RockMyAmadeus

The Copper list is woefully incomplete. Bob's still resisting the age.

Hi Chuck, I notice that you keep making the same point above in regards to 9.4 graded copies. However, since Overstreet's top 10 list is based on value in NM-, what 9.4's sell for is almost (but not quite) as irrelevant as what 8.5's sell for. In regards to 9.2's, IMO, arguments can be made from both sides (as they are) as to which would sell for more today (a lot of which might vary depending on the attractiveness of a particular copy, sales venue, auction vs. fixed price, etc.) The issue is "why is Cerebus #1 worth more than Hulk #181 in ANY grade???" There have been a number of side discussions in this thread, but I believe that the key issue in this thread comes from the thread title, which states "Re: Cerebus 1 a more valuable key than Hulk 181? Really Overstreet?". I believe that this title was in reference to the top 10 keys lists in the OPG, which are based on the OPG values for NM-/9.2. At least that was my takeaway after reading the thread. I can't tell...are you disputing or agreeing with what I said? Yes, that's the premise for this thread, but the UNDERLYING issue is the offense that some feel that Cerebus #1 is worth more than Hulk #181, in any grade, for any reason. That's the entire thread in a nutshell. And the answer, of course, is "Yes. Really." I believe that documented sales over the years support Cerebus 1 in 9.4 having a greater value, still today, than Hulk 181 in 9.4. Has anyone really disputed this in this thread? I don't dispute this. If a Cerebus 1 were to grade 9.6, or 9.8, in the near term (as anything is possible in the long term; just look at Single Series 20), it would be a pretty safe assumption that it would sell for more than a Hulk 181 in 9.6 or 9.8. Has anyone really disputed this in this thread? I don't dispute this. I know there's pretty close to a zero chance of it happening, but if a Cerebus 1 were to grade 9.9, in my opinion, it wouldn't exceed the value of a Hulk 181 in 9.9, unless CGC starts handing out 9.9's on Hulk 181's left and right. Given the rabid and sizeable fan base for Wolverine, it doesn't shock me that one devoted fan was willing to fork out $150K for the (currently) single highest graded copy of Hulk 181. Given the smaller fan base for Cerebus 1, I just don't see a Cerebus 1 in 9.9 selling for $150K+. Of course anything is possible as it only takes one die-hard Cerebus fan with the money to want it bad enough (if listed as fixed price, although it would take 2 such folks if at auction), and on the plus side it would hold a much greater chance of remaining the only graded 9.9 than Hulk 181. Do you think someone would fork out $150K+ for a 9.9 Cerebus 1? It's beyond silly to discuss What Ifs regarding 9.9s. 9.9s and 10s are freak grades, and DO NOT FOLLOW ANY RULES. Therefore, any attempt at analysis which includes these grades will be wildly inaccurate, if not altogether worthless. 9.9s and 10s operate in their own universe, with their own rules. And I have no problem stating that there's not a single potential 9.9 that exists, or has EVER existed, for Cerebus #1, while 9.6s and 9.8s remain in the realm of possible. Probable, no, but certainly possible. Arguments can be made based on available data for sales in slightly higher and lower grades over the years. Will such arguments hold as much value as they would if one had more data? No, but for purposes of discussion, arguments can still be made. This is not to say that one side's argument won't be better than another's using the available data, but arguments can indeed be made from both sides. Rare books have a completely different dynamic when it comes to sales, and don't operate like a book like Hulk #181, or Amazing Spiderman #14, or X-Men #94, etc. You CANNOT make arguments based on "surrounding grades", and you can BARELY make arguments in the SAME grade, because so few copies come to market. Look at the FOUR GPA sales of C#1 in 9.4. You have THREE sig series sales (which, too, operate under different rules) that all sold for substantially different amounts than the SINGLE Universal 9.4 sale from this year. So, no, arguments regarding rare books can't be made in slightly higher or lower grades, especially when you have single digit sales over a long period of time. Sure, they CAN be made...but they hold essentially no weight. The rules simply aren't the same for rare books. It doesn't work that way. A SINGLE RECORDED SALE does NOT give weight to ANYONE'S argument. If GPA and other limited data sources is all that one has available, then that is all that one can reference for purposes of discussion. No one has disputed this. With a SINGLE SALE...? From 9 years ago? Come on. I don't think everyone understands that at ALL, or some of the arguments being made here would not be. And you're right, they should know this....and clearly don't (or, didn't, before this thread.) Still true.

Want me to sig series that for you...? Did you get a letter in this one? Yes indeedy! My crowning achievement as a letter hack.

It is clearly an oversight. Otherwise, it's a conspiracy by Overstreet to....do something? Because the book is clearly priced at $15,000.

Thanks. Clearly, it's an error/oversight. But $15,000 for OAAW #83? That's madness. Just madness. Well, to use your argument, the highest recorded GPA sale is for an 8.0, and that one sold for $16,730 in November 2011. A 9.2 would sell for a lot. How much? I don't know, but a lot. A big big big pile. It would be a stunning sale. Hey, don't look at me. I'm not disputing any of that. I am, however, free to think it is madness.

Want me to sig series that for you...?

I found a Transformers #3 3rd print last Sunday.

stephen100009cws Bought a JIM #114. Complained that the pages were "tan to off-white", which is not accurate. For a 1965 Marvel, the pages are white. The pages sparkle for the era. Opened a "not as described" case before bothering to contact me first, which sends me up into the boughs. Words cannot express how angry I get at this. I blame the buyer, and I blame eBay for this nonsense.

Thanks. Clearly, it's an error/oversight. But $15,000 for OAAW #83? That's madness. Just madness. I don't remember what I sold mine for, but it was in 2002-2003, for probably a couple hundred dollars or so...it was a nice VG/F or better, too.

Thanks. Clearly, it's an error/oversight. But $15,000 for OAAW #83? That's madness. Just madness.

Pfffft. Now I KNOW that's a lie.

Mainly because I don't need one, just to check a couple of pieces of information that you could easily post here. And, I know this is a niggling thing, but it's "you're." Sorry, was that showing off...?

Oh, no, I wish I was brilliant. I only see things in a thick, dense, impenetrable fog that Einstein and most brilliant people can not only see with perfect clarity, but understand in such a way as to be able to explain it with perfect clarity to lunkheads like me. It's heart-achingly frustrating.

Did you know that overuse of the " " emoticon is equivalent to the nervous giggle in real life...?

I think that's wonderful advice, advice I take to heart often, and extend it to you, as well. Would that be an example of "reading into it too much"...? I dunno, just wondering. Orrrrrr...you could just quote the relevant information. We are talking about like 3 or 4 prices, are we not? Why don't you just get an OSPG? Or am I being unsportsmanlike? You sure do take a lot of things personally. OPGs are $30 or so. I don't buy one every year. Why not just post the information? Perhaps I'm unsportsmanlike? Possibly.

Yes. Then that's clearly an error, or an over-the-top conspiracy. I'm gonna Occam's Razor that shiznit to the max. For you yes. For me, yes what? A super intelligent logician like you can figure it out. Do you know what Occam's Razor is...? Yes. I have a cot in the moderation area. I thought that was common knowledge. :shrug: CGC boards hab been beddy beddy good to me.

I think that's wonderful advice, advice I take to heart often, and extend it to you, as well. Would that be an example of "reading into it too much"...? I dunno, just wondering. Orrrrrr...you could just quote the relevant information. We are talking about like 3 or 4 prices, are we not? Why don't you just get an OSPG? Or am I being unsportsmanlike? You sure do take a lot of things personally. OPGs are $30 or so. I don't buy one every year. Why not just post the information?

Yes. Then that's clearly an error, or an over-the-top conspiracy. I'm gonna Occam's Razor that shiznit to the max. For you yes. For me, yes what?

I dont' think the Marvel Milestone copies of Action 1 sell very well at all. In fact, I don't think anyone has ever sold one. Stan would still sign it.

Yes. Then that's clearly an error, or an over-the-top conspiracy. I'm gonna Occam's Razor that shiznit to the max.

I think that's wonderful advice, advice I take to heart often, and extend it to you, as well. Would that be an example of "reading into it too much"...? I dunno, just wondering. Orrrrrr...you could just quote the relevant information. We are talking about like 3 or 4 prices, are we not?

Touche!

Great Book Her heiny isn't anywhere near as large as it is now.

That is COMPLETELY ridiculous. These books are common as dirt. Sigh. Now I must go dig mine out.

You have a very, very odd definition of what is "personal." Much like Alanis Morissette's definition of "ironic", it's not what you think it means. If you say something that is not true, and I know that YOU know it's not true, and I say you are lying...have I made a personal comment? Of course not. But if I call you a LIAR...then now, it has become personal. See? And you have turned this: "that's fairly unsportsmanlike of you"....into an accusation, which it was not, since it immediately followed an unanswered question "so you DO mind scanning the pertinent information?" You know, the way in which we use words really does matter. I asked if you minded scanning the pertinent information. Your answer was "get a current OPG." Not "I don't have a scanner, or I would" or "I don't have a camera, or I would." It was "get a current OPG." However, if you did not mean to be curt, then I have the answer to my question.