Iconic1s

The 9.8’s ($99.99 ea) aren’t even sold out at BTC yet and these are already on eBay…

On 12/1/2022 at 6:02 PM, Ryan. said:

Why, what would happen?

On 11/23/2022 at 7:20 AM, theCapraAegagrus said:

Unless I'm misunderstanding something, someone could have simply cracked one of the slabs open.

BTC contacted the seller directly and he said it was a gift from a ‘creator.’  They said that all of their copies are at CGC now and should be back by mid-December.  They were concerned too.

I am a little disappointed as I had no idea these extra copies would show up, not that I ever would have paid that for a raw copy!

On 11/22/2022 at 7:20 PM, Tnexus said:

There's always publisher and artist comp copies. That's likely one of those. Generally most places that claim a limited number will small print this.

This is exactly what BTC just told me. They contacted the seller and he said it was a gift from a ‘creator.’  They weren’t too pleased about it either.  It was not leaked from CGC or anything like that.

I actually knew the seller on IG and blocked him awhile ago because he got so annoying… would message me to brag about his contacts with DC all the time. For example, when I bought the Death of Superman Omnibus he messaged to tell me that DC offered him three free copies but he turned them down.  If that was all true it’s no surprise a ‘creator’ hooked him up but I think it’s kind of a low class move to then turn around and sell a ‘gift’ like this on eBay.  That’s just me though.

On 11/22/2022 at 6:13 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

@Iconic1s

Yeah, this is super shady!!

On 11/18/2022 at 3:01 PM, Loading... said:

Wow this is one epic set up you have @Iconic1s The way you have Cybor sups and Doomsday squaring up opposite Superman is such a great touch. Thanks for sharing your set up!

Thank you!  I can’t seem to stop moving stuff around!

Now they dropped a pink foil… either $200 or 1500 rewards points for this one raw!

I hung in there for the gold, silver, and red but am officially tired of this !  Pink doesn’t even make sense!!

There is going to also be a blue, and they hinted at a black w/red ‘S’. The latter makes the most sense but I am way over it already… won’t be going for any more of these.  I'm actually kind of irritated now!

P.S. I just added a few more books to my Custom Death of Superman Set (first Custom Set link in my signature).  New additions are at the end of the gallery... please check it out some time.  Thanks!

On 11/8/2022 at 8:57 AM, mmtz said:

Kirk:

Thanks for the missing images. I've updated my DC Comics Collector's Pack web page at https://www.startrekcomics.info/art/dccomicscollpacks.html

A few years ago I posted photos in this thread of the Star Trek comics logo variants found in collector's packs but the links are stale. You can see them at https://www.startrekcomics.info/art/dc2logo.html and https://www.startrekcomics.info/art/dc2tosall.html

I'm also trying to document DC Star Trek comics in multi-packs https://www.startrekcomics.info/art/multipacks-dc.html

Star Trek comics are only a very small part of the DC Universe logo variants world, but the conversations in this thread helped me find them.

Thanks

Wow!  I've just begun to explore your site but I have to say that it is truly AMAZING!  Wonderful work on it!

On 11/7/2022 at 7:25 PM, Yorick said:

@Iconic1s Start practicing your penmanship. I want you to sign "Jurgens" and "Grummett" on a few of my books! 

You got it! 

CGC seems to be all over the place these days… whether they went with Qualified or Universal is a moot point when they acknowledged the name that was written on the cover… shouldn’t it just have been ‘name’ written on cover??

Lets say I write ANY artist’s name on the cover and that it looks nothing like how they actually sign… will they still identify the person whose name I wrote by their name?  By the standard they set with these books it seems like they should.  If not, by noting ‘Todd McFarlane’ written on cover this way they are in a round about way saying it looks like and probably is his signature!  If they refuse to also acknowledge my bogus signature, It pretty much IS a verified signature done this way.

Meanwhile, they think we now need a newsstand edition note on a label when we can clearly see it’s a newsstand.

Seems like decisions are made more to drive the market than from a ‘most trusted’ third party grader perspective these days.

On 11/7/2022 at 9:30 AM, F For Fake said:

Great set-up! I really dig these retail-style displays, with the pegboards. They look ideal, I'd love to have a couple. 

Thank you!  My wife snagged them off of Facebook for like $150 for both. I think they were originally from a Claires that went out of business. They needed a lot of cleaning but were worth it. 

On 11/5/2022 at 1:14 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

So good! I'm always a little happy to see quality lighting even, my house is expertly dim compared to that  Nice and orderly, plenty of room to peruse. Kudos!

In a room like that, I wouldn't even care if it were a little messy! haha  super clean though  

Thank you!  I got the brightest LED bulbs I could find for the recessed lights (I think 1600 lumens each x 4). Also, you can’t really see in the pics but I replaced the ceiling fan in each room with a four bulb track lighting that I got at Walmart for like $30.00… those little spotlights make a big difference because they hit the shelves from the front.

This area is never messy… can’t speak for the rest of the house though (unfortunately) 

On 11/4/2022 at 5:57 AM, MARVELSKI said:

My goal with the set is to have fun, not express to my fellow collectors my inner most feelings about comicbooks.

With the books I really care about I write as much detail as I can about the book and primarily the hunt, as well as my (nearly) inner most feelings .  As my set has evolved I tend to forget sometimes the effort that went into, and occasionally it’s my set itself that reminds me where I got a book or two.  

Here’s an example…

https://comics.www.collectors-society.com/WCM/ComicView.aspx?PeopleSetComicID=1344174

To each his/her own 

On 11/3/2022 at 2:47 PM, Qalyar said:

if your set looks like its purpose is to try to win, it will not win.

Great point!

Another Custom Set…
https://comics.www.collectors-society.com/wcm/ComicCustomSetView.aspx?s=32372

I looked through most of your set again.  I really like that you have front/back pics of the books.  I also like that you did some HTML in the set descriptions.

I’m not a judge but If anything I think that you need to put a little more into the set description… why did you start putting THIS set together?  What makes it special, etc.  other than saying it’s the ‘biggest and baddest’ tell everyone why.

I also think you need to add more to the book descriptions other than just the statistical info.  Where/when did you get that book. Did you buy it or submit it yourself, is it your first (or second, third, etc) copy.  Tell people why this book matters to you.

I think you have the really hard stuff done… the set is there and pics are loaded… I’d just start with the first book and work your way through each and share a bit more about that book and maybe yourself. You’ll probably end up doing this a few times and always finding something new and fun to add.

Good luck and you can DM me any time if you need anything.

On 10/27/2022 at 3:46 PM, wytshus said:

This is the way of things when it comes to the Registry.  I have been working with the Collector Society website for about a year and a half now, and I still find it.....lets say.....clunky.  I can just imagine that a new user would find it a bit overwhelming.

I have been exclusively approaching the Registry as an Admin, modifying sets, adding slots, modifying scores, and resolving add fails.  Now that I have my feet underneath me somewhat, I am starting to look at things from a collector standpoint (whats fair, fun, and interesting), and from a marketing perspective (how can we get new users, how can we make the competition more transparent) 

Let me state for the record that the Registry is NOT the Census.  I do not have read/write access to the Census, the Registry gets its individual book data from there, and I input Universal Scores on the Registry side. Once that's completed, its out of my hands.

 

What I am trying to do, and the reason I created this thread, is to get input, instead of springing drastic changes on everyone arbitrarily, and expect everyone to like it.

 

Most of the comments in this thread have crossed my mind at one time or another, especially the comment about competitive sets being modified ad hoc.  This is one of my biggest gripes about the Registry when it comes to the Awards, and I intend to do something about it next "season". 

 

I am heavily in favor of a base score for ALL books.  It has been mentioned, and I totally agree that CGC should not be in the business of declaring FMV, especially since the modifiers for weighted scores only apply to books that have been registered BY CGC. Having one score for all books will level the playing field, and the algorithm can weigh scores for individual books. If there are tweaks to be made, we can do that in the "off-season".

I am also leaning heavily towards fixed sets for award consideration.  If a new slot absolutely must be added, it will be non competitive until the new season starts.  But for the most part, the scores and slots do not change.

 

I do really appreciate all the feedback, keep it coming.  I read all the comments(and re-read the long ones). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Really appreciate what you are doing! I’m bowing out of this discussion now. I think my opinion is clear and no sense beating a dead horse as they say.  Best of luck figuring out what works!  One last thing though… Custom Sets are cool too and may be a good way to reward creativity, etc.  Probably just another can of worms though, so apologies 

On 10/27/2022 at 3:36 PM, Qalyar said:

Obviously, you and I are never going to agree on what we would like to see from the Registry. Because you bright-line do not want sets to have separate slots for DM vs. newsstand copies. You consider them the "same book". I very much do want them treated separately, hate that I have to kludge distinct sets for them now, and think that any books that are reliably distinguishable due to any production elements are not at all the "same book" even if the cover art is the same.

But I think "indicia trumps everything" is sort of a mess, regardless. There are a lot of books -- mostly from smaller publishers, but not exclusively so -- where there are 100% distinguishable second (or later!) printings but the indicia makes no indication of that. Heck, there's a thread right now over in General about the early issues of Transformers (back when it was going to be a limited series), where there have generally been threeish recognized printings, except that the internal issue checklists and back-cover advertising makes that far more complicated (and CGC isn't always flawless about noting what's going on, but that's beside the point). None of them have indicia changes.

Or, if you don't like Transformers, consider Classics Illustrated. I sold off the entirely of my Classics collection and will never look back, but at one point in time, I was trying to assemble a comprehensive specialist collection of the title, with all of the HRN variations and so forth. I was only about 70% complete (and almost exclusively in raw books, but let's pretend), but I would have been very disappointed if the Registry only permitted me one line per title in the run. The point was to collect as many of the minor variations as possible. That's what collecting is about, for me.

I get that not everyone collects the same way, and I feel like there has to be a way to offer Registry space for people who just one one of "each book, broadly speaking" versus people who want "one of each book, in the narrowest sense possible". If I were to collect Crisis, I would 100% want those slots for CPV copies, and slots for the US newsstands, too. But I appreciate that people who just want to collect the set should have a way to do that without being condemned to having their set rate in 5th place or somesuch.

As for the PS issue there, where you get one awesome book and then tromp all over 20 sets with it... my personal opinion is that the Registry should be one book, one set. That has the added benefit of ensuring that, if there are separate sets for with- and without-newsstands/price-variants/etc, you can't win both at the same time with the same books. You can choose how you want to collect and compete... but you have to actually choose.

Definitely NOT trying to get anyone to agree with me. Just clearly stating my opinion regarding this issue as it seems not many others are.

I do 100% agree with your one book, one set idea!  I think that would make the Registry much fairer for everyone, and give more people a chance to have #1 in Set Type.

I have stated my opinion as clearly as I can and now it’s time to leave it at that, and allow CGC to decide what the Registry will look like going forward.  Whatever that is we all get to decide if we like it and if it’s something we want to be involved with.  I for one, won’t hang around if some of these newsstand variant/set/slot changes go into effect, but that’s okay.  Life will go on!  Take care!

On 10/26/2022 at 2:36 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Stinks we've seen such few suggestions; although, I don't pick a side either, whatever is decided on will be mostly out of my hands anyway, and I'll live with it.

This is true!  Considering their are tens of thousands (guessing) of Registry Users it's odd that only like 4-5 of us care enough about this discussion to contribute.  That's a bummer considering how much effort @wytshus is willing to put into this to make sure it's right.

I am of the 'same book, same points, same slot' opinion (in case you haven't noticed ).  Unless the indicia indicates otherwise, they are the SAME BOOK.  I don't care about newsstands, I don't care about price variants, etc. unless the INDICIA is different (that's just ME).  All of these so-called 'variants' with the same indicia can share the same slot and be worth the same points... that's ALL I care about.  The Census will NEVER be a reliable source to determine the relative scarcity of any of these books, and because we are talking about GRADED copies, nor should the whole newsstand distribution  be a factor to base points on.

If someone digs those 'price variants/newsstand' books that much then they can create a Custom Set where they can show them off IMO... OR they can add them to the same slot where I add my Direct and be rewarded with the same points for the same book.  Unless they have different indicia they share the same slot/points in a competitive set.

Points won't mean a thing if there are multiple slots for the SAME BOOK in competitive sets, particularly where a couple of those slots are only to pander to a few niche collectors (look at the Crisis set!).  I also don't believe in multiples of the same sets where these niche books are added...

Having said that, and I've said it before, if CGC does go full-blown newsstand variant slots/points then it should be across the board and if that's what is then expected to 'compete' then guys like me can make an educated decision whether to continue to hang around.  It's a waste of MY time to have a 100% complete set, when there is another identical set (except with extra slots to appease the niche collector) created where I would be incomplete.  That's the 'every kid gets a ribbon' mentality and I for one, don't want something I haven't 'earned' per the rules in place...  if, in CGC's mind, additional slots belong in ALL competitive sets for these books then that should be it.  At least then we know where we stand, and I can decide to either go for these other copies of the SAME BOOK and continue to compete (which I personally won't do because they are ugly), or I can peace out.

In closing, points don't mean a thing when books are either multiplied across sets like this, or arbitrarily given more points for a reason that clearly cannot be tied to any actual data at this point... 

P.S. I also still think the issue of using the same BIG book across multiple sets to win in them all should be looked at...

Looks great!  Love that you took the time to add front/back pics as well as your descriptions!

Wondering if you have them in a specific order?

On 10/22/2022 at 12:36 AM, Rosland said:

I'm not much for collecting the variants, but I do believe that any item graded by CGC deserves a slot in at least one set.

Agreed.

On 10/21/2022 at 10:25 PM, Iconic1s said:

 I still feel that as long as the same book is worth equal points within a particular set then it’s a fair playing field. I honestly never gave this much thought until newsstands suddenly became variants.

This is the only reason I am chiming in as much as I am.  In my opinion newsstands can continue to share the same slot as their direct partners as they do now… they have the same indicia and are not variants, they should not have their own slot or be worth more points.

This goes for those ‘Canadian Price Variants’ I mentioned above as well… if they occupied the same slot as their US counterpart you wouldn’t have all the division that Crisis set has been subjected to. Disclaimer: I haven't seen the indicia on those.

When it comes to all the Modern Retailer Variants, I’m not even sure where to begin on those!  In a competitive sense do they each get a slot, or can they all occupy the same slot for competitive purposes?  I don’t know.

Back to points… I don’t think they matter if the same book is worth the same points.  This market is so crazy right now that I’m not sure points should be in any way linked to the market.  Someone else already mentioned that scarcity in the census could mean that the book is indeed rare, or that no one else cares.  I have the only Major Bummer (1997) set… all but one of the 15 books are the first and only graded copies… that’s only because so far I am the only one that cares about that set of books, not because they are hard to find raw (also, other than issue 1, none have ever sold because I submitted them all myself).  Those books should not be worth mega points because they ‘appear’ rare due to the census, and if their points were tied to the market what then?  Having said that, the census is probably not reliable when linked to points either. (Neither is the market when it comes to books like these).

Perhaps points should be tied only to some formula that involves year published and grade… I don’t know but I do think there are too many other factors affecting each and every book that as it is now it is way too complicated to ever be sustainable… and it will only get worse.

On 10/21/2022 at 1:23 PM, Rosland said:

Suppose users can generate custom sets based on a Complete set. For example, I want a specific artist run on a comic and I can mark each

issue of the Complete set as Enable/Disable. The Disabled slots become invisible, and what is left is my customized version. That could even

work for issues between titles if a massive "Complete Silver Age" (for example) set was available for customizing.

Some thought would be required for set scoring and set awarding...

This is an interesting idea, but I think it goes back to just making your own Custom Sets.

My concern (again) isn’t so much about the points, as it is about slot creation, which then took a turn to actual Set creation.  I still feel that as long as the same book is worth equal points within a particular set then it’s a fair playing field. I honestly never gave this much thought until newsstands suddenly became variants.

I have one set that I wholeheartedly care about. People had worked on that set for years and hadn’t gotten it close to 100% and in the quality.  It was not easy.  As much as I love that set I think it would be dumb to have a second nearly identical set except with (for example) newsstand slots.  There is no point in that IMO.

As I said earlier CGC just needs to define what a set is going to be so we can decide if we want to play or not.  I, for one, don’t want to spend the next several years working on something else to have the rules/guidelines changed again to suit another type of collector (or to encourage submissions).  I think that, for example, Canadian Price Variants absolutely RUINED the Crisis on Infinite Earths Set Type to suit one (maybe two) guys and I’d rather not see something like that happen to sets I enjoy.

Perhaps part of the solution is to somehow find ways to offer more awards for those type of Custom Sets that stand out because that one guy was so awesome that they went after all these weird books that, although they don’t make the cut for a Competitive Set, still complement the group of books?  Or, just throw every type of variant, newsstand, price variant, etc into the competitive Set Type and call it a day.

I’m not sure about the first printings only set (in addition to another larger set) either.  I think in a lot of cases the person winning in the larger set would just add their books there also, and win a second time.  Maybe, MAYBE, limiting the number of sets a single book/cert number can compete in at a time is something to look at.

On 10/20/2022 at 3:44 PM, Qalyar said:

Let's go with that hypothetical Captain Canuck collector, because that ought not single anyone out. We'll pretend that there are suddenly slabbed copies of this whole thing. It's a thought experiment, people! The title was a 14-issue run in 1975 from Comely Comix, but there are a ton of one-shots from various publishers (the 2014 Calgary Entertainment Expo exclusive Captain Canuck Summer Special is a moderately difficult book to find). And the series eventually got picked up and continued by Chapter House Publishing. Unusually for indies, that 1970s series has (for at least some issues) both direct market and newsstand distribution editions, but no variant covers; the later titles featuring the character sometimes have many variant covers. How do we represent this with sets? We could have:

• Captain Canuck (Archie, 1975) [Title Only] -- this has only the 14 slots, one per issue of the title itself
• Captain Canuck (Archie, 1975) [Title Only, Specialist] -- there is no "With Variants" here, because the only variants are newsstand editions; this slot has 14 direct market slots, plus one for each issue with NS copies.
• Other titles with enough issues to count as a set could qualify for their own slots, too. Captain Canuck (2015, Chapter House) certainly, but not Captain Canuck Legacy, which was advertised as a miniseries but only saw 1 issue.
• Captain Canuck [Category] -- this has one slot for every Captain Canuck book, from the original Archie series to the Chapter House stuff to the various one-shots.
• Captain Canuck [Category, With Variants] -- same thing, but now Captain Canuck Legacy #1's 1000-copy special edition has its own slot, as do the retailer incentive covers of the 2015 Chapter House series, and so on.
• Captain Canuck [Category, Specialist] -- as the previous one, but the 1975 newsstands have their own slots too.

 

I actually don’t agree with this at all.  CGC should have one competitive set per ‘Set Type’ whatever that looks like… if it’s with variants, with newsstands, whatever that is, that’s IT.

The rest of the sets you mention can be Custom Sets if someone doesn’t want to ‘compete’ under the CGC ‘Set Type’ guidelines.

What’s the point of having a set in so-called ‘first place’ when it’s just a consolation price because you didn’t want to compete in the ‘real’ set, where (hypothetically) there are 50 variant covers of each issue, and (again hypothetically) newsstands with separate slots, etc.

If they make all the sets as you mention to please every possible collector, that’s completely unmanageable.

Myself for example, if CGC does in fact create another set that I enjoy ‘complete with variants’ I’ll either 1) just leave the competitive set world behind and enjoy my Custom Set, or 2) start finding the books I need to compete in that Set Type under the new rules… I won’t expect a Set be created to accommodate my personal style of collecting goals… that’s why they provide me, and everyone else the ability to create Custom Sets ad nauseam.

On 10/20/2022 at 3:44 PM, Qalyar said:

all the other goodies that made his sets so compelling.

Thank you!