Mr. Spider-Woman

I just finished reading through this and I really enjoyed the look back at what was my early collecting days. I think I started seriously collecting around 1995/1996. I definitely recognize the look (trade dress?) of many of the Marvel covers you've posted. I think the only comic you've posted that I bought myself when it came out is Captain America (Volume 3) #6 with Cap as a Skrull. I do also have the Starship Troopers miniseries you posted the first issue of and the entire Earth X limited series, but bought those long after they were published.

What's most interesting to me is that when I switched from subscribing through Marvel to subscribing through Direct Comic Book Service (DCBS), I branched out from a strictly Marvel pull list and starting buying a lot of books from DC and other publishers. Scrolling through the DCBS website looking at all the covers and synopsis was a ton of fun, much like your experience with the Westfield catalogs. Sometimes I was hoping to buy something that turned into a big book later on but probably the only time that worked out was Spider-Man Noir.

I'm looking forward to continuing to see what books you unbox. I don't think you've posted any Fantastic Four issues yet, though. I hope there are some waiting to be rediscovered.

The Walmart closest to me had maybe 10-12 of the 7 for 10 bundles. I saw Eternals, Darth Vader, Edge of Spider-Verse, maybe a Venom cover. 

Oh wow, I had no idea. I love weird giveaway/promotional comics like this. 

On 3/29/2024 at 5:08 PM, Iconic1s said:

My problem is not with any grade, it’s CGC’s public relations.  I wish they would just grade books and let nature take its course from there.

When they publicize something like this then in my mind, everything becomes suspect… I mean, when it comes right down to it shouldn't this book have simply went from QC to shipping and no one inside CGC would have even known to make a big deal out of it?

Just be the best at grading and shut up, then no one will have a reason to wonder what motivations are for this grade, this grade now, etc.  Also makes me sick whenever I see CGC ranting and raving about some record sale (especially when it’s at Heritage)… just so shady.  It’s almost as if they want to suck every penny possible out of people that enjoy this hobby  

I wholeheartedly agree with everything you've written. 

On 3/24/2024 at 5:52 PM, KirbyJack said:

If it makes you feel any better, I consider raw, reading copies of Kirby Fantastic Fours to be the most entertaining (and thus, intrinsically valuable) comic books in all existence. 

I'm happy with my beater readers. They're the best I can afford. I do get a little jealous looking at nicer copies though. 

Star Trek: Voyager Paramount Comics #1 (November 1996)

Fantastic Four Volume 2 #13 (November 1997)

I've read every Honor Harrington novel, many two or three times. So I had to grab these when I found them in a $1 bin. Then I had to go and buy the rest of this miniseries and the other Honor Harrington miniseries, too.

I was excited to find the recent Playmates Star Trek: The Next Generation U.S.S. Enterprise on sale at Target. I had a bunch of the original 1990s Playmates action figures when I was a kid but none of the ships.

I was not excited when it arrived and the box is beat up. I wasn't planning on taking it out of the box, I wanted it for display. The other two items shipped with it weren't damaged and there's only a minor crease on the shipping box. The shipping box was way too big and there was nothing to protect the items, no bubble wrap or packing paper. Nothing.

I'm afraid if I keep opening returns with Target due to damaged items, they'll eventually ban me.

My understanding is non-business sellers (aka hobby sellers) can only deduct cost of goods sold (COGS) and literally nothing else.

I'm not sure it's an error. It could be Marvel printed versions of the direct and newsstand editions without the foiling on the cover. The Grand Comics Database lists four versions/variants:

• Guardians of the Galaxy (Marvel, 1990 series) #25 [Deluxe Direct Edition]
• Guardians of the Galaxy (Marvel, 1990 series) #25 [Regular Direct Edition]
• Guardians of the Galaxy (Marvel, 1990 series) #25 [Newsstand]
• Guardians of the Galaxy (Marvel, 1990 series) #25 [Deluxe Newsstand Edition]

Link: https://www.comics.org/issue/1875149/

One thing that does give me pause is the fact there is no price difference between the regular (no foil) and deluxe (foil) versions. Other Marvel comics with deluxe foil comics from the 1990s did have different prices, including Guardians of the Galaxy #50. Some examples include:

• Excalibur #75 (March 1994) - Direct Edition - Deluxe Foil Cover ($3.50), Direct Edition - Standard ($2.25)
• Fantastic Four #387 (April 1994) - Deluxe Direct Edition ($2.95), Regular Direct Edition ($1.25)
• Guardians of the Galaxy #50 (July 1994) - Deluxe Direct Edition ($2.95), Regular Direct Edition ($2.00)
• Doom 2099 #25 (January 1995) - Deluxe Direct Edition ($2.95), Standard Edition ($2.25)
• Fantastic Four #398 (March 1995) - Deluxe Direct Edition ($2.50), Regular Direct Edition ($1.50)
• Spider-Man #57 (April 1995) - Direct Edition - Deluxe ($2.95), Direct Edition - Standard ($2.50)
• Daredevil #350 (March 1996) - Deluxe Direct Edition ($3.50), Direct Edition ($2.95)

Either Marvel didn't see the need to price the regular (no foil) and deluxe (foil) versions differently for both the direct and newsstand editions OR there were printing errors resulting in both direct and newsstand editions without foil. Is it likely that printing errors for both editions exist? I don't know. I personally think it was intentional and there were no printing errors. GotG #25 has a cover date of June 1992 so it came out a few years before any of the other deluxe editions I found with a quick search of the Grand Comics Database that did have price differences. Maybe other examples of deluxe/regular editions with and without foil and no price difference exist from 1992 as well. 

An action figure/cartoon TV show/comic book tie-in. From Wikipedia, without any sources listed:

Quote

The first M.A.S.K. comics were three mini-comics produced by Kenner that were packaged with the vehicles from the first series of toys in 1985. After the success of the franchise, DC Comics picked up the rights and produced a special insert which appeared in several comic books dated September and November 1985 to launch a four-issue miniseries (December 1985 – March 1986). This was soon followed by another insert in comics dated from June to November 1986 and a regular series that lasted nine issues (February–October 1987).

I was in Walmart last week and saw a lone 7 for 10 hidden among the trading cards. Can't remember what the top comic was, though. 

On 1/3/2024 at 8:04 PM, universal soldier said:

 that's a lot of ASM #300's!  

 

That was my initial reaction as well. Wowee.

I scanned through the last 10+ pages or so and didn't see a link to a post at the Comic Book Collecting group on Reddit about the CGC scandal: 

140 comments so far. Not sure what that means long term but awareness of the ongoing situation definitely seems to be growing outside of this forum. I don't see anything written about the scandal at Bleeding Cool, CBR, or The Beat. There is an article at ComicBook.com:

https://comicbook.com/comics/news/cgc-comics-issues-statement-on-holder-tampering-controversy/

I checked the other day and all comics (DC and Marvel) are gone from my local Walmart, which recently reduced the size of its collectibles aisle to only three shelves. The other shelves were removed and replaced with stacks of water bottles. 

On 12/24/2023 at 1:07 PM, comicwiz said:

Not directed at anyone, to make anyone feel little, or wrong or incorrect. Just a general statement based on my experiences with reporting transgressions in the past.

feeBay doesn't care. CGC might because of the optics, but there's a likelihood this gets categorized as too stealth for them to procedurally detect reliably, or without frustrating/delaying their current modes of process. I hope I'm wrong, and they take this seriously.

Remedies. I've tried (with mixed results) going the route of reporting fraud by deception through the Office of the Inspector General, and the FTC. I will need to better understand how this all shakes out, and I will say it is going to hurt our ability to get resources on something like this because we aren't the impacted victims here reporting this, although it's reasonable that we assert the position that it's happening in such a stealth manner that it's impossible for the consumer to even understand the nature of the deception, and the down-the-line impacts inevitably hurt us all, in terms of jeopardizing consumer confidence and the overall health of the hobby. 

After I've had a run through of what I hope to do in the coming week, I'm hoping to check back here to see what's developed. However it likely will need to be repackaged for easier, more cogent anaylis by examiners, and I think it will only help if we continue to make more finds, because the scale of this will always be looked at from the monetary damage component to justify the use of any oversight agencies time and resources.

What I'm seeing as the benefit of going in this direction is to put pressure on all involved to recognize the severity of this, and at the very least to hopefully enforce corrective remedies like taking these slabs out of circulation.

I've been wondering about the scale of the scam/fraud/whatever as well, if it involves enough money for the FBI or the FTC to get involved and commit limited resources to.

On 12/24/2023 at 2:13 PM, Stefan_W said:

There is one thing that is still puzzling to me. I do a lot of crack and resubs and the part I keep getting stuck on is how the person got books in and out of a CGC case without cracking it. Granted, when I open up a case I make no effort to preserve it, but my experience is that cases chip and crack very easily. 

I recall earlier in this discussion that there was mention of a person who once put up a post outlining how to open up a CGC case without cracking it but it was taken down right away. Am I misremembering or is this a real possibility?

It seems like the only ways to make this work are: (1) figuring out how open a case without cracking it, or (2) having a supply of blank cases that can be used (which involves having the equipment to seal them). 

The scammer can always claim the holder was broken in transit to cover for any damage caused by forcing it open. And there have been theories floated that the scammer can reseal holders after opening them up.

It's unique to my account.

I got a popup on the eBay app about a $10 coupon with a targeted code. I also got an e-mail. Nothing on the regular eBay website, though. It's not one of the annoying category specific or seller specific coupons.

Good through December 29 with a minimum $50 spend. 

I picked up two 7 for $10 packs last week. One has Darkhawk #5 on top, the other Alien #7. Haven't opened either of them.

On 12/21/2023 at 7:27 PM, JC25427N said:

I think pages like 10-30 have a drawn out discussion about that including some boardies who are lawyers giving their thoughts

On 12/21/2023 at 7:27 PM, sledgehammer said:

That was talked about on all 50 pages from this morning.

On 12/21/2023 at 7:57 PM, Lightning55 said:

If you had read a few pages back, a lawyer chimed in with a laundry list of potential offenses, mostly Federal.

On 12/21/2023 at 8:03 PM, Lightning55 said:

Yes, I just got there. The posts are coming in faster than I can read and refresh. 4 posts just came while I was typing this one.

But I do know enough to not jump in on page 48 with a comment or a question without reading the thread.

I've read the entire topic, give or take a few posts, and paqart's posts about fraud and counterfeiting and forgery, and I keep circling back to the earlier talk about the seller exploiting a loophole in the CGC reholdering process and vague terms like manipulation and trickery on the part of the seller.

Can the seller pass the buck and blame everything on CGC for sending the lower graded comic back in a new holder with a new label and the old 9.8 grade? That's the grade CGC gave the comic the seller sent them, whether or not it deserves the grade and whether or not it was even looked at rather than slapped in a new holder, sealed, and shipped out the door. 

Is it illegal to crack open a CGC case? Is it illegal to swap out the comic in the inner well? We all know this is shady and paqart talks about forgeries and counterfeiting and whether or not CGC is liable. Plenty of people in this topic have chimed in saying CGC dropped the ball and let this happen. The seller isn't printing fake labels or creating fake comic books (as far as anyone knows). CGC has given their official seal of authenticity to the comics involved. They're real comics with real labels and real grades on the labels, just not the right ones for the comic in the holder. So it's all very confusing to this not-a-lawyer.