RockMyAmadeus

Yeah, make that two pages. Thanks for the correction. It's been a while since I cracked open the book.

We have once more entered Bizarro land, where down is up, black is white, and truth is fiction. Let's once again fight fiction with clear, sober fact: 1. "Divad" brought up the issue of "selling restored books without disclosure", here: That post is (currently) to be found on page 2359, the 9th post down. That post was the catalyst for the subsequent posts on the matter. So, if "Divad" brought the issue up...and I merely responded to the charge with the facts...who is the one with the obsession...? 2. The sale was not "alleged", as "Divad" claims...I posted the feedback from the actual transaction, which clearly demonstrates that a sale from myself to him took place...again, which he brought up...with which he was completely satisfied. 3. I did not trim the book, despite the allegation of "Divad." It was trimmed...poorly...like, by a child with scissors...when I got it, and I sold it plainly stated as such. "Admittedly" means that I admitted that I did so, when, in fact, I have already stated, quite clearly, that I DID NOT trim this $15 book. That ALONE should completely disqualify "Divad's" position. 4. Being accused of selling "restored books without disclosure" is a serious, serious accusation, which should be treated seriously and not be ignored. And remember: I didn't bring it up. "Divad" did. These are the facts, and I have supported them with evidence. I don't care what "Divad" does, so long as this person leaves me out of their posts. "Divad" has a very long history of making snarky, snide little contentious comments to people he doesn't like. He takes his little digs, and then is astonished when someone pushes back...so he gets vicious and starts up with the (multiple now) false and Bizarro-world accusations. But none of you should have to stand with being publicly accused of fraud with no evidence, and neither should I. Regardless of whether you like or dislike a member here, no one should be subject to accusations, false or not, to which they cannot respond.

Please don't quote "Stu's" posts. Not only is it doxing, but he's just making excrement up at this point. What is an "illegal" eBay account...? No one but this sociopath even knows.

I don't believe this is true. Can you prove it? You would be incorrect. Too many people these days, so eager to accuse others of lying, with no justification for doing so. You're too transparent, Stu.

This is my new favorite video. This should be my go-to video from now on.

Yes, but nobody cares. He's not in a movie. Not my point, and not in dispute. Hobgoblin is, and has been, far more important a comics character than "Spider-ham", movie or no. Spider-Ham is in a movie. That's all that is driving the price. Yes, and that is absurd. "He's in a movie!!" does not justify $500 for a 9.8. There's nothing substantive about this character, nor scarcity in high grade, that would justify $500 for a 9.8. Not to be a , but "what I collect rules, what you collect drools???? I'd expect more from you. That's not what I said at all. Name the most significant event in Spider-ham's history. .... Right...there aren't any. The character is a funny animal, parody character. Name a funny animal or parody character from the last 60 years that has seen this kind of attention. Sonic? Maybe. Sonic isn't a parody, but you could call him "funny animal", and he at least has video games and cartoons to back him up. TMNT? TMNT quickly grew beyond its parody introduction into its own mythos. Cerebus? Same thing. What has Spider-ham got...? A couple dozen comics from the 80s, and the occasional one-shot beyond that? Occasional appearances in cartoons of other characters? This is not disparagement of the character or the genre. It's a wonderful genre, and has delighted people for decades. It's an acknowledgement that funny animal and parody characters have seldom been sought after, the way their super-hero, fantasy, and horror/suspense counterparts have been. Spider-ham never moved beyond its silly, parody roots to become a TMNT or a Cerebus, or even a Sonic. Again, the spread isn't that great. Is it speculator driven? Of course it is. That's what all the market is right now. When and if Spider-ham can be developed into a character the likes of Cerebus or Sonic, or become a cross-platform success like Groot or Mickey Mouse or Scooby Doo...then I can see justification for these prices. Until then, however...

That's a shame. Do you have an obituary you can share? I rather liked ol' Luxxy.

But the marketplace only pushes (1) first appearances and (2) media plays. No Hobgoblin media play, therefore no spiking. You, of all people, should understand that there's no absurdity in a marketplace - it is what it is. If you think this price is too high, you should absolutely grade and flip them, because you will make money at the top. I don't know how much room there is for growth on graded books - especially at the 9.8 level - but on raw copies? Move them out. The point was a comparison. Hobby is a classic Spidey villain, and has been, to varying degrees of importance, part of Spiderman's story for 35 years now. Spider-ham is most decidedly not. My point is that those prices, like sooooooo many that have come before it, aren't real. They're not real because they're fueled by people who have a "fear of missing out" (FOMO), and who don't know, understand, or appreciate the market. So, they foolishly pay far more than is justified by the qualities of the character, or the actual scarcity of the book, and absurd prices are born. It's just as absurd as paying $30k for a 9.6 copy of Green Lantern #76. If there was something, anything, justifying the premium, I'd be right there with you. But there's not. There's just speculators, speculating, afraid of missing out.

No one is disputing this. You're arguing with the choir.

Mainly because, of all the Spider-Ham books ever made, this one is by far the most common, and the most common in high grade. I'm going to grab my copies when I run across them and get them graded and sold, because $500 is absurd. That's about where a 9.8 ASM #238 was up until a very short time ago.

Hot™

And come on...how could you not get a thrill when you turned the page to see this:

I waxed last night. It was painful.

Four years later, and STILL only 1 #11 in 9.8.

This is not the print run of TWD #1.

Very cold. As in dead. Roughly about 1993-2002 or so. The only thing that saved it was its ridiculously low print run.

Useless trivia: at one point in time, because that issue had a single page of McFarlane art...this one...it was worth the same as DD #257 ($3), which later became much more valuable because of the Punisher appearance.

Heating up: https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=carnage+wonderful+life&_sacat=0&rt=nc&LH_Sold=1&LH_Complete=1 Carnage It's a Wonderful Life. Tough little book to find, especially in high grade.

Which, of course, is the total truth. Back-pedal all you want, it doesn’t change that you sold a trimmed book without disclosing it. For readers paying attention, realize..."Divad" here is referring to an eBay listing from around 2003. In the past, when he decided to get snide, I would point out this fact...and he then would claim he had "never done business with me." That post is still here on the board, somewhere. Here is the feedback he left for me: ...which is from his eBay account "divadrabnud" (which is his name spelled backwards.) The corresponding feedback can also be found on his "feedback left" page...my late, great, "graysoncollectibles" account. (For fun, scroll through some of the feedback he left for others. It's fascinating!) Notice anything there in that feedback? No mention of "trimming not disclosed." Do you think, if the book was badly trimmed and it was NOT disclosed, that such feedback would have been left by someone who has been collecting comics, since, what, the 60s...? Check out the feedback he has left for others. Does anyone reading this think that someone who had received a "trimmed book that was not disclosed" would have left feedback like that...? Consider THIS feedback which he left right around the same time: http://toolhaus.org/cgi-bin/negs?User=divadrabnud&Dirn=Left+by So, if the book *I* sold him was trimmed and NOT disclosed as such...why did he leave such glowing feedback...? He was obviously capable of detecting trimming. Not only was the book badly trimmed, but I plainly disclosed AND pictured it with a front-on scan...so there was no hiding it. Unfortunately, as it is now 15 years in the past, and I certainly didn't keep the listing, it's now a "he said/she said" type situation. Why do I remember it so vividly? Because I was thoroughly annoyed when I discovered the exact book (Batman #169), listed by the exact same person who I sold it to, listed a couple of weeks later, with a picture angled so you couldn't tell the right edge was poorly trimmed, not a word mentioning the trimming, and it sold for 5 times what I had sold it for ($15 to "Divad", $75 to the unsuspecting mark.) So, I can only point out the information that I DO have, and leave others to come to their own conclusions, and decide who is more trustworthy and telling the truth. Remember the Excalibur #1, graded "NM 9.4", pictured above. I recommend, "Divad", that you drop it, and pretend I don't exist.

Ok. If we entertain that premise, how did that work? You looked up "magazine distributor" in the phonebook and then walked in? I don't think Robert Bell was buying his future stock from 7-11s, either, but Robert Bell wasn't your typical collector, either.

Here's one I have been picking up for the last 5 years or so: https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313.TR8.TRC2.A0.H0.Xvenom+sinner+3.TRS1&_nkw=venom+sinner+3&_sacat=63&LH_TitleDesc=0&_sop=16&_osacat=63&_odkw=venom+sinner+4&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&LH_TitleDesc=0 Venom: Sinner Takes All #3

That is complete and utter insanity.

Which, of course, is total nonsense. I neither trimmed the book myself, nor failed to disclose it. Seeing as how this was 2003 or thereabouts, if I run into the picture, I'll make sure I post it, which clearly shows the very poorly trimmed right edge. At least you're not denying that you bought it anymore, once I proved that the feedback you left for me was still on my account. But, by all means, feel free to continue this childish back and forth. Gotta take your shots, over and over and over and over and over.... "lol"

Yup, and it’s now pretty clear that creators’ commitment to a title is a huge land mine if anyone is considering speculating. So many independent books burn brightly at the start... Yeah, it's a very unfortunate fact of modern comics.

Says the guy who sells restored books without disclosure. And that would be “nor.” No, you're forgetting your history. That would be YOU who sells restored books without disclosure. Remember? We've been over this. Batman #169, listed BY ME as trimmed along the right edge, for $15, bought BY YOU, and flipped for $75...with no mention of the trimming, and pictured at an angle to hide it. The feedback you left me for it is still on my account. I won't bother asking if you have any evidence of me "selling restored books without disclosure", because there is none. I would be slitting my throat doing such a thing. Here's an example of your overgrading: https://www.ebay.com/itm/EXCALIBUR-1-Oct-1988-NM-9-4-Alan-DAVIS-Cover-amp-Art-1st-App-WIDGET-MARVEL-Comics-/183366453019?epid=85426698&hash=item2ab17e071b%3Ag%3AwF4AAOSwwbdWKY5~&nma=true&si=GseEzKa0y59iFEUrdbdG00hKrJw%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557 Excalibur #1 graded "NM 9.4" with pretty severe spine damage, and nasty fingerprints on the left edge of the back cover.