RockMyAmadeus

Ovalguitarkarate!

I thought you had your own thread to play in now? I'm sorry, you are who, exactly.....? :shrug: Someone who actually posts Moderns that are heating up on ebay in the Moderns that are heating up on ebay thread. Novel idea, wouldn't you say? "What I post rules, what you post sucks." How about you worry about what you post, and let others worry about what they post, and if you think there's a problem, take it to the mods and leave it with them. Problem solved. Huh? Some people actually like to enter into a thread and read about the said subject. Pretty telling of why you post in threads. One more time: how about you worry about what you post, and let others worry about what they post, and if you think there's a problem, take it to the mods and leave it with them. It's no one else's business to be telling anyone how, where, why, and what they may post. I post because I find a topic interesting. Period.

Wouldn't that be "ERBER!"...?

Yeah, yeah.

not really, but ok And this is totally accurate: Not really. These modern age books are like the junk bonds of the 80's...extremely high risk. People, even after the crash, still wanted FF #1. Nobody wanted, after the crash, Unity #0 Red. And there are more FF #1s in existence than Unity #0 Reds. (And I suspect the people still looking for that book...myself included...perhaps numbered fewer than 100 nationwide.) Take it to another thread bud. -J. Mind your own business bud. -R.

not really, but ok And this is totally accurate: Not really. These modern age books are like the junk bonds of the 80's...extremely high risk. People, even after the crash, still wanted FF #1. Nobody wanted, after the crash, Unity #0 Red. And there are more FF #1s in existence than Unity #0 Reds. (And I suspect the people still looking for that book...myself included...perhaps numbered fewer than 100 nationwide.) Or it could be worth $4,000 in 5 years. There's risk no matter how you spend you money. But, I don't want to derail the thread anymore. Jerome Talking about the investment aspect of the book is not derailing the thread. Yes, it COULD be "worth $4,000 in 5 years." THAT'S NOT THE POINT. The point is that it is far, far, FARRRR riskier than, say, FF #1 or Hulk #181. If you accept that risk...great! But people should be aware that it's FAR riskier, when you flat out said "MA run the same risk of crashing ." Same risk of "crashing" AT ALL? Yes. Same risk of crashing TO THE SAME DEGREE? Not even remotely! No one has said "there's no risk in this, and total risk in that." The point of wise investment is managing risk. And, if the idea is to invest $3,000 in a modern variant barely 5 years old, vs. a Hulk #181 in 8.5 (yikes!)...the wise investment is in the Hulk #181. Investing in comics at all is foolish. I've been doing it for 26 years, and I'm hardly wealthy....and I did everything "right", according to conventional wisdom. So, no, implying that the risk is the same for Modern variants over established keys is irresponsible. Buy it if you have the money and want it. Don't buy it because you "think it will go up in value."

not really, but ok And this is totally accurate: Not really. These modern age books are like the junk bonds of the 80's...extremely high risk. People, even after the crash, still wanted FF #1. Nobody wanted, after the crash, Unity #0 Red. And there are more FF #1s in existence than Unity #0 Reds. (And I suspect the people still looking for that book...myself included...perhaps numbered fewer than 100 nationwide.)

All a matter of preference. ...and budget. and brains . . . I don't really question how people choose to spend their funds. I assume if people are spending 3k and up on comic books, they must be successful have successful careers, have high paying jobs or just have the cash to pay for a luxury item. Comics are no different than other luxury goods. People buy a mercedes or BMW as their daily drivers. Sure you can just get a smart car , but some people don't want to drive smart cars. +1. Yet if someone were to drop $3K on an SA book no one would bat an eye Jerome Remember the Valiant books I sure do, IIRC all comic books dropped in value. So it's not like those 'safe' SA books didn't drop in value. Point is, imo, MA run the same risk of crashing like every other book no matter the age. Jerome Just as with the Batman 608RRP thread it is quite entertaining re-visiting the similar naysaying that happened in the early parts of this thread. -J. *Hey, I just hit "Total Newbie". It's fun to read that old batman RRP thread. Some posts were from 13 years ago. Lots of salty boardies back then when an RRP sold for the insane price of $325. Here we 13 years later and there are still variant collectors that still want that book The market is much larger, with many more dollars in it, than it was in 2003. We are on a bull run, and have been for quite some time. Bull runs don't last forever. The point isn't "you should spend your money on what I TELL you to spend your money on." The point is: be careful. Yes, Silver Age did withdraw a bit in the late 90's, as everything else did. But nothing crashed as hard as the "rare" variants and other books that people spent hundreds of dollars on only a short time before. And the keys...most of Golden and the big Silver...didn't withdraw at all. And...CGC skewed the market in ways that most people don't understand. But consider this example: Aria was one of the hottest books in 1999. People were spending $50+ on the sketchbooks, $100 on the gold linen variant. They're still rare. In fact, today, they're even rarer. There were still only 1,000 (or so) of the Aria gold linen sketchbooks made, and about 200 of them were damaged (according to Jimmy Jay.) What are they worth now? $10? $5? Still rare. Still very hard to find. But the public's interest moved on. If you didn't live through the early and mid 90's as a collector, you're not going to have that perspective. No one is trying to be "down" on anyone and what they like. If you like it, and have the money, go nuts! What people are saying is just to go into it with eyes wide open. That's all. Understand that the book you're paying $3,000 for today, you may not be able to get $100 for in 5 years.

I guess you could say that. It would be nice if this forum and thread specifically was used for what it was titled. Instead people use it as a sounding board for their ignorant opinions and chest pumping. I don't think I want to know what "chest pumping" refers to...

Uppity noobs.

I thought you had your own thread to play in now? I'm sorry, you are who, exactly.....? :shrug: Someone who actually posts Moderns that are heating up on ebay in the Moderns that are heating up on ebay thread. Novel idea, wouldn't you say? "What I post rules, what you post sucks." How about you worry about what you post, and let others worry about what they post, and if you think there's a problem, take it to the mods and leave it with them. Problem solved.

Here's my baby before it sold. I should have had it pressed. Ah well. I still have my lowly Royal Blue 9.6, and it's apparently worth like $7000 now, so yay!

Remember when eBay advertised on TV? Yup. They really did.

I believe the problem is raised by the fact you said it was graded by another company. You should have just said you were selling it as a raw book assigning your grade. The rest would (or should) have been uninfluent. And you still have to get back to me (At this point, have a Good Easter!) Uninfluent is my new favorite, non-existent, word. It's regal sounding. Would you please reinterate that for me...?

And you don't even have to listen very carefully, either....they're pretty loud as it is.

I thought you had your own thread to play in now? I'm sorry, you are who, exactly.....? :shrug:

20 copies is a drop in the bucket. Because most of the people buying don't have an understanding of market trends. Not everyone who buys comics is on these boards. Not everyone on these boards has an understanding of market trends. Nevertheless, quite accurate.

Because most of the people buying don't have an understanding of market trends. Not everyone who buys comics is on these boards. Not everyone on these boards has an understanding of market trends.

Remember....it's only greedy when someone else is making money.

I think they're giving you flack because you ain't gone to schoolz to follow forum posting rulez. You didn't allow him to reinterate.

Smart guy. Well priced, he paid much less. Got his profit and he is out. What kills me are these greedy that ask for well over the going price looking for a sucker. isn't this the Modern flipper mantra It's only greedy when someone else is making money....

There's an entire run of Punisher magazines, not to mention the Marvel Previews and the various graphic novels out there. Most were OK. Yeah, but if I remember correctly, those Punisher mags just reprinted comic stories. The 70s/early 80s Hulk and Moon Knight mags contained original stories I'm fairly certain Marvel Preview #2 and Marvel Super Action #1 are original stories...97% sure. But they didn't do Punny like they did Moony, for sure. The Punisher mag they did starting in the late 80's was just reprints. Still, the run was kinda cool. Mags were out of favor by then. Punny...Moony? Had the same reaction. Pffft...Punny's been called Punny for decades. I think even Spidey called him Punny at one point.

Very true. But if you were lucky enough to find the sticker, I can't figure out why you would take it off one comic book and put the sticker on a different comic book. The thing I've wondered is whether nor not someone could figure out a way to make those stickers. Probably not likely since there's really not much demand for these DC Universe variants to warrant the trouble of trying to make exact replicas of these stickers (I've rarely seen anyone crazy enough to pay a huge premium for them except for me). Perhaps the CGC should use carbon dating to figure out the age of the sticker (just kidding!) Like any sort of "add on" to a book, if the book itself became valuable because of that add-on, the unscrupulous would certainly attempt to switch stickers from a more common book to a rare one. I would like to know why DC felt the need to sticker these books in the first place. Of course, the books were designed to be part of (discounted) packs, and they didn't want the same problem that occurred with the 70's 2- and 3-packs, whereby retailers were accidentally scanning the one book as the price for the whole pack, but since many of them seem to have been made *only* for the boxed packs, which had universally covered UPC areas, the sticker seems unnecessary. It would appear that there are very few known examples of stickered books for any of these examples. If these are the only four known books, with possibly single examples (or maybe two) of each known to collectors of these things, then it wouldn't be worthwhile to potentially damage the book or the sticker to try to manipulate anything. At best it would be a lateral move. I'd be much more concerned with potential counterfeits (because they are pretty simple designs and fairly rough printing quality) than removing legit stickers to place on other books. I am also curious about the rationale for the stickers. My guess is that they may have needed some additional books to round out some of the multi-packs, so rather than go back to print on covers with the DC Universe logo they may have simply taken some regular printings and placed stickers on them. I suspect that this could have been some form of inventory control, similar to printing "not for retail sale" on some things, to prevent retailers from buying discounted multipacks and then reselling the books inside at cover price. But that is pure speculation on my part. I think you have the right idea here. I don't believe any of the known stickered DCU's came from 20 packs. The last 20-pack was for issues dated Nov 1994 and the 4 known stickered DCU's were dated after Nov 1994. That leads me to believe they came from boxed sets or two packs. My stickered Superman 104 DCU actually came from a sealed boxed set (i.e., Superman's Greatest Foes) that I opened myself. I don't know why DC felt the need to place the sticker on the boxed copy since the sticker doesn't show through the box (and interestingly, it was the only stickered comic book among the 6 comic books in that boxed set). Maybe the stickers were placed on there because those comic books could be sold in either boxed sets or two packs (the UPC codes are visible in the two packs and would therefore need to be covered up) For whatever it is worth, the sticker on my Superman 104 covers a newsstand UPC. The sticker on my Detective 690 and SM MOS 42 covers a direct sales UPC. I don't know what possesses me to care about these things, but DC also produced stickers to cover some errors on newsstand bar codes. In case you didn't see my posting on that, you can see it in the following link: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9240642#Post9240642 If anything, I would suspect the stickers were for the carded 2- and 3-packs, which would make sense.

I had this similar thought, and it seems like a reasonable guess. The rationale that I've heard is that the packaging might allow a barcode from a single comic to show, which would make the multi-pack ring up at a single comic price. The only way to guarantee that a multi-pack rings up at the multi-pack price would be to cover all the other barcodes. Yes, but that was the point I made earlier. The boxes were all made to cover up the UPC quite well.

Very true. But if you were lucky enough to find the sticker, I can't figure out why you would take it off one comic book and put the sticker on a different comic book. The thing I've wondered is whether nor not someone could figure out a way to make those stickers. Probably not likely since there's really not much demand for these DC Universe variants to warrant the trouble of trying to make exact replicas of these stickers (I've rarely seen anyone crazy enough to pay a huge premium for them except for me). Perhaps the CGC should use carbon dating to figure out the age of the sticker (just kidding!) Like any sort of "add on" to a book, if the book itself became valuable because of that add-on, the unscrupulous would certainly attempt to switch stickers from a more common book to a rare one. I would like to know why DC felt the need to sticker these books in the first place. Of course, the books were designed to be part of (discounted) packs, and they didn't want the same problem that occurred with the 70's 2- and 3-packs, whereby retailers were accidentally scanning the one book as the price for the whole pack, but since many of them seem to have been made *only* for the boxed packs, which had universally covered UPC areas, the sticker seems unnecessary.