joe_collector

The Comic Link strategy invades the CGC forums. I was going to make an offer on your Logan's Run variant before it was pulled... Which of course brings up the question...if yours was pulled why aren't a couple others? Good question - I guess my price was a bit too low?

The Comic Link strategy invades the CGC forums.

Kudos go out to: Greggy for a few stacks of his "reject pile" Marvels Nik/Nikos for another pack of his patented Forum Sale books tkg2627 for a pair of nice BA books All three, while not having the best singing voices, are great guys to deal with. Ooops, I almost forgot to thank pirate for a set of Doomsday +1.

If I'm a US company, with the majority of sales in the US, then it makes the most sense to keep the test marketing geographically close - both to keep the data timely and to hit your core customer base. Just common sense.

Nah, there would be no reason to test market prices in the UK, as the time delay would absolutely kill any meaningful data. It would be far more logical to extend it to Canada first, and we never got any.

Wow, look who's back from the dead.

Has anyone else noticed the deluge, relatively speaking, of WTB posts? There never used to be any, now they're really clogging up the boards some days. Any thoughts to a new WTB forum?

You do realize that increased emoticon activity is the easiest way to defeat such a strategy? You refresh and suddenly the book is 2 posts up.

See, it links to the last post made at the time of submittal. My head just hit the desk - I need some sleep.

Quick reply test

I checked your links, and it looks like you reply to the last post. If it was linked to the original post, I'd believe none of your would be valid, otherwise it would be abuse-city.

While this method works, it does bring with it a risk that someone will post a message between that sales post and yours, thus linking your generic Quick Reply to that, and not the comic you wanted. Then the cat's out of the bag, and it's Roast a CGC Member time.

As long as the original poster replied to the correct post (you can check by clicking on the link above the message) then I don't see the problem. There is no need to even edit the post later, other than to clarify it to the seller. If the person is scamming, and replying to an earlier post (or creating a generic quick reply), then hoping he can catch a book that was just listed, then that's dead wrong. But if the Reply Link/ID is right, I don't see the harm or foul.

So what ID did you use when inventing the CGC Marketplace? The one above says Mar 27 2002.

Was the before or after you solved world hunger?

I've sold plenty of stuff in the past, but old Marketplace threads get deleted.

As I've stated many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many times before, I do not BUY Moderns, since I do not want to support the short-sighted "aging market" business model, but I do read some.

Do you even sell books on here?

No, I knew exactly what you meant, I only wanted things clear for possible rules inclusion. For example, something like this (no scans): Amazing Spider-man 128 VF - $30 Amazing Spider-man 129 VF - $30 Amazing Spider-man 131 VF - $30 Amazing Spider-man 132 VF - $30 Amazing Spider-man 134 VF - $30 Would still be allowed in a single post. So basically, the proposed rule would be "One large scan per post, multiple thumbnails and URLs allowed".

So is it one book or one scan? A list of books and a set of scans are different, ya know.

Just to make sure the proposed rule is corrent, you mean one scan per post, right?

Sure, but I also do not agree with banner, that we need to water-down the rules, so that dealers are allowed to just dump their online stock lists here, while concurrently posting them in their site, on EBay, and using various consignment sites like CL.

I wonder about this too.

But that's the whole point that banner wants to CHANGE. Somehow "following the rules" is too hard for these big dealers, so banner suggests getting rid of those horrible "forum only" rules in the Forum Only marketplace, thereby rendering the split totally useless.

The funny thing is, that NONE of those options are what you're suggesting - getting rid of the "forum-only" requirement and alllowing dealers and other sellers to relist their online stock here. Next time post EXACTLY what you're proposing, as this poll does not support your view, no matter the response.