RockMyAmadeus

I once sold a Rai #3 for $9... Of course, long BEFORE it became a $75 book.

You sir, still owe me a Ninjak 1 Gold. I knew there were a couple...I still owe that motorcycle guy one, too. Totally forgot his name. When I got banned in Dec 2008, he posted "guess I'll never get mine now." Boy, was he wrong! He just hasn't gotten it YET.

Yes. Not how debate works. Yes?? That's your come back? Where's your input? We all got your knowledge of bullying, but yet you can't provide any input and still you continue to post in this gsxm1 investment thread. Why are you posting popcorn? There's still a few of us who are awaiting your input and rebuttal to Mark1's post. Why are you beating around a bush. And don't say that's not how debate works. You replied to Mark1's post with simple short answers, with no input of your own. That's not how a debate works. That's because RMA doesn't have a rebuttal. Oh, I certainly do. You'll see it below. You've just changed the parameters of your argument. Let me refresh: ...which is not correct. This statement is neither true, nor untrue, because it concerns the future, which is unknown. You also give absolutely no parameters to qualify your claim about the future. For example: does it matter what condition the book(s) is/are in? How long a period of time must one hold said book(s)? What about restored copies? Qualified copies? Does it matter how much you pay, or is any price paid going to guarantee you will "make money"? The lack of any qualifying parameters makes the claim far too broad to come to any conclusion. You've posted data? I am unaware of any. Would you please point me in the direction of that/those post(s)? Time and date of post(s) would be fine. Thanks!

Yes. Not how debate works. Yes?? Yes. No, that's my response. "Come backs" are usually reserved for games of the dozens, which is most fun to play late at night in your college dorm room. I wasn't aware there was a limitation on where or when members could post...? I've already provided the input necessary. It's up to others at this point. There's a difference between "can't" and "choose not to." Why are you posting popcorn? Because I felt it was an appropriate response to that post. The onus is on the claimant to prove their claim(s), not the challenger. I'll explain again: when someone makes a claim, and that claim is challenged, the onus is on the claimant to prove said claim...not on the challenger to DISprove it. It isn't my responsibility to disprove Mark1's claim, and because I choose not to spend my time and effort to disprove it does not therefore prove it. That would be a bad conclusion.

Sake of argument, let's take the middle road of your estimate and say there's 20k. [Ten percent-ish of the initial sell-through, 8 years before the Oversteet era, that number in a vacuum is not outrageous] The question then becomes, how many of those will be slabbed and/or come to public market before they are destroyed? Let's say that all copies of AF 15 both unknown and known will change ownership within the next 70 years. Unknown copies means they are hidden within other property (a house, grandad's old trunk, etc). A large percentage of inherited copies will be slabbed and/or come to market and THEN be slabbed shortly after being inherited. Virtually all "unknown" copies will either become known or be destroyed shortly after the property changes hands. There will be exceptions, but not many. Kind of hand-waving around the fact that some copies will change hands without being slabbed, you're still talking about 250+ "NEW-to-market" copies per year being added into the market in some form. Every year for 70 years. *** That's interesting to contemplate. It'd be interesting to know what would happen to the market if copies were slabbed at much higher than the current rate, for several years running. I think it also suggest that if there are 20k copies out there, very many of them will be destroyed without becoming known. I think we'd be seeing some acceleration of census numbers already, if market forces were efficient enough to bring most recently-discovered or recently-inherited "orphaned" copies (those held by civilians or very casual collectors) to market. The wildcard in all this is hording. Presuming a 20k number, a lot of things that don't make sense now (the fact that a 5x price increase has not accelerated the rate of slabbing AT ALL) become more plausible if there are old-school collectors/dealers out there sitting on 100+ copy stashes and slowly slabbing them as they need money. And finally, if any of the above is remotely true, it also suggests that I should buy stock in a grading company, because they'd have a brighter future than maybe even they imagine. I like your reasoning, Mark, but it doesn't work at this time. CGC is only 15+ years old. But, more significantly, there are many, many, MANY copies that are still in the hands of the original or nearly-original owners, and they don't care about either slabbing or selling. Give it a generation plus, then we'll see how things shake out. It cannot be stressed enough that the fact that comic books have value is still a very, very niche idea, and that they can be slabbed is a small fraction of that. And there are still people who have many multiple copies who bought them in the 60's for 10, 15, 25, 50 cents each...what does it matter to them what they're worth, if they don't need the money?

This is not true. "Dramatic price increases" mean nothing to many collectors. According to....?

By who....?

If everyone used threads to pimp out their books for sale, this place would be a mess.

Only when you add apostrophes to plurals.....

I think I have a gold or three lying around....

I might...I wonder if there's a website dedicated to them... Nah, I'd probably be banned...

Not looking to pick a fight, Bosco. You shouldn't be, either.

I wasn't aware that I wasn't. :shrug: Thank you for correcting your statement. There was no malice on my part, nor should any be inferred. I'm only interested in the facts.

is the above comment directed at me? If so, I'm confused as to why. I don't have anyone here on ignore. please let me know. best Jason Moore No, I'm pretty sure It's directed ar RMA. Correct! If you put someone on ignore, and preach to others about sticking to your principles when taking such action, then walk the talk. The "talk" has to do with trying to pick a fight/be snarky. It is not, therefore, inconsistent to "the walk" to reply if one is not doing that.

You were 16-17 at the time? What a way to break into comics at such a young age. Right at the heat of the Black & White Boom. Caliber wasn't around until 1988, and the "heat" of the B&W boom was 1986. By 1988, it was long over. And yes, Caliber Presents was originally High Caliber. If you have me on ignore, then please keep it that way. We are much better off like that, and you follow your own advice to the rest of the forum. I would definitely encourage you to contact the moderation team and ask for a "full ignore" function on the board...that way, responses quoted aren't seen, either. Meanwhile, my comments weren't personal attacks; I am simply correcting misinformation, which is necessary. I could have passively responded "to nobody", but that wouldn't have been very honest.

Yes, but they are promotional material, not actual story appearances. Deadworld #10 isn't, properly, the "first appearance" of the Crow, either...that distinction is CB #1. Neato stuff, but still in the realm of preview/promo. They certainly have value, but aren't as important as CB #1.

You were 16-17 at the time? What a way to break into comics at such a young age. Right at the heat of the Black & White Boom. Caliber wasn't around until 1988, and the "heat" of the B&W boom was 1986. By 1988, it was long over. And yes, Caliber Presents was originally High Caliber.

What is "Valiant"...?

I'm sorry I missed you at Baltimore...I don't know what you look like, but you do me, so next time I'm in the vicinity, don't be a stranger! Say hi!

Very sad, and quite appropriate.

Tough because the black cover shows wear that doesn't show on white or lighter colors, and thus isn't counted off.

On a related note, I used some beeswax product today for the first time...wayyy too soft, had no hold. Had to go back to Clubman.