ADAMANTIUM

@CGC Mike

This is all that is on CGC site for attendance at the moment, I know @Monster's Lair Comics has helped some facilitators in the past and might know of a few closer to time. It is still fairly early even with guest announcements, I know comicsketchart.com usually attends so you might check that website as they are facilitators

Someone mentioned that they only theived $30k Didn't the suit mention $4mil plus in insurance filed with the books subbed through cgc? How that equates to only pocketing 30k doesn't sound feasible idk

Feel old yet?

I gave away a fine condition copy of that issue a year or so ago in the Christmas exchange. I enjoyed it, as it being a raw could be read. I first discovered that cover in the TV show comic book men when they "helped the descendant of the artist sell the OA to that cover" amongst other things. I'm sure it was scripted and not at all a "surprise visit" as it was made out to be. Different world now than ten years ago watching, when I was more naive 😂

Ya I'm usually middle of the pack, which I guess is still true, and yet it has me wondering how many more rounds to do even better there are.

I'm in good company. Somehow doing somewhat better than I have before, but I think it may be we all are doing equally bad? Lol Idk

Turning out to be an darn tootin' hard kind of grade given the nearly 30k total, with only 28.00556K of them being below 9.8. Idk just scraping the barrel

Well in a twisted sort of way, perhaps being silly.... Is it possible that somehow the CGC census gets fixed to new totals? After all there are a lot less legit out there, and over time, "maybe the stigma" on certain books will wear off? I'm not sure, but ASM 300 in 9.8 was still only like 2 % of the total, equaling only under 2k or thereabouts. Perhaps that saving grace will reconstitute value in the future. Probably not an immediate hope, but is "something", idk

Respectable! When I first saw it, I had to look twice! Real nice

I could hear the defense now, "we were just trying to help occifer and we were doing great!"

That was the one way back due to technical difficulties, I was allowed to change. I started out at 6.0 as well, but changed to 7.0. I think it was the glare on that read spine, it made the paper look raw in places and especially around the staples like paper was missing, which 6.0 made sense. When I realized my glare error, and cgc Mike had made a listing error, those that had submitted before hand got a redo on that. Whew!

I kept it under 10, good for me

Results in 45 minutes?

That's true too, many posted having watched it in the Dave Stevens thread. Not many new acquisitions posted in that thread as of late or in a while, and yet when they were, it was the rarities.