Beyonder123

Maybe I'm just weird, but I prefer the first one.

I've seen a good lot of this guys videos. And from what I've seen, he does show before and after photos. I've definitely not seen him "damage" books. He seems to generally do a pretty good job.

Its things like this that make me doubt CGC's "quality control" even looks at the books.

On 12/11/2021 at 8:52 AM, Kathoom said:

How many collectors does this "mislabeling" affect, a dozen, two dozen?  I'm on CGC's side, ignore these  whiners and label it how you want. CGC shouldn't care that much about foreign reprints anyway 

Why shouldn't they? Because they weren't printed in America? A comic is a comic is a comic. It doesn't matter within what borders the book was printed. What matters is accurately labeling all books regardless.

On 12/8/2021 at 10:54 AM, themagicrobot said:

Note well that along with the different page count the Bizarro Batman 64 has had fairly obvious changes to the artwork compared to the original so how can the two items be considered one and the same? 

Simple answer is they aren't the same. But CGC really wants them to be for some reason. I honestly don't know if I will continue to have my foreign books graded if they are going to be labeled incorrectly. I feel the frustration of GM&I. I feel like this is a very dumb problem that shouldn't even be an issue. CGC hasn't had to deal with alot of foreign books in the past and it shows. There's more to a comic than just the cover.

On 12/7/2021 at 6:09 AM, BigLeagueCHEW said:

None of this stuff is appealing. Spider-Man with the bug eye's and his kicks bro!, Spider-Gwen, Red Goblin, 2099, etc. Marvel is desperate to toss something at the wall and hope it sticks.

Marvel has been highly successful with their cinema for quite a while now. I somehow doubt they are desperately hoping something sticks. Sony has wanted to expand the spider verse and I'm not sure how one would do that without adding other spider men. As for the first movie I thought it was quite good and creatively different from other Marvel films.

I'm very late to the party. Maybe there's still interest in this.

Marvel Superheroes Secret Wars #1 is definitely the first appearance of the beyonder. He has a form (even though it's light), he has a name, and he has one of, if not the most important role of the story. If that doesn't define the first appearance of a character I don't know what does.

However I do think that his first appearance in his physical form should be mentioned. Not in Secret Wars II #2, but in Captain America #308 which takes place before SW 2, came out the same month, and tells the story of his acquisition of the form. (Which is by the way just a copy of Captain America's body).

So I'm not sure if anyone has brought this up already as it has been awhile since I've read through this thread. But while doing research I realized that the Greek spiderman books seem to have started over and re print books while continuing the numbering. Are these going to be labeled the same? Will the cencus differentiate them?

I've seen Argo once many years ago. I remember it being a great movie. Didn't know Jack Kirby was involved in the rescue.

On 9/16/2021 at 8:25 PM, bellrules said:

From one of my sealed packs. That’s not overspray. 

Very cool. I think this case is pretty much closed. Now I'm interested in the spray on the kids books.

This leads me to believe that these books weren't witnessed at all. Perhaps the date on the slab is the date that a CGC rep picked them up?

It can definitely be done to some extent. How much I don't know. This guy on YouTube shows how he does it Here, but he seems to know what he's doing so I wouldn't risk it.

Not me personally. The book has too much historical importance to be Frankensteined together. Plus if I were to get it graded, there's a good chance it wouldn't come back as a universal grade.

I'll never go to Wizard World comic con again. The last one I went to had literally 2 tables with ANY comics. Wasn't worth the 60 something dollars I paid for admission. I hope covid kills the company for good.

Just asked someone I know who is an avid Rom fan and has been stocking up on issue 31's for awhile about this. He says the following.

"So I looked through that ROM #31.  It has Rogue breaking the Brotherhood out of prison after the events of Avengers Annual. No references made to X-Men 158.  The checklist is interesting.  They aren't alphabetical, but laid out more or less by release date throughout the month (week over week). It has ROM and X-Men right in top of each other.  I'm thinking they were released the same week."

I haven't watched this yet. I'll have to wait till later today, but is this about that pamphlet he sold out of his apartment for a time?

If Leonardo DaVinci doodled all over the Mona Lisa, yea I get how that would have been a problem. But imagine for a second that he made several thousand prints of the Mona Lisa, and on a select few, he drew one of a kind doodles. Is there a problem with that? Honestly I don't believe the argument that by having a book remarqued like that we are failing to preserve the books for future generations. Jerry Siegal and Joe Schuster are not around anymore to sign books. But how much money do you think a collector would pay for a copy of Action 1 with an authenticated superman sketch on it from Joe Schuster himself? There are thousands of copies of this turtles book that's not even 40 years old, and I see no problem with someone who originally worked on the book adding some history to it. He's not going to be here in 100 years to do this. These books aren't going to be signed forever.

On 8/28/2021 at 1:08 PM, Ride the Tiger said:

What a joke. I'm trying to browse the books for sale and I'm getting error messages for every click. Come on CGC are all you guys and gals on drugs?

Glad to know I'm not the only one. I get an error message with literally every click. Literally not worth using the forums until it's fixed.

On 8/27/2021 at 5:06 PM, Lazyboy said:

You're confusing distributor spray with the printed stripe/box that was added to most comics not that long (within a year or so - I don't recall exactly when) before this issue was printed. Whitmans wouldn't need any marking, which was there for returns, but them having it is evidence that they were printed with the rest of the run, for anyone who still thinks they're reprints.

I think you're right. Comparing my copy to an ebay copy, the first page has some "ink bleed" for a lack of a better word, on both my copy and an ebay copy in the same exact pattern. Definitely looks like it was printed on. In fact all copies I can find of this book, Whitman or not, have the same mark.

On 8/27/2021 at 6:08 PM, Readcomix said:

Whitmans were also sold individually in the book section of some department stores at that time. But I don’t know whether a third-party distributor got them there, or whether they were shipped direct from Western Publishing. I do know an old-timer who worked there; he may or may not know. 

Would be quite interesting to hear his input

I just recently purchased this Brave and the Bold #157 Whitman variant. As I was looking it over, I saw it had a distributor mark on it. If these were originally sold polybagged, why is there this mark? Any ideas? Or am I misunderstanding the importance of distributor marks. Please ignore the construction hands.

Not only is the hair perfectly intact, but it's looking virtually untouched. Is super hair a power I'm unfamiliar with?

Now for the opposite end of the spectrum. Many months ago, I sold my newsstand Amazing Spiderman 316 and Star Wars 68 for something like 75 bucks each. The more I see those books going up the more I hurt.

I just found this thread and as the original posted books are mine, I suppose I should state my opinion.

Personally I believe the "Enaintep Man" book should be labeled as follows...

Σπάιντερ Μαν #164

[Spider Man #164]

Kabanas Hellas 6/84

Greek Publication

I think there should be a distinction between the comic Amazing Spiderman #252, and the story presented within. For example, how would you notate foreign editions that print stories from multiple US titles under one book? Under the current rules whatever the cover is would dictate what the label says.

For example, I currently have a copy of "Hulk #45" published by Atlantic Förlag in the Netherlands. The book prints the story and cover presented in Incredible Hulk #285. But that's not the only story it publishes. It also prints Daredevil 181 (which I believe is in it's entirety). 

So the question I pose is what should the CGC label be for this book? The Incredible Hulk #285? Or Daredevil #181? Both stories are printed inside. The book is from 1984, so both issues had already been made available in the states at this point. The only distinguishing factor is that the foreign print has the cover for the Hulk book. What if my copy is coverless? What if another issue from the same run has a completely redone cover?

What about the Brazilian run of "Secret Wars". The story was heavily edited, and at least one of the covers was completely redone. Is the story that Americans read and the story Brazilians read really the same story? Is it really correct to label it as such?