RockMyAmadeus

Here's the dirty little secret of pressing: every book is at risk of damage in the process. You're exposing decades old paper that was never intended to be "high quality" to heat, pressure, and in many cases, humidity/moisture. It's like racing a car...to get the best results, you have to take the risk...but sometimes, you crash. It happens. So if you have a $1K book and CCS ruins it you're basically skrewed? I do not know, and will not speculate on this, the message board of the company that owns CCS. But I DO know that other pressers have damaged books, and not stepped up to the plate to address the issue satisfactorily with their customers, if they even mentioned it at all. Are you speaking specifically to Harbinger 1 or books damaged in general? In general.

Here's the dirty little secret of pressing: every book is at risk of damage in the process. You're exposing decades old paper that was never intended to be "high quality" to heat, pressure, and in many cases, humidity/moisture. It's like racing a car...to get the best results, you have to take the risk...but sometimes, you crash. It happens. So if you have a $1K book and CCS ruins it you're basically skrewed? I do not know, and will not speculate on this, the message board of the company that owns CCS. But I DO know that other pressers have damaged books, and not stepped up to the plate to address the issue satisfactorily with their customers, if they even mentioned it at all.

Such a beauty. I love that book.

BATMAN #368? mm Oh, no, he'd had many full appearances before then. I'd have to go through them again, but I'm leaning to Tec #525.

Here's the dirty little secret of pressing: every book is at risk of damage in the process. You're exposing decades old paper that was never intended to be "high quality" to heat, pressure, and in many cases, humidity/moisture. It's like racing a car...to get the best results, you have to take the risk...but sometimes, you crash. It happens.

In this case, I trust in Valiantman's expert analytical skills and his application of descriptive statistics to make an assumption about CGC results over time. That doesn't require decades of data when it comes to such sampling. But it does require defining the population (graded books), sampling frame (9.8's of all graded books), an appropriate sample size that can accurately represent the characteristics of the overall population, and validation there is no bias or error in the data pulled. If Valiantman's hypothesis in this case is CGC changed its standards over time, and through the sampling of all 9.8's delivered can validate there was a shift in results, then the assumption is there may have been a shift due to the increase in 9.8 counts compared to all other grades. But I think an interesting chart to validate the hypothesis further is a comparison of all grades to see if they also experienced any shift in results. It has nothing to do with anyone's ability, talent, or skills at gathering and interpreting data. It has to do with having enough data to form accurate analyses. And, as I said, coins have just started to blossom in that area, and they have 15 years head start on comics, AND there were two A-Class grading companies from the start, rather than one. "Results not known; not enough data" will be the story for the next decade, at least. And, as I explained in detail in the other thread, trying to figure out if CGC's grading standards have shifted over time is not possible with that graph and data alone.

We must be talking about different things; I don't know what you're referring to in the first one. My thinking ability has clearly been retarded by my lack of sleep. I DO know what you're referring to in the second one.

Batman #357 is a Jason Todd cameo. Three whole panels, he doesn't speak and it's from a distance. There's a better book for his first appearance.

No, because of the numbers you post here. Look at the slowdown. 2008, the numbers doubled (12 to 24) in a single year. In 2012, the numbers only went up 60%, 80 to 135, and it took 3 years. You can see the rush happen before our very eyes, and it peaked in 2009. You had a leap of 6, and then 7 the next month, back to back. 13 copies in two cycles. You don't ever see that again. That was the rush. Since then you see 3s, 4s, but nothing more until Sept of 2013, when you get a strange leap of 8....then the same dribs and drabs. One or two copies every 3-4 months. There will undoubtedly be more...I have more raws, and I suspect others do, as well. But the "doubling of the census" for this book is essentially over, unless we're looking at several years down the road.

And #359 leads directly into Tec #526, the anniversary issue, which is chock full of awesome. It doesn't get near the love it should.

It takes several examples in the data, but I believe that I can prove that CGC got VERY relaxed in what they gave CGC 9.8 during the 2009 timeframe. Across pretty much every major modern book, across all publishers, there is a sharp increase in the % receiving CGC 9.8 around 2009. Sure... it could be prescreening, and it could be pressing, but I believe it was literally a relaxation of the standard. Or, it could be that people got into CGC who consistently acquired very high grade raw books, maybe even brand new, who weren't in that market before. Prior to about 2007, it made no sense to slab 1980-up books, because they didn't sell for much. The GPA data is littered with examples of books that sold for peanuts in 9.8. A&A #0 Gold is a good example. The first 9.8 sold for $28 back in 2002. Why would anyone submit books, to sell them at a loss when all is said and done? It's just too soon to tell. We're only just now getting to the point, nearly 30 years on, when good, reliable statistical data can be mined from coin slabbing. With only the one company, and only 15 years on, the picture is still much too fuzzy to draw any really meaningful conclusions.

Only in a sample size that's large enough to make such percentage differences to matter. 135 is not a large enough sample size to extrapolate.

The census will not double on this book any time soon. It has taken 7 years to get from 12 to 135. Harbinger #1 selling for $2500 was a watershed. Everyone and their grandmother slabbed whatever copies they could find. In that same time period, starting in Jan of 2008, Batman Adventures went from 1 9.8 to 280 9.8s. New Mutants #98 went from 128 to 1597 9.8s. There will be no "census doubling", just like with ASM #301 (which, since the discussion last August has added NINE 9.8s to the census, despite selling for $1000 several times.) Some people may believe that there are endless copies of every single 1980-up book out there in raw 9.8, just waiting for attention to be paid to it so it will go in that slab. That isn't the case. Will there be a few here, a few there? Sure. But will there be a large jump in the census? Of course not. The book hasn't sold for less than $300 in 9.8 since 2002; it is a easy money. So where was the flood...? You're looking at it. 135 copies. That's the flood. The book had a relatively low print run, a good chunk were manufactured with spine splits and bindery tears, and another good chunk had the coupons cut out. If...and granted, this is a colossal if...but if Harbinger were to ever gain any sort of mainstream, widespread buzz....the book will have no problem being a $2,000 book again. And this time, there will be no flood to mitigate prices.... Rebuttal: Iron Man 55. These two books are so radically different, trying to compare them is quite beyond reasonable.

Well...that was certainly interesting. Even Shelly got involved.

They could have called it "Adolescent Transgenic Tai Chi Crocodiles", or some such....

The census will not double on this book any time soon. It has taken 7 years to get from 12 to 135. Harbinger #1 selling for $2500 was a watershed. Everyone and their grandmother slabbed whatever copies they could find. In that same time period, starting in Jan of 2008, Batman Adventures went from 1 9.8 to 280 9.8s. New Mutants #98 went from 128 to 1597 9.8s. There will be no "census doubling", just like with ASM #301 (which, since the discussion last August has added NINE 9.8s to the census, despite selling for $1000 several times.) Some people may believe that there are endless copies of every single 1980-up book out there in raw 9.8, just waiting for attention to be paid to it so it will go in that slab. That isn't the case. Will there be a few here, a few there? Sure. But will there be a large jump in the census? Of course not. The book hasn't sold for less than $300 in 9.8 since 2002; it is a easy money. So where was the flood...? You're looking at it. 135 copies. That's the flood. The book had a relatively low print run, a good chunk were manufactured with spine splits and bindery tears, and another good chunk had the coupons cut out. If...and granted, this is a colossal if...but if Harbinger were to ever gain any sort of mainstream, widespread buzz....the book will have no problem being a $2,000 book again. And this time, there will be no flood to mitigate prices....

I wonder where Thomas Nielson went...

Yesterday? That's awesome. I saw Margot Kidder once... not yesterday... and you're correct. Then again, I didn't understand why anyone would have been impressed by Margot Kidder... ever. Even looking at old images from Google... she just looks like a less-pleasant-to-be-around Courtney Cox. (insert requisite favorable comments about 1970s Valerie Perrine here) (thumbs u I saw Valerie Perrine, too. They were all at Monsterpalooza.

Speaking of Zod, I saw Sarah Douglas, the woman who played Ursa in the Superman movies yesterday. She looks great. Margot Kidder, on the other hand, looks terrible.

Except not. Kirby was given free reign on his 4th World, and Byrne did it with Alpha Flight. And Kirby in 1970, and Byrne in 1983 were just as big as McFarlane in 1990. Kirby may have not had the numbers, but Byrne certainly did. Byrne's popularity dwarfed McFarlane's, even at the height of McFarlane's fame. Byrne was the very first superstar artist. Not to pick nits, but there were really only two covers to Spiderman #1. The Platinum wasn't intended for (and couldn't be purchased directly by) fans, it was a thank you for the retailers, and came after the fact. And the gold is also an after-the-fact printing. Sure, ok, there were the bagged versions...but the variations between those are minor. You have silver..and "green"...and that's about it.

I believe Jim Shooter said that in the editorial section of... Harbinger #1. I would say more like Uncanny X-Men #1 with it being new characters that deal with how their powers effect the world and themselves, teenagers, death, life, and a new way of approaching a superhero team that no other comic publisher was doing at the time. Similar... (but that title wasn't "Uncanny")... this article from Sequart lists Harbinger #1 as the top comic of the 1990s, mentioning the difference from X-Men. http://sequart.org/magazine/2430/the-ten-most-important-comic-books-of-the-1990s/ X-Men #1 is on the list at #4. I dissected that article once upon a time, and even wrote an article in rebuttal that I think someone stole whole cloth and claimed was their own. It's on the 'net somewhere.

I have sold more Valiant books in the last week than in the last three years. And when the furor dies down, I will buy them all back...again. I was sad to find out, though, that I only have 9 copies of Ninjak #1 gold. I started with 100. I gave a good chunk away. Still owe a couple to a couple. Haven't forgotten!

+1 I might have just thrown it on ebay. -J. Probably would have done better.