Qalyar

Errors are not created equal. Some errors are one-offs: double covers, misbound wraps, that sort of thing. Prices on these are all over the place, because they're not really a consistent collectible. They're just sort of neat to own if you're otherwise interested in the underlying book. I've got one, for example, with a double cover, half the wraps duplicated, and the other half missing. I paid over a hundred times the base value of the book (but the base book is dollar bin fodder, so...). It's probably not worth that on the open market though, because it's not a title anyone cares about. Some errors are still errors -- they weren't produced intentionally -- but they affected enough books that they're sort of viewed as an accidental variant (although CGC doesn't always agree). That's the world of the green cover Fantastic Four #110, the Secret Wars #1 blue Galactus, the Sandman (v2) #18 blue panels, and the Sandman (v2) #19 page order error. Prices here tend to depend on how many copies are in play, whether the error is something truly striking, and whether people care about the book in general. Blue Galactus and copies of Sandman 19 with the binding error aren't hard to find or especially valuable, for example, but the blue panel copies of Sandman 18 are a considerable rarity (estimates are < 1000 produced) on a popular book and so command appropriately high prices. Finally, there are "error" books that aren't really errors per se, in that nothing went unexpectedly wrong in the production process, but something either went wrong in the development process or the publisher just decided that something needed to be changed. This is the world of the Sandman (v2) #8 Karen Berger Editorial variant (actually a ~600 copy unmarked 2nd printing, and not originally intended for distribution), the TMNT (IDW) #1 "orange wash cover" (actually a ~400 copy unmarked 2nd printing), the Elric #1 error edition (actually the 200 copies remaining from a defective first printing that was otherwise pulped), and -- regarding the matter at hand -- Detective Comics #643 with Mark Badger's name in the cover box. For Tec643, what happened is that Mark Badger had been tapped to produce the cover art. However, his cover (you can see the OA at CAF here) ultimately wasn't used, which is frankly a crime, because even uncolored, it was way better than what we got. At some point, however, the slug for the direct market edition (to replace the newsstand UPC) had been prepared with the names of all three creators: Milligan, Aparo, and Badger. Eventually, someone realized that since Badger's cover went unused, he didn't actually contribute anything to the book, so the slug was modified and Badger's name removed. In non-comic book collecting terms, the Badger copies would be deemed "first printing, first state" copies and the Badger-less ones "first printing, second state". Are they worth hundreds of dollars? Well, a lot of people are certainly hoping so. I'm not sure what the long-term prospects are here, and a lot comes down to how many of these exist. Now that this has come to people's attention (although it's hardly new news), there are suddenly a lot of them listed on ebay and elsewhere, which makes me suspect that -- although rarer than the second state version -- they're not actually all that rare.

You absolutely should seek advice from counsel, and should do so now (and before discussing case details with any third parties on, say, Zoom calls or whatnot). It's possible that there are no assets to seize. Mike certainly wants you to believe there are no assets to seize. He also wanted the bankruptcy court to believe that there were no assets to seize, but there are, shall we say, reasonable questions about whether that filing was accurate.

Tiny bit of color loss near FC UR. What look like small creases or surface scuffs, breaking color, at FC LR. Creases, breaking color, at BC UL and BC LL. The picture of the first interior page makes me believe that the entire LR corner of the book has a slight bend. That might be lighting, but I don't think it is. If the book is pressed before grading, that won't be an issue (but pressing can't fix the corner color breaks). I'm also trying to decide whether, based on the first pic, there's a "reader's bend" (like a less severe, non-color-breaking reader's crease) vertically along the left of the front cover. If that's not just a trick of the light, it would certainly press out (again, if this is going that way). I don't think this is getting a 9.0. I'd say 8.0 / 8.5, depending in part on whether those bends are real or tricks of the light.

So random to see that Puma Blues 24 1/2 without the rest of the Mirage minis. Obviously, though, you did real well here! My local show never has $1 copies of X-Factor 24. For... some reason.

Sure. It's (probably) a printing error that CGC has accepted as a variant. The "yellow variant cover" is a 2nd printing* copy that was printed without the blue ink, resulting in an entirely yellow-and-black front cover and a back cover with a white background behind the kid's mother tearing up his comics. I've seen estimates that there are < 100 of these. I don't think there's anything concrete, but that seems plausible. The Heritage copy was Don Schenker's file copy of the error. *It's not a 1st printing book because it lacks the scratch in the Z on the front and the extra yellow on the back. It's not a 3rd or 4th printing book because it lacks the damage to the front cover character's spine. Heritage's scans are detailed enough that you can compare it to known copies of the 2nd printing (as originally intended) and the 5th printing (second attempt to retouch the spine damage), and it clearly does not have the more heavily-filled in spine elements of the 5th printing. Everything later has a higher cover price. Therefore, the error books are from the 2nd printing. Honestly, since the 2nd printing was the Print Mint's first, it wouldn't surprise me if these weren't errors at all per se, but pre-production proofs. In any case, Don passed all the way back in 1993 and so we'll very likely never know for certain.

I'll go ahead and (unsurprisingly) plug Black Hole for being a unique indie horror / romance / drama series. As a bonus, the collected edition is readily available. It's not exactly the pre-code EC sort of horror, but it definitely does more than dip its toe in the genre.

I shouldn't be mean to end-of-era Charlton books, because I'm pretty sure all their artists were getting paid at that point was regret. But this is one of my favorite so-bad-its-good covers. Especially because it's Steve Ditko, who was very clearly phoning this one in!

I don't think anything about those is authentic. The CGC labels are clearly counterfeit. I'm pretty sure the hologram security labels are too. I believe the cases are not CGC cases but some generic equivalent. I also don't think the books are real. I suspect those are reproduction covers, probably stapled to blank pages or to some valueless book with its cover torn off.

So your next thread is going to be a 9.2+ run of Planet, I assume?

There is. I'm not going to post that information here, because nothing good will come of it in this forum. But for anyone with skin in this mess, your lawyer will be able to contact the trustee for this case, and may have some... interesting questions to ask.

Filing a police report on your own is all well and good if you've been porch pirated or if someone broke into your car. In most of that cases, you need that in order to file for insurance claims, which is probably your only recourse. If some meth head steals cuts out your catalytic converter, it's not like you're going to (or going to be able to) file suit against them. This is not that. The underlying torts (and maybe crimes) here are more likely to be fraud or breach of contract issues that outright theft (for many of you). And now, there are bankruptcy law implications. Any attorney that you want to be involved with will give you a free initial consultation, to see whether they're able to help you and to provide an initial consideration of what your options might be. Whether it's financially viable to pursue the case is absolutely a topic that will be discussed. If you don't know where to start, there are also legal outreach organizations that can help you find an appropriate attorney. There are also several firms that sort of specialize in connecting people with appropriate legal counsel even if that's not them (without regard to whether they're the best such option, I know that Eagle Law does this). It is possible to take actions that will limit your future legal rights and options. This is why there are lawyers, people.

Attorney. First. Do not go on record with the police until you have sat down with your counsel and determined what the appropriate actions are here. Just because you are the victim here does not mean the cops are on your side; they are not. They are on their side. For example, while I do think it's likely that some of you are victims of actual, legal theft -- especially anyone who had their books sold by Mike -- you are not competent to understand the legal implications. If you're filing a police report, you will be asked for basic details of the crime, such as the date that it occurred. Is that the date you sent your books to Mike (obviously not). Is it the date he listed them for sale? The date the transaction completed? The date he actually transferred them to the third-party buyer? Filing a police report in which you get the details wrong may limit your legal options later. Also, frankly, this is a confusing, expansive case that's probably in a different jurisdiction and that involves property the cops probably don't care about; they are not going to do anything helpful on their own. Get. A. Lawyer. They will advise you what official actions you need to take, and when. Potentially, very much yes.

I can confirm that this was the individual Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing for the same Mike who operated Hero Restorations. This filing asserted that the majority of his debt was consumer debt. It is... interesting to note that at the time of the filing, he claimed to own zero dollars in collectibles, and that his business, Hero Restorations, possessed only $2000 worth of collectible comics. No individual book owners are listed as creditors. Again, if you sent books to Hero Restorations that you got back in the same or worse condition as submitted, or that you have never gotten back, you need legal counsel... a long time ago, but seriously-I-mean-it now. As always, I am not a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. I am double-extra not an expert in bankruptcy law. It is outside anything even like my areas of expertise to judge whether or not this constituted asset concealment, or whether Mike had a fiduciary duty to notify the customers of Hero Restoration of any of this (or even the extent to which they are creditors under the law, frankly). There are a lot of complications here, and for some of those issues, you are potentially four years into a five-year filing window. If Mike took your books, stop farting around on this thread, stop entertaining whatever nonsense the guy with multiple accounts is up to, and go secure counsel.

Generally speaking, tape used to "repair" defects is graded as if the tape was not present. If you've got a detached piece taped back on, the book will be graded as if the tape, and the detached piece, are not present. If tape is used to re-attach a centerfold, it will be graded as if the centerfold is detached. And so on. None of these will get a book a purple label. Also, if you're going to use tape on a comic, whatever grade it might be, please consider the minimal extra expensive of archival-grade tape rather than Scotch tape or its ilk.

This thread has taught me that if I'm ever in a position to determine what variants to produce for a potentially-significant comic, I'm going with a blue foil, green foil, aqua foil, AND turquoise foil. That'll show 'em. Seriously, I'm pretty sure these are a cinch to distinguish in hand, but in photos with crappy lighting? Yeah...

In general, they shouldn't be using gloves. The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions -- actual experts in paper conservation -- published an article in their then-newsletter, International Preservation News, evaluating the risks and benefits of white-glove handling of archival rare paper. Here's a link. The article in question is "Misperceptions about White Gloves". Essentially, CGC employees should be keeping their hands washed and thoroughly dried. If there's a fingerprint problem, it represents lax operational controls in this regard. Also, about 5% of the population has abnormally high rates of hand perspiration and those people shouldn't be in positions where they would contact raw books. But gloves are, on the whole, a really bad idea for handling archival paper of any sort. Gloves are more likely to transfer contaminants than bare hands and they reduce sensation and tactile feedback, which directly leads to more damaged paper.

So, I'll start by saying that lots of things are technically crimes. But for this sort of misrepresentation to clear the bar for actual criminal prosecution? Amazingly unlikely. Even for it to give rise to a tort claim is a pretty tough row to hoe under most circumstances. The tort at issue would be fraudulent misrepresentation, which requires the plaintiff to demonstrate six factors: A representation was made The representation was false The defendant knew the representation was false when they made it; or they made it with reckless disregard for its truth The representation was made with the intention that the plaintiff would rely on it The plaintiff did, in fact, rely on the representation The plaintiff suffered harm as a result of relying on the representation So what's the challenge here? Somewhere between the second and third prongs, most of these claims are doomed to fail. Grading, as we all know, is not a wholly objective process, whether it's CGC doing it or you or me. Sure, there are grading scales and rubrics. The point of a recognized grading authority isn't even necessarily that they're flawless, it's that, over the aggregate, their opinions are more respected than mine; they're more likely to be right, in other words. But even ignoring obvious mistakes, we can -- and do -- argue about whether that's a bad corner or a bindery tear, whether that's a medium crease or a small one, how aggressively to penalize staining, and a thousand other aspects of evaluating comic book condition. So if you, or I, or even CGC, overgrades a book, the almost certain defense to that statement is "honest error". Can you prove that the comic in question couldn't possibly get the grade I described it as? Not even from Mile High? Good luck with that. And even if you somehow demonstrated that to be true, can you prove that I was intentionally lying, rather than just being a sloppier grader than you'd like? I really doubt it. Now, if there are objectively false claims involved, that's different, but it's a lot less likely. If I take an 8.5 slab, crack it out, and sell the book as a "9.4" raw, you will never, ever win that fraudulent misrepresentation claim, because, hey, it was just my opinion that CGC undergraded that book. And CGC does undergrade books sometimes, so good luck proving that my representation was both objectively and knowingly false. On the other hand, if I falsely tell you that it was cracked out of a 9.4 slab instead of an 8.5 one, well, then (assuming you can prove the book's provenance) I suppose you can demonstrate that I did in fact knowingly misrepresent a material fact. You might have a claim there for the difference in value between a 9.4 raw book and an 8.5 raw book. Hope that's worth more than the filing fees. Of course, that scenario doesn't happen; no one does that.

I know that, canonically, the 1st printing has the Montezuma's Revenge back cover, and the 2nd printing has a back cover advertising Risk. I have no idea what the back cover is for the 3rd print offhand. Those 2nd and 3rd printing books are both indicated in the indicia, though. I also see people with what they describe as 1st pritnings but with the Star Wars arcade back cover; did they fail to read properly, or does the 1st printing exist in two back cover states? I seem to remember this sort of thing was discussed before and that consensus was that there's a lot of weirdness with the early Transformers issues and not everything is flawlessly documented. What do the indicia on these books say?

Green labels are Qualified labels. They are basically "but for" grades: the book would have the listed grade, but for one specific defect (that generally isn't normal wear). So a generally flawless book with an unwitnessed cover signature might get a 9.8Q, meaning it would have been a 9.8, but for that signature. Or a fairly nice copy of Incredible Hulk 181 with the Marvel Value Stamp clipped out might get an 8.0Q; if it was "straight graded" into a Universal label, the same book would probably be a 1.5 or thereabouts because it would be considered incomplete. The problem with Qualified books is that the universe of things that make your book Qualified is huge. Unwitnessed signatures -- like your book has -- are, to a lot of collectors, more or less fine. Clipped-out panels? Not so much. Add in the fact that books with structural production defects also get green labels. I've got a 9.8Q book with the label text: "MANUFACTURED WITH COVER & 1ST FOUR WRAPS INSERTED TWICE, AFFECTS STORY. INCOMPLETE." Regardless, the general public impression of Qualified books is that they're books that "look nice, but have something really wrong with them", and that hurts their resale value, even if that's not always a fair evaluation of why the label is green. In any case, this book is a low-grade enough copy that it doesn't matter. The unwitnessed signature is not, as they say, a "controlling defect". It's presence or absence doesn't make any difference in how the overall book will grade. Which means you won't get a "but for" grade. You'll get a Universal grade, with a blue label (possibly with a label note saying there's a name written on pen in cover, and probably saying there's tape on the cover). And it's tough to evaluate this book from these pictures, but 1.5 or 1.8 are pretty good guesses for what the grade might be, I think.

3.0. In particular, I think the left-center back cover damage is worse than it looks like at first glance. The creases and tears there extend quite a ways into the cover. I think there's already some missing pieces there, and of course, it's perilously close to having that big trapezoidal chunk join them.

I would never have thought that top margin would clean up that thoroughly. Congrats, that's a winner.

So, I was looking at information about the Lotus VHS release. At least some copies apparently came packaged with a full-size copy of Spawn 1 (in addition to the mini comic packed into the VHS sleeve), presumably a reprint. Any idea if those Spawn 1s are uniquely distinguishable, or if they're identical to ... some other Spawn 1s?

I wonder how many other issues exist with this bespoke Eastern News barcode. If I recall correctly, Eastern News primarily did distribution to mini-bookstores in business areas, like the ones in airports. I have to assume that, however many books were printed for them this way, survival rates are, erm, not gonna be great absent warehouse finds.

Appreciated! I just wasn't sure if the Italian 4-in-1 books managed to cross a line. I love foreign republications, but it's a wild world out there! Still sad that there's nothing that can be done for French b.d. books, though. Maybe someday CGC will work out an encapsulation process for them.

But what's a Trade Paperback? Sometimes this question is easy. Sometimes... it's not. Let's consider Black Hole, the Charles Burns indie book. It was published as a 12-issue miniseries. Obviously, the individual issues are comics. It was collected as a single volume, published in both hardcover and softcover. Obviously, the softcover is a trade paperback (and too big to slab anyway). When it was licensed for foreign editions: Spanish publisher Ediciones La Cupula published it as a 12-issue miniseries. Obviously, these are comics. German publisher Reprodukt published it as a 6-issue miniseries, with each issue containing two of the original comics. Obviously, these are still comics. French publisher Delcourt also published it as a 6-issue miniseries. Although these are still comics, they're also not eligible for encapsulation because they were printed in the French bande dessinée format (which means they are hardcovers). Italian publisher Coconino published it as a 3-issue miniseries, each being an approximately 150 page book containing four of the original comics. I believe these have slabbable dimensions, although they'd get the extra-chonky cases. Obviously, these are... um, actually, that's not obvious. What are these? Are they comics, or are they trade paperbacks. If slabbed, would they be eligible for the Registry (in a Black Hole Foreign Editions set, obviously)? All kinds of publishers -- Coconino, Delcourt, Hjemmet (Norway), Like (Finland), Oog & Blikt (Netherlands), Reprodukt, and likely others -- produced foreign editions of the collected volume. Obviously, these are all trade paperbacks (or hardbacks, as applicable). Is there any firm dividing line between multi-volume reprints and trade paperbacks? Or is this just a "know it when I see it" sort of demarcation problem?