eschnit

I, for one, don’t want any part of Frankenstein 

On 8/31/2021 at 1:29 PM, valiantman said:

I think the appropriate point was made that you simply weren’t with the right audience here.   You’d likely find more like-minded people elsewhere.  Like GA collectors would be more likely to have the polar opposite stance.  You did a really impressive job to try to counter, given no one agreed with you.

On 9/1/2021 at 10:13 AM, Straw-Man said:

i'm the rare geek who finds the okajima underwhelming; i lean more to the quality of books within peds as opposed to their backstory, so it's nowhere near "top 2 or 3" for me.

I was referencing the story.  In terms of quality, yeah, no doubt, Okajima is closer to bottom 2 or 3.

Does anyone know if this book is worth anything?  It’s a Baltimore Comic Con variant, so there are a lot fewer of them than the 1:25 variants.  Like maybe 500 copies.  I can’t seem to find info on it.

I counted 15 or 16 books in total.  Most of them are very strong books.  But still, a lot more video games than books.  As for Golden Age, I think there were two, an 8.0 Batman #1 and a 1.0 Superman #1.  Anyone that wins the Supes, props for winning a super grail.  Most of us would love to have a Supes #1.  That said, that cover 😳.  I would expect that’s a 0.5, but I’m not a grading expert.  Regardless, I think they likely have an idea of what they’re doing.  Have had great success in other endeavors.  Can potentially build off of this, or not, either way, not hurt their brand. I think all of the books save two any consign or, if there is one, could rest assured the values are solid enough to where they’ll get what they’re worth.  The 2 stars, the Bats and AF, will be interesting to see. 

Heating up or on fire?

Fantastic Four 5

Amazing Fantasy 15

Amazing Spider-man 2, 3, 14

On 8/31/2021 at 5:38 PM, sfcityduck said:

Just out of curiosity, what are your top 3 most interesting pedigree stories (not quality of books, quality of backstory)?

 

Wasn’t trying to be pretentious. Other folks I’m sure have different opinions, and know more than me.  3 that come to mind for sure for me are Okajima, Chinatown, and San Francisco.

On 5/20/2021 at 11:30 AM, sfcityduck said:

On the video, Matt and Brian both agreed that the MH books are superior to the Promise books.  Better structurally, page quality, and preservation.  Matt made it clear that MH is undoubtedly better than Promise (and he also gave a nod to SF), and as the chief grader for CGC he should know.  But, its a really good point that the MH did not go straight into encapsulation, so Matt's comment is talking about the well-preserved MHs. 

The area where Matt and Brian saw the Promise as far superior to the MHs was in the backstory.  I completely agree.  Far superior.  And I'm not talking about the backstory told by Heritage.  The MH story is important to comic collecting history, but it is a story a man perhaps placing his livelihood above his family and about a family relationship that seems more than a bit sad.  What kind of dad cares more about comics than his kids?  As for the Promise backstory, Matt and Brian said they are going to take their place near Okajima on backstory, and that statement by them was definitely not hype.  

I expect to end up with a handful of Promise books myself, and I don’t own any Okajima.  Obviously the Okajima story has had time to build in life over the years, whereas this one is brand new.  But for my taste, the story doesn’t remotely rival Okajima.  It’s an interesting story, but I think we do a disservice to it to compare it to Okajima.  Of the 60 pedigrees, the Promise may be top 10 most interesting, certainly in the top half.  Whereas Okajima is clearly top 2 or 3, and to most #1.

On 8/30/2021 at 10:39 PM, valiantman said:

Sounds good.  All you have to do is build a 24/7 digital exchange, secure it, hurdle the SEC obstacles, tackle the legal documents, and advertise your service.  But that's all.  Just that.

That’s your job

...I don’t have an Action #1 anyway

On 8/30/2021 at 4:37 PM, valiantman said:

And thank you for speaking on behalf of everyone.  Anyone who doesn't agree that fractional investing is a certainty will look like a fool now, thus sayeth @MrBedrock

However, it will make the value of said comics implode. Why? Because I’ll happily sell you 99% of any comic I own for 80% of the value, as long as I decide when I want to sell it, and I always possess it.  

On 8/30/2021 at 8:15 PM, pickycollector said:

ASM #2 CGC 9.0 sold for $40,100 tonight on ComicConnect 

The one that sold on Comiclink recently now looks like a bargain..

Link

I felt like I was stretching a lot on the #14

Dino Bravo and Black Canary

On 8/30/2021 at 10:20 AM, valiantman said:

Agreed on the purple onions. 

I understand your stated objection to "commoditized" Golden Age comic books, but it has already happened.  The moment we paid more than ten cents for them, they became a commodity with a price separated from their intended market price.  Collectors created these commodities, decades before they considered themselves investors.  Some collectors still don't consider themselves investors, but they won't sell their Golden Age books for ten cents.  Why not?  They recognize the commoditized aspects of their assets and still boldly label themselves "collectors, not investors".  Fine, then any Golden Age books which "collectors, not investors" have two or more, I'll buy the extras for ten cents.  A collector only needs one copy, and a collector won't treat a ten cent book as something profitable.

Collectors are all hypocrites, and we know it.  We just don't admit it. "Collector, not investor" is the same as "inhaling, no exhaling". 

In the end, could go back and forth on this in perpetuity.  I don’t own two copies of any Golden Age book fwiw, and if I did, they’re relatively rare enough in most cases to where I consider each one unique.  ie not a commodity.  My sentiment is I’d want the books values to continue to be determined by how much someone is willing to pay for the whole book, not part of it.   We just weigh different aspects of what we value in the hobby a little differently. 
 

Golden Age forum, and I don’t collect Valiant at this point, but it’s the better example for me than Action 1, for the purity of the argument’s sake.  Though maybe an Amazing Man 22 or Suspense 3 would be better referenced here.  
 

I couldn’t find a Bloodshot Platinum Zero error available, at any point.  I owned everything else I wanted to, aside from some original art Valiant related at one point.  Similar to your take on Action 1.  The value of the Bloodshot may have been $5k at the time, give or take.  And maybe it wouldn’t escalate much if it were made available in partial equity, I don’t know.  But it would defeat the entire purpose.  I want to own the book, to hunt for it, to consummate the deal, to possess it.  I want it in hand, and to appreciate it.  But if someone gave me 1% of the book or 99% of the book, but I couldn’t actually possess it, then I don’t really own anything except whatever I could sell it for.  It means nothing except that.  I can’t think of any argument that contradicts that truth.  So if the only reason to own a partial book is betting on the horse, fine, there could be a market for that.  Just be preferable to me to not have it muck up the actual collecting part of the hobby.

To some degree, with any book not Golden Age, I can see it more.  If there were a market on Dr. Doom, Punisher, Gwen Stacy,  Daredevil, and Ghost Rider, we’d have Dr. Doom, Ghost Rider, and Gwen Stacy scorching hot, Punisher and Daredevil plummeting. It may be nice to have a market for that, or even a digital market for books associated, FF5, MS 5, Edge 2, DD1, ASM 129.  Bet on whether they’ll go up or down, market changes daily.  Without the hassle of having to actually buy and sell multiple copies of each book.  In so many ways that’s different than Golden Age.  And if the argument is that somehow that’s contradictory, one could bet Matt Baker or Pre-Code Horror, or Sci-Fi would go up or down just the same, what makes it different to me, is scarcity.  The assignment of a digital value to an actual physical book.  You could separate the two much more easily with books post Golden Age. 

On 8/30/2021 at 9:26 AM, valiantman said:

My posts may appear to be cheerleading for RallyRd or trying to convince some of you that you SHOULD be into fractional investing, but neither is the case.

As @Aman619 stated, the fractional ownership CONCEPT is what I am promoting, whether that's RallyRd or some other company after RallyRd rips off all its investors (as some have suggested).

The CONCEPT will remain.  My posts are in opposition to those who have posted that NO ONE should be able to do fractional ownership... ever.   Yes, some have said so.

If you, personally, don't like it.  No problem.  I don't like purple onions, but I'm not about to suggest they shouldn't exist. 

Aman even agrees that although he has no desire to take part in it, the concept of fractional ownership in unobtainable assets should exist, and those who want to do it should have the option.

Sadly, he's also correct when he says this is yet another example of "what I collect is great, what you collect is dumb".

No, it's not "collecting" in the traditional sense, because I can't hold the comic, I don't have complete ownership, I don't say when the comic sells, etc.

But...

A traditional comic collector like me could have 20,000 comics books, 1,000 slabs, a NEARLY complete collection of a favorite title, and a reprint of the missing issues.

Those who say that I somehow forfeit my status as a collector if I also purchase 1% in fractional ownership for the key issues missing from my collection, because I could never afford them outright, either aren't thinking or their thinker is broken.

As for why anyone would ever want to even consider fractional ownership as a "collecting" option, the choices are literally:
A) A collection with all but a few missing issues

B) The exact same collection plus fractional ownership in those missing issues

Because C) A collection with all of the issues, including those that cost six figures --- is not possible.

When Collection C) isn't possible, every collector should at least have the choice for Collection A) or Collection B).

Those who say otherwise are correctly saying they don't want Collection B, but then incorrectly saying NO ONE should have the option.  Many collectors will love having the option someday.

Those who say that investing isn't "pure collecting" are also correct, and I'll personally, happily, buy all their Golden Age comics for ten cents. 

Anything more than ten cents is also investing, if we're talking collector purity and removing all possible investor labels.

Purple onions are objectively fantastic!!!  We’ll just have to agree to disagree. 
 

Honestly, the primary part of this that I don’t like is summed up in the title of the thread.  It’s not that what I like is good and what you like is “dumb”.  I’m socially liberal in every way.  You do you.  If it makes you happy, it can’t be that bad.  For me, it’s simply a case of not wanting the aspects of the hobby I enjoy most disappearing for the sake of your idea.  Like, it’s basically this simple.  I don’t want Golden Age comic books to become commoditized.  For me, it’s no more complicated than that.

On 8/23/2021 at 6:17 PM, MrBedrock said:

The Mystic 7 isn’t even a pedigree. How it was maintained in that condition is beyond me, amazing.

On 8/26/2021 at 1:20 PM, Aman619 said:

As currently run, the objects are bought, shares issued, with a hold out period. You can’t sell until say 90 days etc. The object is sold and share values are paid out of the proceeds of the sale.  So for now, the entity maintains a lot more control in order to try to guarantee a profit for themselves.  They also value the shares at a price higher than price they paid.  Therefore if they paid 80k and sell 100 shares at 1000 each, that’s 20k profit for fees/expenses, and an investor needs it to sell for 101K to see any profit on their investment.  This too is a limitation as an investment vehicle because it’s not a wide enough open market like Wall Street where you can buy at 9:30am. and sell ten minutes later.  Basically you have to decide if the object will increase more than 20% not just if it will increase at all..  but this just means it’s an investment like real estate more than an equity. If you flip a house you pay broker fees so a sale at price you bought is a loss.so you hold on til you’re in the black.  Again, there’s the concept, and there’s the available vehicles… if RallyRd et al get too greedy they kill the concept. 

Creative capitalists make stuff up if they think it will work.  And right now, there’s so much liquidity, if people feel like they can make money on it, they’ll try to push it.  In my opinion video games should not be a collectible in the way that it has become.  

The power of the sellers pushing it down people’s throats worked.   They knew they could make a fortune from them if they could get it to work, because any new market that builds a base over a few years is a huge boon for the early adopters.  There’s a want to do it with pulps, but it’s not as easy to do for a lot of reasons.  Pulps would be more of a legit thing thing to slab than a video game, but it’s less profitable, so it may not happen, or at least is slower coming.  And this partial onwreship thing, if certain power brokers were made to see a way that they could make a fortune on it, they’d cram that down our throats too.  I hope it never happens.  For me, it would potentially ruin the hobby.  I have no interest in watching the value of a comic go up 500% artificially because someone can buy 1% of it, when they really don’t own it at all.

...sneakers/tennis shoes/basketball shoes is fine.  That’s legit in my opinion.  And obviously it has worked out well.

On 8/25/2021 at 2:13 PM, Aman619 said:

Why is satisfaction even in this discussion?  This is about the viability to invest in omits to make money.  Period. Wake up, comics collecting has outgrown the geeky satisfaction for the big grail books.  Trust me, the joys of buying the grails lost its pure joy aspect once they were worth 100K each.  They are just investments now.  All the moderns and silver age Marvels will retain the satisfaction of collecting full ownership. So comics collecting for 99% of all the comics ever created will not be affected.

but as I wrote yesterday, if someone believes that Action 1 will be worth twice what it is today in less than 7 years (Wall Street average) he should be able to buy shares and profit in the appreciation of one jointly owned copy…. Just on a larger scale than say 3 collectors pooling their funds to buy on e on Heritage. And provided the vehicle for doing so is a solid company not built to fleece and run.

Perhaps, the irony for me is I’m in investments, that’s been my career.  Comics is anything but that to me.  But the only books I’m interested in for the most part, are the ones that you would deem as collectible investments.  If it’s not a grail, or perhaps something I appreciate for the art, or something special unique and rare, then what’s the point.  I don’t need to own something that’s easy to get.

On 8/25/2021 at 2:06 PM, Aman619 said:

No.  I meant Disney paid 5B to buy marvel. In Disney stock to Ike P mostly 

May have been after Disney bought LucasFilms, it was an 80x return.  You may be right.  Disney bought Marvel a few years before LucasFilm.  I know $1 in Marvel in 2000 was $80 in Disney 12 years later.  But I think you may be right on how it got there.

Someone paid $69 million for this.  And someone else bid like $68 million, but didn’t quite get it.  This doesn’t even actually exist.  It’s just digital code.  But the owner is selling it off in pieces.  Not a joke.  So who knows? What would we do, register our books on an exchange with title and insurance, then sell off pieces?

On 8/25/2021 at 1:53 PM, Aman619 said:

I remember the number as 5B which was still considered risky..

Nope, it was $500 million.

Marvel stock outperformed every Marvel 1st appearance from 2000 to 2012 multiple times over.  Every one. This had to do with the movies coming out.  X-Men, then Spider-Man, and soon all of them.  People were buying the stock because the value of the franchise was going up.  ie they were making more profit, more earnings, with more promise for the future.  Those earnings could be divvied up in dividends or put in the coffers.  The cash coming in could be reinvested in the company to pay big name actors or advertise to make even more money, or sell out, to say Disney.  
 

The books don’t make money.  They don’t pay dividends.  They can’t be sold to another company that feels like they want the cash flow machine themselves.  The books went up in value.  AF 15 went up multiple times over.  But it went up because collectors wanted to own the collectible.  I don’t have an interest in a portfolio of digital comics that aren’t real.  But markets aren’t made off of those that don’t invest.  So 1 person’s opinion isn’t that relevant.

On 8/25/2021 at 1:27 PM, valiantman said:

Again, I have to disagree.

If you can afford the whole thing, buy it.  You don't lose anything if you can afford the whole thing.

If you can't afford the whole thing, you gain something from being able to own a part.

Who loses?

So let’s say that I own an actual Batman 1, I paid $500k in 2022 from a Heritage auction, and it’s trading on an exchange now in 2024 where 1% is $8000.  So the book is worth $800k digitally.  Is this book being traded, the book that I own?   If so, what happens if the book is stolen, or burns in a fire?  

On 8/25/2021 at 1:18 PM, valiantman said:

Your suggestion for 100 digital DC 27s and 100 digital Action 1s is basically what the sports card industry has done since 2000 (Tom Brady limited rookies), and it has made those recent creations worth $100,000 each.

I'd much rather own 1% of an actual historical artifact from the dawn of the superhero era than 1% of the "best printing" of Tom Brady (or Mike Trout, etc.) rookie cards from this century.

It should at least be an option.

I respect you man, from back to the Valiant boards and what you continue to bring to this hobby with the CGC census data and all.  My opinion here has a lot to do with personal preference.  I feel like we lose something as a society the more we go down these roads. I wanted a Bloodshot 0 Platinum error or Suspense 3 for many reasons, but part of it is rarity, and chase, and that it’s tangible.  We gain something by being able to own part of a super rare collectible, we otherwise couldn’t afford, but I feel like we lose more.

On 8/25/2021 at 1:04 PM, valiantman said:

I disagree.  These items are worth what the available money is willing pay for them.  The total dollars in the market for Action #1 is $X.  If the market could handle my paltry $100, the total dollars in the market for Action #1 would be $X + $100.

If the market could handle ANY dollar amount from any number of people, the total dollars in the market for Action #1 could easily be ten times $X.  The number of Action #1 wouldn't increase, so the price would.

I get where you’re coming from.  And I’m not saying this market couldn’t exist, just that I don’t think it should.  Everything is becoming digital.  NFTs was the rage about a year ago, that has slowed considerably.  Similar to crypto or NFTs, it doesn’t necessarily matter how many naysayers there are, just how many embrace it.  But I don’t like the idea of commoditizing rare books to such a degree that they’re bought and sold on an exchange more than tangibly.  

i mean, it loses everything that makes it appealing.  You might as well ignore the existing books altogether, just have an exchange created where  you divvy up 100 digital DC 27s and 100 digital Action 1s, take it from there.  Do it crypto style, where you know there’s a finite number, but leave the actual books alone.

...I mean literally leave the actual books alone.  Like the real books have nothing to do with the digital exchanged books.  Totally separate them.  A digital DC 27 can be worth $100,000,000, but the actual book is worth what it’s worth, $1MM or $2MM, whatever.  No fractional ownership of the actual books, just digital pretend ones.

On 7/25/2020 at 10:32 AM, valiantman said:

Now you're talking.

 

One-third of U.S. museums are in danger of closing permanently due to covid.  What if all the items in there had shares on a digital exchange?  See a painting you like? Invest!  Buy a litho in the gift shop on your way out.  Museums as investment shopping.  That's a trillion dollars of assets, instead, since $200M is too low. Donors/foundations still retain majority ownership, free up capital, and the items stay right where they are.

But they have no real value.  The volatility could be wild.  An Action 1 today,  if the economy went into a Depression might drop from say $1,000,000 to $500k.  What is the value amongst those that can afford the book.  In your digital partial ownership scenario, $10,000,000 could drop to $250k. Because what do you own?  You own nothing.  It’s why NFTs are for the most part a bridge too far.