Abibliophobia

It would be nice if people could upload any serials they had stolen from them somewhere so the next buyer isn’t out of money if the stolen goods were to be confiscated.  It would add friction to selling such books (remove from encap, re-grade, and then sell, or force thief to sell as raw).

I’ve seen plenty of suspicious posts in Reddit or other social media about “I need to quickly sell this high value book that’s encapsulated, but I know nothing about comics or the venues where I could sell such a thing (not even eBay)”.

On 9/10/2019 at 7:24 PM, pickycollector said:

I thought I was winning a book tonight on Comic Connect...

...but then came an extended bidding period of 3 min, then another one, and another one..

I am done bidding on that site

If you’re a seller this is very friendly to you.  As a buyer who mostly does eBay it takes getting used to.  It’s more of a traditional auction that gives the other bidders a chance to consider. That said, the “other three” are often where you can get the hot and rare books because it’s a sellers market.

The recent Key Comics Auction on ComicConnect was really fun to watch how the timers kept resetting due to a bidding war.  That pedigree’d X-men 12 in 9.8 with the bright colors was a battle of wills (and pocket books).  You’d probably never see a book like that go for that price on eBay.

To go back to mom’s house and finally get my long boxes of 1980s comics packed up and shipped.

To complete my John Byrne X-Men run.

To save up for a higher grade X-Men 94.

To sell my Jr. Varsity X-Men slabs to put toward said 94.

To clean and press some worthy raw X-Men books and slab them.

To not spend as much as I did in 2019.

On 11/16/2019 at 7:53 AM, ADAMANTIUM said:

WHOA!! Thanks for this I had no idea this issue had climbed so high, I remember when I bought my copy raw that I thought it would reach 9.6 or 9.8, might be time to dig it out! 

Thanks Again!  

Tell me about it. It’s kind of expensive enough that I don’t want to chase it.

On 11/13/2019 at 3:57 PM, the blob said:

How do we figure out an actual sales price on a best offer again? I used to know this, I think.

GoCollect has this information, but it requires a subscription.   One would just need to click on the price.

On 11/10/2019 at 12:18 PM, BigDaddy1 said:

I think it is reliable for books that sell very frequently. I have used it lately to help with making informed purchases. I think for the most part it's accurate. 

This. I have GoCollect and GPA subs and I find that GoCollect has decent FMV numbers when it comes to books with high sales or turnover. The FMV accuracy suffers for low volume traded books, and can easily be subverted by someone paying way too much on a low grade which can send the higher grades into the stratosphere.  GPA’s valuation isn’t great either, but makes up for it elsewhere.

GPA as many have pointed out has a deep amount of historical data.  It has no peer today that I’ve seen. GoCollect organizes it way better though and the product is being well maintained. GPA is stuck in the 90s though. They could do so much to improve how they present the data for the cost of the sub.  Gawd, that interface.

On 6/24/2019 at 11:14 AM, buttock said:

It looks like a high school art project

Looks like it should be on a death metal album. 

On 11/2/2019 at 10:57 PM, lou_fine said:

 

I don't understand why it would not be relevant, especially in terms of the 5-year time period.  

Sorry. I meant the specifics of the book aren’t really relevant as to whether this collection is significant or would ever deserve a pedigree.

Selfishly, it would be convenient for me for CGC to recognize it as either so that the distinction was on the CGC label rather than a separate COA in the event that I wanted to get the book reholdered in the future.  If it was recognized it would then say so on the label and thus the COA is largely unnecessary.

On 11/2/2019 at 10:57 PM, lou_fine said:

For example, if it was the 5-year time period of 1936 to 1941 then it would most definitely qualify for full pedigree status.  Now that we know from Masterchief that it is from only the much more common and abundant 5-year time period of 1966-71 when comic book collecting was already in place, it's rather obvious why this particular collection was not given pedigree status.  Any COA's for books from this time period is really geared more towards marketing hype in hopes of maximizing dollars upon sale, as opposed to anything resembling a true pedigree worthy book.  

My suspicions as well. Thank you for time and reaffirming.

5 hours ago, MasterChief said:

That's odd. What's with all the secrecy, anyway? Certification is meant to be verified to confirm a book's description in CGC's database and prove the holder is genuine and not tampered with. 

No secrecy beyond what I’ve already stated.   The numbers are legit.

Thank you for taking the time to give your opinion about Pedigree Comics. It satisfies my instincts about whether the provenance story is true or just clever marketing. Regardless, the book is top shelf (albeit probably won’t exceed four figures in value during my lifetime—just a solid silver age Marvel), I’ll keep the COA with it, but I’m not expecting it to come of much.

On 11/2/2019 at 2:47 PM, slym2none said:

Had the OP shared his pics, we would have seen that much earlier. After I asked the second time in this thread, they PM'd me pics with the caveat that I was not allowed to share them, so I just deleted the conversation. IDK what they are trying to hide, as the pics seemed innocuous enough, but I thought people should know that.



-slym

Slym, I shared with you because you’ve got a lot of apparent history on the boards and thought you’d provide some insight and i was willing to provide some proof. As I’ve mentioned before, I’m just tying to learn what separates a “collection“ from a “Collection” from people more knowledgeable than me.

I don’t like the idea of sharing pics with the serials and grades on my personal collection in a public forum, in general.  It seems like risky behavior to me.  I can’t be the only one who feels this way.

Separately, I’m not sure why you’d think I was trying to hide anything other than the obvious.  It makes me feel as though you’re thinking I was trying to deceive the readership.  Haha.

Anyway, no harm done.  Thanks to those who are helping to explain.

9 hours ago, porcupine48 said:

 

I'd be sure to keep your certificate with it,even if just for yourself.I have some raw Crippen pedigrees with the certificate and I believe they send them back to you outside of the slab.

Ok. That sounds like good advice. I keep the COA on the back side of the Mylar the slab is in.  Never know when sentiments may change.

6 minutes ago, porcupine48 said:

So it's slabbed in an old label at the moment?In my opinion they're a LOT nicer than the new pedigree labels even if your book is at some time recognized as one.

Right now it’s slabbed as a Universal with a separate paper COA issued by Pristine Comics noting the “collection” and the CGC serial number. It’s not an officially recognized anything by CGC.  Quite honestly, the book is of such high graded quality that it stands on its own.  That said, I don’t want any possible extra bona fides to become separated from the books provenance as these things can sometimes tell a story as they change hands.  If the Seattle Drug Store story is to be believed it’s not a bad one to have attached to the book. 

Not sure why that font changed above. That wasn’t intentional. Haha.

10 hours ago, slym2none said:

Pics?



-slym

Are you asking me for pics of the COA, the book, or both?  I don’t think that it’s terribly relevant to the discussion about whether the Seattle Drug Store Collection is really a capital “C” collection worthy of the distinction or if it’s a just 5 years worth of high grade books.  Most of you have been collecting graded books much longer than me, and as a kid in the 80s I was just happy to be able to get back issues no matter the condition.  The notion of pedigrees and names collections are only new discoveries by me—hence my questions.

I hope this response isn’t taken as combatative as I’d rather not share this kind of information unless it’s directly relevant to the question at hand.

On 10/27/2019 at 9:00 PM, thunsicker said:

Short answer, No.

The collection appears to be only a five year run based up internet searches. I assume that may be considered a bit short to recognize it despite apparent quality.

Any idea what constitutes enough significance to get recognized as an official collection?  I’ve seen Harlan Ellison’s books recognized. That particular collect appears to span a lot of years and volume, but aside from being a renowned writer the condition of the books weren’t terribly notable.

How does the story behind the “Seattle Drug Store” collection even rate with serious collectors?  Marketing hype?  Is it impossible to prove?

For what it’s worth, I acquired the book at a great price for my personal collection and the COA was just icing on the cake.  The COA didn’t affect my rationale for purchasing.  My interest on the collection labeling is merely whether it could be memorized on the label rather than having a COA (which I recognize as flimsy and kind of annoyingly peripheral proof).

Thanks in advance for any helpful guidance here.

I managed to pick up a Seattle Drug Store book with COA. It has the older flatter case, so I assume it was slabbed near the discovery and naming of the collection. Would anybody happen to know whether it’s now an officially recognized collection by CGC in that the label would state it as such?  I did a look up for a pedigree and it’s not listed so that question doesn’t need to be asked.

If it was recognized, I’d consider getting it reholdered sooner than later.

8 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I'd rather not. The market cannot make rational decisions when it doesn't have accurate information.

 

>>I think you missed my comment about “over time”.  The market will decide over enough time what is and isn’t significant.

 

The market has been duped by so-called "authorities" for decades. So, no, I'm not going to let people run around and say "Malibu Sun #13 is the first appearance of Spawn!!" or "Marvel Age #97 is the first appearance of Darkhawk!!" and not challenge them. 

>> What are you going to do to stop them?   The fools will soon be parted with their money. I’m not sure I see how you can change the market sentiment until the market collectively wills it.

8 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Not sure how it's 2019 and anyone...not just you, mind...is still discussing this as if it's up for debate. The first appearance of Wolverine...since roughly July of 1974...is, always has been, and always will be...barring some hitherto completely unknown to the entire comic collecting world new information...Hulk #180. It matters not what else people call it. Hulk #181 is not the first appearance of Wolverine, and never has been. Value has no bearing on any of those facts. 

I don’t think that we are disagreeing. But that’s a lot of text agreeing with me.

8 hours ago, Werner_Von_Doom said:

Thanks for posting this, I was wondering how much it went for.

That auction deserves a post unto itself. That was an X-Men collection that will never been seen together again.  If there was a 9.9 or 10 to be had the collector had it.  9.8s weren’t just ordinary 9.8s—they were exceptional 9.8s.

I hope that the reason for the sale wasn’t due to tragedy. I’m just glad I got to see the bidding action across the entire collection!

11 hours ago, Gotham Kid said:

$43,700 

https://www.comicconnect.com/bookDetail.php?id=830425

 

I was watching this auction last night and that 3minute timer reset like a dozen times it seemed.  Was totally exciting to experience second hand.

Edit:  It was obvious that this book was going to sell for a lot. Even as a 9.8, it’s an exceptional example with the perfect wrap and bright colors. Being one of two doesn’t hurt either!

This is a great thread. Thanks everyone who has contributed to the discussion.

To me, the various ways to describing all of the firsts are merely marketing terms and designed to expand the market (just like low print variant runs do in moderns).  I see nothing wrong promoting the hobby as I would like to see my collection appreciate in new ways.

A first appearance is what it is. It doesn’t mean that if given that particular label the book MUST be worth more than the book with the first story.  CGC doesn’t get to make this determination either (as another poster contends).  The market will decide which of the books is more valuable (180 or 181).

I think that the first appearance market tends to do a disservice to the writers.  Today, the overall market still recognizes characterization to help determine the significance of the book and not just the arbitrary panel that may show the character for the first time.  I hope that continues.  The first appearance is often also the first story as well which is why the designator has market value.  Hulk 180/181 isn’t the case and the value can be shared across both books as one is first appearance and one is first story.

A cover appearance also makes a huge difference in significance.  Obviously there’s the 180/181 case, but look at X-Men 120/121.  It’s arguable that those books are in many ways similar to 180/181 with the main exception that the first appearance of Alpha Flight was important enough to put on the cover which is one of the reasons the market values that book more. There isn’t much of Alpha Flight (the team) other than Vindicator and the arm of Sasquatch beating the out of Wolverine.  We are introduced to the team and the story in 121–yet it has the lower market value.

In summation, just let the marketers/speculators have their fun with all the hair splitting labels, and have faith that the market is rational enough (over time) to be able to identify the keys and place value where it is deserved.

Disclosure:  I own a 181, but not 180 and I feel that 180 is the first appearance.  It doesn’t threaten me to hear the designation “moved”.  The 181 has the larger significance, imho. 

13 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

You can't hire new graders just for an add-on service, but you can hire new graders just to grade, and have existing graders do the additional service. The thing about business is that virtually anything can be done...it's just a matter of price.

Lots of good dialog here about what could be done.  I agree that full annotation of every book submitted is a situational service, and probably not  something easily done without a form of partial to full automation, or outsourcing to faster/cheaper labor.  It would take a lot of effort to do so.

I’d look at full annotation as something CGC can do to separate itself from the competition (but is there really any?).  When a modern comes in do they really spend much time on it?  Judging by the price—probably not.

I’d pay for a full detail service if I was grading a high value book (mid 4 figures and above).  I’d also consider that grading as part of the high value asset I’d want to sell (if I were into that), or buy especially if I was dropping that kind of money.

One could put digital right management on the notes, and monetize (like they do with current grader notes).  Annotate once, sell many, share never.

About revealing how they grade... Are their grading methods really that secret?  Has no senior grader ever left the company?  C’mon—this isn’t KFC.

CGC’s Crown Jewels aren’t their grading methods any more.  It’s the trust we put into the Authority because of the quality and consistency of the grading over many years.  We are living in a time where the foundations of trust are being questioned, and people want to see the evidence backing the claims.  Why not make some money while doing so?

My first post (in a long while). I’ve been reading the boards for a while, but have demurred from posting as most people cover what I’m thinking, and I’d just rather avoid adding to the cacophony.

After reading this thread in its entirety, I’m actually surprised that nobody has brought up grader notes.

To me, when we boil down what CGC is (or should be) it’s a way to inform the consumer of the faults discovered and the degree of those faults.  The multiple dimensions of number, page color, label color are just more information. The grader notes in my mind should be mandatory for all books as they should expose why the book earned its grade.

One of the recent previous posters referenced digital imagery.  CGC could employ digital imagery as to why the grader chose to fault certain aspects of the book in the grader notes.  Circling the blunted corner on a blue, counting the spine ticks, showing exactly the restoration on a purple, etc.

Perhaps this would reveal their grading techniques and allow for abuse, but it would also allow the consumer to make a choice.  Some people (like me) are really bothered about color breaking spine ticks, but others might be more so with a blunted corner.

So often we hear, “That grade is too low.  You should resubmit,” or “Maybe the CGC grader had a bad day, etc.”  The digital imagery technology now exists to accurately grade color (could even be a percentage of “white” rather than the qualitative grading), and to digitally annotate the faults noted by the grader.  This should with high certainty allow the consumer to dispute the grade without having to gamble (and dare I say, reward CGC) with a resubmission.  Just have a separate grader or dispute panel review the image, and inform the owner that s/he is eligible for a new grade, or that their complaint has no merit (and show the evidence why).  Maybe there’s a fee for the enhanced notes, or for the dispute.  Maybe if you pay for the enhanced notes you get dispute resolution as part of the deal.

I’ll leave you with this anecdote...

I recently bought a purple label of X-Men 94 @ 9.2 with S-A. It cost me 50% of present fair market blue labeled values.  I’ve never purchased a purple before, but I went into the trade reasonably well informed. When I got the book, I looked it over and felt that I got the better part of the deal. It’s beautiful and I love it.  The market may punish purples and that’s just a market force due to the apparent risk, but it’s important to inform the consumer that something was added to the book. If they are ok with it (as I have been) and neither side felt cheated then what really is the problem?

Personally, I think that there’s a lot of untapped market potential in the purples due to the risk aversion, but it doesn’t mean one is allowed to avoid the disclosure.

For those that made it this far. Thank you for your time.

I quit in near the 250s when the issues began selling twice a month, and the stories became twice as bad. There was also a period around 225 or so when the art became atrocious IMO.

I was too young to have read anything below 140 in actual print. Back then you either had to know someone older who had the issues (I didn't) or be able to buy the back issues (I couldn't even if my one horse town had such a place).

I thought Mutant Massacre was an interesting plot line, but by Inferno I could tell these massive cross over events were just a marketing scheme even as a teenager.