serling1978

On 2/25/2019 at 8:39 PM, thunsicker said:

So Magneto’s first appearance might be a keeper?  I can get behind that.

Haha yeah good call. I guess I won't throw mine in the trash tonight

28 minutes ago, ComicConnoisseur said:

I think because Ronan and Ultron were both villians. I think somewhere earlier in the thread said most villians are overhyped/priced. There could be something to that as villians don't seem to have the holding power as heroes.

Maybe only Thanos and the Joker would be considered the exception to the rule of villian`s first appearance being overpriced/hyped?

Don't forget about Dr Doom. First real Marvel villian. Once they some day make a FF movie from Marvel Studios his intro will get a nice sustainable bump.

And maybe Magneto. Depending on how they handle him. Might also get a sustainable movie hype bump

On 2/23/2019 at 4:41 PM, Mercury Man said:

I always go back to Avengers 55.  People were wetting themselves due to Ultron's first appearance, Avengers movie etc.  It has come down quite a bit from a few years ago.   Do we expect the same from Iron Man 55?

Agreed. Avg 55 has crashed almost as hard as Ronan's intro. The way Ultron was portrayed in the movie definitely didn't do him any favors. I've read the avengers run from the 1960s through the 1980s and he was a more formidable villian in the actual comics (although he was pretty corny in his first couple appearances, I remember him throwing the word "cretins" around quite a bit). Even in some of the cartoons my 4 year old watches Ultron is handled better. 

5 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

They are reprinted in multiple trades.

Here's one, $11+ shipped:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Marvel-Masterworks-5-The-X-Men-94-100-Giant-1-Trade-Peperback-Comic-Book/273698419347?hash=item3fb9b27293:g:8UYAAOSwF8BcYqOd

GS #1 and #94-100.

 

There you go. Just remembered they're all also reprinted in the Classic Xmen series, Volume 2 from the mid to late 80s I believe

On 2/16/2019 at 3:05 PM, 1950's war comics said:

i think i have 4 Ms Marvel #1 alone ... might be time to unload 

Haha I have 3 myself. Probably time for a fire sale

19 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

For reading? There are several trades of the first 50 issues of the new X-Men, including Dark Phoenix, nearly all of which is outstanding.

I loved Mutant Massacre, but it was a little disjointed and unwieldy. That's X-Men #210-213, New Mutants #46, Thor #373-374, X-Factor #9-11, and Power Pack #27. Maybe one or two more. It was a great idea, and, really, the genesis of the Marvel mutant crossover events (the next one would be Fall of the Mutants.) Had they come up with a nifty cover logo, I think it would be even more of a standout.

Whatever you do, don't read X-Men #214-267. None of it makes any sense.

No, really. It doesn't. 

Age of Apocalypse is fun, and pretty self contained.

All of this is in trade form, or cheap.

Agree on the Mutant Massacre storyline. Really good read. I would also say any of the early "reboot" issues. From #94 through the late 130s with the Dark Phoenix and Hellfire Club stories. Although unfortunately those won't be cheap these days, but as someone else suggested online might be an option.

8 hours ago, Donald Jack said:

That's interesting about your find at the antique shop.  Every shop that I've ever been to that has a comic book vendor seems to think that, because it's an antique shop, EVERY comic book should start at the $20.00 and higher range (exaggerating for effect here).  It would be cool to find a "dollar" box that held some great stuff.  And you're right...these may not have a lot of value, but they make a great conversation piece.

Oh yeah, I know what you mean. There are multiple antique shops by my house that do consignment. And the prices are outrageous.

The store that had the Hansi book is a rare one where sell stuff cheap. For comics though they normally only have Archie's and other non hero stuff. None bagged or boarded or well displayed. Just tossed in a heap. I used to go in there once a week hoping to stumble upon a hidden AF15 or something crazy. Needless to say, didn't pan out. 😪

Cleaning out a drawer this weekend I discovered I have a copy of The Hiding Place that I forgot I owned. I guess it was ... hiding.

I also remember passing on a copy of Hansi for 50 cents at an antique shop about 10 years ago. Even if these don't have any real monetary value they're still a cool oddity to own

9 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

It comes down to intent. And, in most cases, intent is pretty obvious to discern. A stick figure drawing isn't...normally...designed to improve the book's apparent condition. That's the key difference. Sometimes, it IS a judgment call as to whether what you're looking at is an attempt to improve the book's apparent condition or not. But those cases are very rare, and the vast majority of the time...as in the above examples, the JIM #107 being quite crude, but still clearly showing intent....it's obvious.

That doesn't mean that the presence of restoration is subjective...it just means that, very occasionally, whether or not it IS restoration can be subjective.

That was an interesting question and actually reminded me I did have that basic situation happen a couple years ago. I sold an ASM where someone has doodled on Spiderman's web with what looked like a felt pen maybe. I called it out in the listing and showed a close-up pic but when the buyer got it he said he wanted to return it because he saw it as being restored. I assume he didn't clearly read the listing and was maybe surprised by the amateur doodle when he got it. I did accept the return though. See I'm not so terrible. Or am I...? Really though I've never denied an eBay return in over 15 years. Even though buyers do come up with some pretty questionable reasons.

My intent here was never to come across like I'm the all powerful seller and I'll stick it to any buyer who crosses me. Hopefully it didn't seem that way. I just enjoyed discussing something I felt was unclear but I'll happily consider all of the info provided here. Thanks

27 minutes ago, Number 6 said:

You seem to be making the argument that if the buyer, without benefit of 3rd party appraisals, can’t determine for himself whether a raw book has restoration or not, he probably shouldn’t buy the book.

In fact, in your initial post, you seemed a bit dismayed that after asking questions about restoration and not getting a definitive answer from you, the buyer went ahead and won the book anyway. 

The problem with that argument is it can just as easily be turned on the seller. 

If you as a seller cannot determine with a reasonable degree of certainty that a book is unrestored and you’re unwilling to stand behind what you sell (within a reasonable timeframe of course) regardless of who makes the appraisal of whether a book is restored, then perhaps you shouldn’t be selling the book. 

The problem with your ‘submitting to a 3rd party grading company = final acceptance’ is that it assumes the ONLY reason a person would do so is for the subjective grade. 

It seems clear this buyer was concerned about non-subjective restoration and chose to avail himself of a 3rd party appraisal in that regard before determining ‘final acceptance’. 

 

All good points. I've actually called eBay before to see their policy for both buyers and sellers on the matter but I got different answers each time as to how they would handle it. I am curious if anyone has ever tried to invoke the buyers protection from eBay in a situation like this and how they ruled.

Like I said I'm open to changing my mind on the matter. And some good info has been given here. 

28 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That's from Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Commercial_Code

Not that Wikipedia is necessarily wrong, but it ought not be considered as a primary source, for anything. And the above is not applicable to the particular topic being discussed, because the rights of a buyer are very well established. There's nothing murky about this.

Here's more information from the UCC:

U.C.C. - ARTICLE 2 - SALES (2002) › PART 6. BREACH, REPUDIATION AND EXCUSE › § 2-608. Revocation of Acceptance in Whole or in Part.

"(1) The buyer may revoke his acceptance of a lot or commercial unit whose non-conformity substantially impairs its value to him if he has accepted it

• (a) on the reasonable assumption that its non-conformity would be cured and it has not been seasonably cured; or
• (b) without discovery of such non-conformity if his acceptance was reasonably induced either by the difficulty of discovery before acceptance or by the seller's assurances.

(2) Revocation of acceptance must occur within a reasonable time after the buyer discovers or should have discovered the ground for it and before any substantial change in condition of the goods which is not caused by their own defects. It is not effective until the buyer notifies the seller of it.

(3) A buyer who so revokes has the same rights and duties with regard to the goods involved as if he had rejected them."

(emphasis added)

Yes, specific state law may vary, but buyers are not expected to be experts in all fields, and have a right to have items inspected by those who are..."in any reasonable manner", according to the language of the UCC.

As an explanation for why your "exclusion" does not work: a buyer can take a recently bought item to a convention where CGC is doing onsite grading. The buyer receives the book on the Wednesday before the convention, takes it to the convention, has it graded, discovers it is restored, and has the appraised book back in their hands by Sunday. They say nothing to you about having it graded by CGC (and they are not obligated to.) They merely inform you that they have discovered it is restored. According to your own terms, they would be able to return the book. 

Or, say they took the book to Richard Evans, of Bedrock City Comics, who is as much of an expert at detecting restoration as anybody in the industry. He informs the buyer that the book is restored. The buyer then informs you that they have discovered it is restored. 

It does not matter how the buyer finds out that it is restored...it only matters that it is. While it may not be reasonable for a buyer to submit a book under a Value tier, and wait 3-4 months for the grade, it's certainly reasonable to submit it under a standard or express tier...and the UCC provides that, while the buyer is responsible for the cost of said inspection, that cost may be shifted to the seller if the item does not conform to the terms of the contract (probably not applicable in your case, since you plead ignorance.)

Nolo has more information on this:

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/buyers-performance-under-the-ucc.html

While I appreciate your passionate responses, the fact is, you're giving people bad information, that could cause them unnecessary grief were they to follow your opinion. A transaction doesn't become "final" merely because a buyer chooses to get an independent, third party opinion as to the item's condition, regardless of your stance. That's quite clear in the UCC and other applicable commercial law. Your opinion stands in stark contrast with long established consumer protection rights, and anyone reading that and thinking they could do the same would cause themselves problems that are easily avoided. 

In other words: getting an expert opinion, in a reasonable time frame, is the right of the buyer, and does not void their ability to reject an item, or revoke acceptance of it.

One last question. Are you secretly Matt Murdock?

I only gave my opinion. If we can't have dissenting opinions due to a fear that others will take it as fact and then suffer as a consequence, well then I guess there's nothing left to say.

Take care, man.

Some additional info on the UCC, found online:

"adoption of the UCC often varies from one U.S. jurisdiction to another. Sometimes this variation is due to alternative language found in the official UCC itself. At other times, adoption of different revisions to the official UCC contributes to further variation. Additionally, some jurisdictions deviate from the official UCC by tailoring the language to meet their unique needs and preferences. Lastly, even identical language adopted by any two U.S. jurisdictions may nonetheless be subject to different statutory interpretation by each jurisdiction's courts."

I have my opinions but as with anything I remain open to changing my perspective, considering the matter remains murky, which I am comfortable acknowledging. Personally I wouldn't begin to speculate on the difficulty of convincing a judge of anything. 

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

It doesn't assume anything of the sort. What you describe happens every day, all the time: an independent, third party analysis of an item and its condition, which includes both objective observation and subjective interpretation, to determine where its level of physical preservation. No one said anything about "indefinitely." But a buyer has a reasonable amount of time to do their due diligence, which absolutely includes seeking an independent, third party opinion. Ignorance on the part of the seller doesn't absolve.

Ok final thought 😁

I agree that what your saying makes sense for something like an auto inspection or a home inspection where the potential buyer has the item inspected prior to buying. But I've never heard of anyone buying a house and then having it inspected and returning it.

Of course now someone will cite an example where this has happened 😂 but I still stand by never hearing of it

2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Restoration either exists or does not exist, entirely independently of any and all grading companies and their standards. Restoration, if present, is not there because CGC says so (aka, "their standards.") It is there because it is there. You are confusing objective observations with subjective opinions.

If a seller doesn't know if his or her books are restored or not, that doesn't absolve them of responsibility. Grading is subjective. The presence or absence of restoration is not. If a seller says "I don't know if this book is restored" and the buyer chooses to have its condition appraised by a reputable third party to make sure (and, sadly, at this point there is only one: CGC), and restoration is discovered, the buyer doesn't "own" the book because they chose to have it so appraised...and no court in the land would uphold that as a valid condition of sale.

Besides...there is no such condition as "as is" in an online purchase, where the buyer cannot inspect the item prior to purchase. 

 

Yes restoration is black and white. But if a seller puts up a raw book for auction and the buyer never asks about restoration and the seller never says it is or isn't restored (because he doesn't know) then why would the seller expect a guarantee on something that they didn't negotiate when making the purchase? I think a guarantee on something like a missing ad page is a reasonable assumption because that is something clear to the naked eye.  And I agree that "as is" can't purely be based on the online transaction. Once the buyer gets the book in hand that is their prime chance to review the book in great detail and come to their own conclusion. I've said that from the beginning. If the buyer inspects the book and deems it restored then the seller should accept the return because it should reasonably have been caught and disclosed. But if the buyer can't tell either that it's restored then why blame the seller instead of blaming themself?  They had a chance to return the book and instead decided to get it graded. At that point they chose that it was an acceptable risk based on their own review and they now own the book.

Thats how I see it anyway, but what do I know. I admit it's somewhat gray though and emotions can come into play. Even if I felt the buyer was in the wrong I would probably feel bad  for him and still work something out. So yeah, it's complicated. Anyway It's been good debating with you, and I do mean that, but I shall now retire to bed

15 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

No.

Why?

Because grading is subjective.

Restoration, on the other hand, is not.

Restoration is either there or it is not...whether or not it is detected...and is not subject to interpretation. 

Grading, on the other hand, is, because you're interpreting how the flaws affect the overall physical preservation of the item, which is always a subjective analysis.

That doesn't mean aspects of restoration and how that affects the book's overall condition aren't subjective...they are...but whether or not restoration is present is not. It is either there or it is not.

"I think this a 9.0." "I think this is an 8.5." "I think this is a 9.2." Totally legitimate conclusions, because grading is subjective.

"This book has color touch." "This book does not have color touch." Both of those statements, outside of a Schrödinger experiment, cannot be true at the same time. It either does, or it does not. Same with things like "this book has a 1/4" color breaking crease on the bottom right corner of the front cover." How that crease affects the grade is subjective; that it exists is not.

And, of course, it is just as likely for a random book by a random seller to grade lower than the seller suggested, thereby making the book worth less than the price paid; in both cases, the buyer has no recourse, unless the seller failed to disclose material problems that would have an impact on that grade.

In other words...it's totally legitimate....though usually quite scummy....to say "book is in MINT condition! Only has a single 5" crease! Centerfold missing!" If those flaws are disclosed, the buyer can make his or her choice based on the information presented to them. The seller cannot say, however, that "book is in MINT condition!" and fail to disclose flaws that would substantially impact the item's condition. What does "substantially" mean...? Good question. I doubt you can make a claim where the buyer thinks a book is a 9.2, but the seller described it as 9.4. However, you could probably make a fair claim if the seller described it as 9.4, and it's a 5.5 on a good day. But if the book is in better condition than advertised? Sorry, seller, shouldn't have been so hard on the book.

Again I do see you point. And it's well thought out. But that line of thinking is assuming the buyer and seller are agreeing that if the book is restored it can be returned. If the seller has no idea it's restored and the buyer gets it in hand and also has no idea it's restored then HE is now the owner who doesn't know it's restored. ( This is all assuming the seller isn't a scumbag who restored it himself or took it out of a purple label case. If that's the case I'm onboard and it's basically fraud). The seller doesn't continue to own the book indefinitely. In my mind the transfer of ownership happens once the buyer gets the book and decides to grade THEIR book. Renting someone else's book to see how it turns out isn't a reasonable expectation.

14 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

You, the seller, are responsible. 

If you're not sure if something is restored or not...submit it yourself.

Getting a book graded...and, I fully believe the legal system will agree with me when and if they ever catch up in this area...is merely obtaining an appraisal. If you take a car you are planning to purchase to a mechanic to have it's condition appraised, the buyer isn't obligated to buy the car. Same with comic book grading: someone is seeking a professional, third party opinion.

It's why the idea of the slabbed book being a "package" is, and always has been, utter hogwash. "You cracked the book out! Now it's not what I sold you!" No, barring any changes to the actual book, you sold me a book with a condition appraisal attached to it. It is the book inside...and nothing but the book inside...that has any actual value.

Don't believe me....? Try and sell an empty slab on eBay...any empty slab...tell me how much you get for it. Try it with an empty slab that has a label for a 9.4 AF #15.

Besides....no one, not even CGC, can guarantee that something isn't restored. There have been, on occasion, books that went through the "restored - not restored" revolving door. They do very well...but they aren't perfect, and neither is anyone else.

I see and respect your points even though I disagree.  If I'm selling a raw book I'm selling as is. A raw ungraded comic book. I have no affiliation with any grading company or any way or obligation to uphold to their standards.  If I had the same expertise and tools at my disposal as they do then I would probably charge a lot more. If someone wants that type of guarantee then thats why already graded books are a good option. Maybe a new company will come out tomorrow that deems all books with a dog ear to be Grade A Bow Wow Worthless. If I'm selling a raw book it's not my responsibility to adhere to a companies standards that I am in no way affiliated with.  I think some buyers are incorrectly assuming that sellers have to uphold to professional grading company standards. But if a regular Joe seller isn't claiming his books are going to meet the specific standards of an independent company then it isn't reasonable to use that  companies standards to hold the seller responsible.

Am I playing a little bit of devil's advocate? Maybe. Am I somewhat drunk? Probably. But if a buyer is expecting a guarantee in relation to CGC standards, then they should buy something that has already been reviewed and verified by....CGC.

Forgot I have two of these types of books. The first (1st 3 pics) is called Marvel Chronicle A Year by Year History. It's from2008. The cover isn't much to look at but the info inside is amazing. It covers Golden Age Timely Comics through modern Marvel.

The other book (last 3 pics) is only Marvel Comics from 1961-1978 and isn't quite as good of a read, but still pretty good. It's called the Marvel Age of Comics

Can't really go wrong with either one.

3 hours ago, Doohickamabob said:

I think it's up to the buyer to check the book and make sure it looks like what you described. At that point if they're satisfied, then the transaction is over. I think it's unreasonable for the buyer to put the seller in a position where the seller has to wait for the buyer to get the book graded, and if the grade reveals something, the seller is on the hook for whatever the seller missed, as well as having lost an entire month or more with his payment in a state of limbo.

If the buyer is going to have that high of expectations, the buyer should only purchase books that are already graded. Or better yet, the buyer should become enough of a restoration expert that he can figure things out before sending the book to a guaranty company.

The exception to the above would be if a seller were discovered to be purposely concealing restoration on an ongoing basis. If the seller had such a pattern then it wouldn't just be a case of the buyer having the right to a late refund; it would be outright fraud and the buyer would be justified in telling the comics community to avoid the seller.

Totally agree. If a buyer wants the seller to be responsible when a book is found to be restored does he also want the seller to be credited when the book grades higher than expected and is worth much more than the price paid?  The point being, I don't like the idea of some buyers buying raw books and expecting to be able to "test the value" to see if they got a deal by sending it to be graded and then wanting to return if it doesn't work out.  I agree that if a buyer wants a guarantee on a book then he should buy an already graded book. There's an inherent risk in buying a raw book. There is also a potential reward. If you buy a raw book and it grades well you can end up with much more value than what you paid for. It just doesn't seem right that someone wants to only be onboard for the reward part but wants a guaranteed backout clause for the risk part. If the risk part is a blocker, then buying already graded is probably the best bet.

Just now, Phish&Comics said:

Anyone have recommendations for books that covers the history of comics? Something comprehensive that covers the golden age all the way to the modern age?

I've got one at home, specific to Marvel though, that covers from the golden age up to whenever it was made (early 2000s maybe).  Found it at Goodwill one day. It's a large hardcover book. Pretty good read with plenty of pics. I can post a pic tonight with the title.

17 hours ago, gadzukes said:

What a cool find!  I don't think I own a copy right now.

I wonder if the CGC graders know to look at that page for writing?

Good question. I just did some amateur searching of active and sold graded copies on eBay and I couldn't find a single one where interior writing was noted on the label.

9 minutes ago, seanfingh said:

You have basically just created a beautiful illustration of why the SS is superior - someone saw Stan sign.  As his signature got worse and worse over the years (which you can see in many of the examples above, it got less and less capable to be accurately identified by 3rd party sources.  I have acted as an SS witness for Stan three times, and have seen countless authentic versions. I wouldn't opine on at least 5 of those. 

Well said.

1 hour ago, Joosh said:

Option 1: get a qualified (green label) grade. People seem to pay almost as much as witnessed for those. 🤷🏽‍♂️

Option 2: Accept/Sell it as probably legit. This whole slabbing/AW thing is relatively new; it’s commonplace to have and sell unauthorized sigs. It just takes a little more homework to avoid a scam.

Option 3: Check out the other grading company who offers what you are looking for (red label VSP) and is not named pgx.

Good list of options. Thanks. 

I've got the book in a long box temporarily in storage so if the can get to it any time soon I'll get a pic.

I was doing some googling last night and I realized I forgot how wildly Stan's signature varies. So I don't think there's realistically any way a mortal man can look and say one vs another is 100% fake. To illustrate: below is a lineup of signed Avengers #1's. If anyone wants to play along, feel free to try to guess which ones are verified slabbed sigs and which are unverified (and possibly fake). If anyone is totally right you get a No Prize. Refer to them in order from top to bottom. #1 being the top and #10 being the bottom.

5 minutes ago, kav said:

If it came with a certificate of authenticity it's almost certainly fake.  Even if was real, it wouldnt matter because unverified sig is just 'name written on cover'.  Basically, the book would be worth more if Stan Lee wasnt written on it.  However, that may not be quite true as buyers on ebay seem to be willing to pay good money for obvious fake stan sigs.

Damn, you're really bringing me down here 😄 . I've bought and sold and previously owned a decent number of graded books signed by Stan and this one def LOOKS totally legit, but obviously that's just opinion. I'm going with glass half full on this one though

2 minutes ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

I'm sorry but no they don't 

That's too bad. Thanks for the quick reply though. Good to know at least