davet75

take

take

take. love this cover

take

Those low grade books 2.0 - 3.5 present amazingly well. Front and back covers look great and no grader notes on label.

I bought some nice Baker books, slabbed and raw, from Eric. Great communication and a pleasure to deal with. Books were packed well and arrived quickly. Grading on point. Looking forward to your next sales thread!

Plot Twist... This is his undercopy....

per PM! Terrors Of The Jungle 8 GD/VG JUMBO 165 VG Thrilling Crime Cases 42 Youthful Romances 11 GD/VG

I purchased a stack of Silver age books from Dan. He was friendly with negotiations, and overall a pleasure to deal with. The books arrived very well packed, and grading was tight. Will gladly do business again! Thank you!

The color strike on that beautiful freak of nature The BIN is looking more and more attractive...

That Planet is really pretty. Looks as nice as one of the Yakima's I own.

planet stories?

What a great gesture to fellow Boardies! I had hoped to go but ultimately i'm stuck catching up on work this weekend. Hope it goes to a deserving member of the community. I applaud you Sir

per PM. Thanks Dan! Strange tales 128 Daredevil 16 and 17 FF 27 and 28

That's an awesome book for a very nice price! One of my favorite PCH covers by Hollingsworth. Double red dress bondage, skulls galore, tons of pre-code bang for the buck. Very competitive price compared to ebay and MCS, and I don't think you'll find one in this condition cheaper. If I didn't already have two of these i'd be all over it. Heck, now i'm starting to talk myself into reasons why I need a 2nd undercopy... Oh yeah, Jon is an awesome guy too

To be clear, I find it morally reprehensible to take advantage of the cognitively underdeveloped and I do not condone such activity. Unfortunately, it's been happening since the beginning of time and will most likely continue to the end of time as long as our legal and social system allow it (implicitly or explicitly). "A fool and his money are soon parted" Moral of the story: don't be that fool.

Ok, while I don't really think the world fits well into your 2 dimensional, black and white world view, i'm going to attempt to answer your answers. These answers will likely require a real-world or realistic example to go along with said answer. 1. Do you think NFT dealers are scammers? Select one: yes/no "I am going to sell you this random NFT block chain coding that proves you own absolutely nothing except this block chain coding connected to nothing, please pay me $1000." Yes, this is a scam. "I am an artist, I have created a unique piece of art on a digital medium. I will sell you the original art, uniquely identified by NFT as my original work, which will grant you ownership of all legal rights to the work." No, this is not a scam "Hi i'm Logan Paul, a famous Youtuber. I'm selling NFT pokeman likeness of me looking obnoxious for the bargain price of $2,000 for these pieces of internet history." (real story). No, this is not a scam but all involved parties should be severely beaten. 2. Do you think NFT's have actual, practical use cases? select one: yes/no Yes, see art example above. 3. scam or not. This question is on par with asking if the internet is good or bad. Some use the internet for criminal acts, others waste their lives away on the internet, some make a living via the internet, some keep in touch with family across the worldl via the internet. NFTs will be the same: Some will scam with it, some will do incredibly stupid krap with it, and others will use it for legitimate and beneficial purposes

Wow. just. wow. You've managed to misread and take my entire post out of context, and then conclude by ascribing motives and intentions to my post that are completely unsubstantiated AND completely contradictory to my actual position. I get that you're completely anti-NFT, but don't automatically assume that anyone that knows anything about them is a shiller for them. The first paragraph explains in simple terms what an NFT is and how it is/can be used, while also clarifying that it has no intrinsic value. How this explanation is "on-brand and pro-NFT" is beyond me. unless.. you know... facts...bad... The second paragraph explains how NFTs have and are being currently used in other collectible markets. These are objective facts. Using the sports and art examples, I hypothesize how NFTs might be used to authenticate ownership of high-value comic via ownership of a unique digital image. I also made a tongue-in-cheek example of how someone might try to make a profit off images w/NFTs: Sorry if my sarcasm is lost on you, and you thought I was actually encouraging or promoting such an idea. Next time I will preface such statements with [ / INCOMING SARCASM-PREPARE TO THINK AND BE AMUSED BY MY WIT] and conclude with [ / END SARCASM - NOW BACK TO OUR REGULAR PROGRAMMING AND SERIOUS DISCUSSION] In my final paragraph I make it very clear that I myself would never pay for digital NFT images/collectibles. Again, I'm baffled at how you arrive at the conclusion that my post is "on-brand and pro-NFT" especially with concluding statement: I have basically described a Ponzi scheme. If you don't understand my stance by now, then i'm afraid I can't really simply it any further for you.

NFTs have no inherent value besides the labor required to code the 0s and 1s, but can serve to validate or authenticate something that does/may have value. Just like a plastic case with a printed slip of paper and a number (9.8) has no intrinsic value besides the production and material cost of producing the case and slip of paper. Now, when you link that plastic case and slip of paper to something of value... say a highly desirable and rare key comic book, then that plastic case and slip of paper have some significance and can increase the value and liquidity of said comic book. We're now seeing this in the art world, with unprecedented sales of entirely digital art. One of the most notable being Beeple's "Everydays—The First 5000 Days", which sold for $69 million in March 2021. The art purchased was ENTIRELY digital and the NFT attached to the digital art file uniquely authenticates it as the only original copy by the artist, and thus the "real" copy. Everyone else can enjoy the art for free by simply googling it and downloading/viewing a high-res image. Keep in mind this is very different from owning a digital image of a comic book that already exists with an NFT attached to the image. The few instances I could see this having any value would be, as OP stated earlier, to confirm ownership of an existing comic and allow for digital transfer of ownership. i.e a pedigreed Action 1, Marvel 1, AF15 could have a digital image created by the owner with an NFT attached, verifying that digital image to be a unique image of the actual comic and used as a token of ownership while the actual books sits safely in a vault. Another possible use is a limited run of digital images could be created with NFTs attached and sold as a "limited print run" to collectors. This is already happening in the sports collectibles market. NBA Top Shot has sold digital images of famous dunks/shots with unique NFTs for $$ millions to deep-pocket collectors. I could easily see someone trying to develop this in the comics market, where there is a "limited official print run" of 50 digital images with authenticated NFTs of a famous pedigreed ultra-high value comic, and you can be a proud owner of 1 of 50 authenticate images for the bargain price of $xx,xxx. This is related to, but not the same as, the trend we are seeing with "fractional ownership" of high value comics and collectibles, where your ownership is virtual/digital. This also has some loose correlation with the extended and heated discussion on WATA graded games. Something is only as valuable as what someone else is willing to pay for it, whether there is one buyer or 1 million buyers. I personally would never buy a piece of digital art, as I prefer physical and tangible art / collectibles. The notion of paying for something like digital art, that I can enjoy an identical copy for free (minus the invisible NFT), is frankly mind-boggling to me. I feel the same way about other digits "commodities", whether of sports or of other rare collectibles. That is me speaking as a collector who enjoys tangible, fragile, old, fun stuff. As an investor, if you can show me a solid business plan and financials, with a history of significant above-market returns and upwards growth, then I'm interested and I don't really care what product you're selling (as long as it's legal). However, regardless of how I personally feel, the digital/virtual market already exists with huge money at stake, and the trend is inevitably going to grow. For just how long this market will have sustainable growth is anyone's guess. There will be huge fortunes made by a few, some non-life-changing disposable income lost by many, and catastrophic losses by a handful. Like almost every new and innovative market, there will be early adopters, speculators, investors, train-riders, suckers, and bag holders. In all of these niche markets, transparency and information is limited, regulation is virtually non-existent, and insider dealing and market manipulation are rampant (but sadly is it rarely illegal or easily provable). Anyone venturing into these arenas would be well advised to learn themselves up before testing these shark-infested waters.

nice, i watched this copy on ebay for months...

take

per PM

per PM