RockMyAmadeus

It's not that I'm against it, but I don't think very many of these get slabbed. At a glance, I don't see any on E-Bay. Most of the underlying books are usually not worth getting slabbed. Personally, I would never submit or buy a slabbed copy. Understood, but the amount slabbed shouldn't have any bearing on their notation. There are maybe as many people interested in these today as there were 30/35c variants in the early 90s. The real point is that they are different, and CGC should have a policy of notating that, whether or not there are people interested or not. Can you imagine if CGC existed when "nobody cared" about the 30/35s?

Complete pre-Unity and Unity SS 9.8 set, except for Harby #3 and Solar #10.

So true, so true.

Hey Rob. You sure the Church Action #1 sale was in 1984....? I thought it was in 1982. EDIT: Chuck claims it was 1983: http://www.milehighcomics.com/tales/cbg168.html

That definition doesn't take into account many works that are considered classic, but aren't necessarily "of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind." Conan #1, for example, might be heralded as a "classic cover", but is not an example of a very young, very inexperienced Smith's best work. Amazing Spiderman #50 is considered a "classic cover"...but it wasn't always considered that, and it wasn't "broken out" for its cover until the CGC era. And...there are many works that are of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind that are NOT considered to be "classic." Is Crime Suspenstories #22 a masterpiece of the artform?...ehhh, probably not. But would anyone suggest it's NOT a "classic cover"? How many "classic cover" designations are there that are just because Bob Overstreet's personal opinion...and his alone...was the determining factor? The answer is "not none." Obviously, there's a great deal of subjectivity, BUT....it's easy to see, over time, how many other people viewed the cover (that's the "impact" that I mentioned above.) I've yet to see a compelling argument for why ASM #300 should be considered a "classic" cover. It's a decent cover, for sure, but the red "300" up and down the cover is a distraction as much as a plus. It's certainly not part of the artistic quality, because it's not part of the art. Spidey's pose is the typical radically unnatural pose that McFarlane was famous for. The cityscape is decent, but it's a bit fuzzy, and not a masterpiece of detail. In other words, it's a decent cover. But I don't know that anyone would objectively say it's "of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind." The cover to #325, on the other hand, is...obviously in my opinion...a masterpiece, the best cover, artistically and compositionally, that McFarlane has EVER done. The detail is outstanding, the layout is fantastic...3 different levels of perspective, and they all work...McFarlane really put everything he had into this cover. And yet...no "classic cover" designation.

I don't know what CVA calls what they do, but of course, the point isn't about grading. It's about presentation for the grade given. There are...obviously...books that are strong for the grade, and books that are weak for the grade. We see them all the time. I've had slabs returned to me...graded perfectly fine, mind you...because the buyer saw something in person that they didn't like. I've seen books that have no business being in a slab with that high a number, and I've had books that look stunning, and I'm left wondering what the grader thought they saw (and these are on books I personally submitted, mind, so I know exactly what the graders saw, too.) The service is only "this book APPEARS really nice for the grade." That's it. I don't think they're purporting to be "grading" the book...just looking at it for what it is, and saying that it looks a little nicer..or a lot nicer..than the grade given. People say about coins "well, you can SEE the entire coin!"....no, you cannot. In the olden days, you couldn't see the rim at all, and even still, you can't see the rim that is under the prongs. You also can't see fine issues that the plastic tends to hide. So CAC (the coin service) is the same thing: a comment on how nice the coin APPEARS for the assigned grade. It may work in comics...it may not...but it IS a legitimate service, and, if I had enough experience with them, personally, and knew they were serious and respectable, I'd pay more for a CVA stickered book over a non-one any day.

It’s kinda like PGX - both offer no value to the hobby, yet they somehow continue to stay in business. It's nothing like PGX, and it does not offer "no value to the hobby."

Oh, without a doubt, eventually no one will want to buy a slab until 47,948 other pairs of eyes have looked at it first. You nailed it.

Yes. You just can't hire your unqualified friends and put them in positions of authority.

At this point, there is no reason...none at all...why these books shouldn't be broken out in the census.

It's interesting how many people are naysaying the concept. We'll see how it plays out. It works just fine for coins. Grading companies don't always get things right, and it's a professional...in theory...second set of eyes.

Well that was quick. Nice!

Stan wrote several comics after 1972, including She-Hulk #1, Ravage 2099 #1-8, Silver Surfer vol 2 #1, Thor #385, and others.

....you do? You sure? Pics?

So, did Felicia and Eddie make up in the last 30 years? (It's been 30 years??!) The last time I saw them together, he beat the living snot out of her in ASM #316. Just destroyed her.

That is so damn cool. I absolutely love the creativeness of fans. You never would have seen these types of projects even 10-15 years ago. So awesome.

I think JSC is losing his touch...I think this cover is terrible! Peter looks constipated, or maybe MJ needs to lose a few pounds. Peters thighs looks bulgy and does MJ have hooves in those shoes. aka "phoning it in."

Nevermind, someone already did it. This sums up the CGC board discussion experience, to a "T":

Anybody know how to take a YouTube video and edit it to make a shorter clip...?