1Cool

On 11/20/2023 at 3:43 PM, jsilverjanet said:

b/w for one, probably being printed on the other side of the world another

Sounds like comics need to go back to fun stories on cheap paper (which are printed on the other side of the world) to get kids reading again.  The only way I'd buy new comics was if they had them for $2 a piece and they were in spinner racks at the super market.  Who am I kidding - even then I'd probably not bother if I missed a couple issues.

On 11/19/2023 at 5:13 PM, VintageComics said:

Thanks. This is why I chose not to have a debate. It always ends this way (Marvels movie thread for lots more).

-----------------------------

On a positive note, if you all want to know why these companies are NOT successful, how about studying a model that IS successful at selling comics and related products? 

Why is Anime so appealing?

Why is it outgrowing the entire industry?

And why is nobody asking these questions and instead discussing numbering and other non-factors?

Why was the NYC Comic Con, arguably the largest show in the country AND THE FACE OF AMERICAN COMICS in the greatest economic city in the USA completely represented by Anime but underwhelmingly NOT supported by US publishers?

There's a message in there somewhere if you read between the lines. 

This was the MAIN ENTRANCE to the NY Comic Con. Anime took up the most important space in the room and about 1/4 -1/3 of the main showfloor. 

It's hard to describe how big and impressive these displays were unless you saw them in person.

This is what the public saw as they walked in the door. 

Based on these images I can see why young teens and kids like anime.  It looks designed for kids whereas modern comics seem designed for grown adult (mostly males).  But as Janet said - how can you change the look of comics without alienating all us older collectors which has been their bread and butter for decades.  They seem to have painted themselves into a corner.

On 11/20/2023 at 3:22 PM, Buzzetta said:

Again, this has been mentioned but it is an example of the problem.

The cost of this four issue mini series was $4 an issue.   Someone that read this went through the entire $16 series in twenty minutes. 

Twenty minutes.  

Let that sink in. 

That means that if we were to equate this to an hourly rate, he is being entertained at $48 per hour. 

Kids these days are better off buying the video game.  

 

If anime and manga are the wave of the future in terms of what teens are reading then is it just because of the price point?  Why is anime and manga so cheap if that is the case?

On 11/20/2023 at 3:20 PM, Prince Namor said:

Personal opinions CAN be wrong.

I can believe, with all my heart, that the head of CGC is an alien from the planet Vulcan. I would be wrong.

No one who ever says that is 'done' with the discussion.

On a public discussion forum - if you make a statement - someone is going to possibly reply. It's inevitable. 

If you manipulate statements - and make statements that go against what you previously said - and can't back up what you say and it gets pointed out - that's not an attack on the PERSON - it's an attack on what they say.

If I go around saying that the head of CGC is an alien from the planet Vulcan, and I manipulate quotes to make it seem as if it's TRUE and someone shows where I manipulated the quote to prove me wrong...

How is that an attack on me?

It's NOT.

But pretending it is, is a manipulative, disingenuous defense. 

Opinions can definitely be wrong and I love a good debate where people express their opinions and try to sway the other person but when I devolves into just arguing and name calling then I usually just tune out the bickering and move on to less argumentative threads.  Roy is very polarizing so I do see why he can make it easy to "fight" with him but just realize it gets very tiring to read the arguing when it goes too far. 

Roy hates to not get in the last word in a discussion and genuinely like him when I see him in person so I thought it was worth a nudge to not have him get into trouble again.  In terms of you - I really don't see your post very often so I don't have an opinion about your posts but hopefully we can get into some good, productive debates in the future.

On 11/20/2023 at 3:02 PM, Prince Namor said:

It's not an attack. I used his own words to show exactly what he said.

Roy has a habit of going back and editing his posts to cover things up, hoping it'll confuse moderation or whoever is trying to follow what he's saying. That's why people have learned to quote him.

The bottom line is - he DID say that Marvel is being influenced by outside FINANCIAL forces to make these changes. That it DOES extend to comics. I SHOWED were he alluded to it and how in his OWN words.

He previously DENIED it ("I said no such thing."), tried to take on the role of Victim again (comparing being held accountable for what he writes as "cancel culture") and then when SHOWN he DID actually say it, pretended it was never in question and deflected to "I'm not here to discuss people. I'm here to discuss ideas."

The discussion isn't about HIM, it's about what he WRITES. But when he can't back it up, he goes on the defensive and tries to play martyr. 

When he gets caught in a discussion he can't actually prove with anything other than his usual shell game, he becomes a VICTIM and blames everyone else. I've taken my share of abuse on this forum for my beliefs, but I don't parade around and show it off like a badge of honor. My actually BELIEFS are what I stand by and go back to. Not some strange masochistic drama dance I can do to drum up sympathy and make it all about myself. 

And I sure as hell don't edit other people's quotes to make it fit my narrative. 

I really have no idea about your back and forth with Roy but I can say that it appeared you were picking at what he saying and twisting some of the stuff he wrote to prove him wrong which is really tough when most of what Roy writes is his own personal opinions which can't really be wrong.  I don't agree with what Roy believes quite a few times but I don't feel the need to keep picking on the guy to try to get him angry.  He said he was done with the discussion so it really wouldn't have been hard to just let it drop (especially since you guys had both expressed your points).  In this one case I thought you were on the attack and appeared to be goading him into a fight (which never ends well for him) so I gave him a gentle reminder.  I have no interest in defending what Roy writes but I do defend his ability to voice his opinion without getting attacked at every turn.

On 11/20/2023 at 9:54 AM, VintageComics said:

I'm not here to discuss people. I'm here to discuss ideas.

Why moderation continues to allow attacks on PEOPLE I don't understand.

People can read the entire locked thread themselves. In fact I think everyone should read it and form their own ideas rather than just read soundbites from the discussion. It's one of the greatest discussions we've had in a long time with lots of nuance and facts that are relevant to this thread and I think they'd learn a lot. Thanks for bringing it up! 

I fully stand by the points I make. 

Carry on. 

Part of saying you will not debate someone is to just not respond when they type things about you.  Even if it's an attack or false - just don't respond since you have made your points enough time that it's not like people are confused by your stance on the stuff he is "attacking" you on.  Report him if you think it's way over the top but just stay strong since he is obviously trying to pull you into a debate that wlll probably get you a strike.

On 11/18/2023 at 8:06 AM, Nick Furious said:

But that's not the writer's point, that just the perception that he works off of in order to draw the conclusions that make his point.  That perception, or observation, is probably at least partially true.  The point the author tries to make about the "collector" is an exercise in insulting and malignant mindreading nonsense:  This kind of totalization by means of objects always bears the stamp of solitude. It fails to communicate with the outside, and communication is missing within it. . . . The collector is never an utterly hopeless fanatic, precisely because he collects objects that in some way always prevent him from regressing into the ultimate abstraction of a delusional state, but at the same time the discourse he thus creates can never -- for the very same reason -- get beyond a certain poverty and infantilism." 

My opinion is simply that the collector is typically not a "first-adapter" but more often someone who prefers things that have been seasoned and survived the test of time (although there are a few people who are both "first adapters and collectors, but we tend to call them hoarders).  It would be easy to write an equally stupid and critical analysis of the motivations of "first-adapters"; always seeking the new and having no appreciation for the old and established.  But again, that would be malignant mind-reading and insulting.      

Oh I agree he is trying to reduce the collector into a box (and an ugly box at that) which shows his bias.  Maybe he got beat up by a comic book nerd in high school and has never been able to get past it.

But I do think there is some truth to the thought they collectors prefer to be surrounded by the past and some people take it too far and neglect the now.  

On 11/18/2023 at 1:36 AM, Nick Furious said:

Good grief.  Many of us collect things that were out of print long before we were born.  Or at least long before we were aware of their existence.  Having an appreciation for appealing qualities that have withstood the test of time...that doesn't stem from any of the motivations offered by this blowhard.   I wonder how he would explain the popularity of pre-code horror with people born long after that era.     

I think you are kind of making his point for him.  He is saying the collector “hides” in the old (even stuff older then us) and complains about the new.  I don’t agree that the collector is wrong in thinking the new is bad because to most of us the new stuff is bad to our taste.  If new was good to us the print runs of modern books would be 5x what it is today.  

On 11/15/2023 at 5:30 PM, justadude said:

It's not some people. Again, almost everyone on this board equates superhero comics with comics more broadly.

Absolutely not true. Kids are reading comics, a whole lot more than adults reading comics as 15 of the top 20 sellers in 2022 were childrens and middle aged titles. They just aren't reading superhero comics which weren't even in the TOP 250 titles sold. And who would blame them for not reading a genre where less than 5% of published stories EVER were any good?

The whole discussion just confirms again and again how narrow-sighted collectors on this board, and collectors in general, really are. They collect specific eras or artists or titles because they are so sure they're the "best" era in some way. It's an incredibly limited view and one that furthers their own egotism to think the only thing that matters is what they like.

Superhero comics =/= comics.

Thank _________ god.

But you are writing your opinions on a CGC message boards where the average person is probably in their mid 40s so it’s perfectly ok to have the discussion slanted toward that group.

im down in Puerto Rico this week and we went on a snorkeling trip yesterday with about 40 people of all ages.  The way out to the reef they played a lot of older songs which had everyone (even the youngest) singing and having some drinks.  The way back the youngest were very drunk on rum punch and the music got louder and newer.  The older people were basically covering our ears by the end while the young were stumbling around and quoting songs we didn’t know.  I find comics are the same way - the young can at least appreciate the older ways (or at least grin and bare it) but the older crowd just can’t handle the pace and the headaches of the stuff the young like. 

if the future of comics is manga and anime then most of us will just be content to live in the past and talk on a message board where younger people would be driven crazy with the slow pace.

On 11/10/2023 at 8:36 AM, MAR1979 said:

Yep, sell'em now if you have them. These film bumps are now fleeting. Fatigue has set in...

On 11/9/2023 at 12:03 PM, PopKulture said:

It’s funny you mention National Geographic. When I was a kid looking for other stuff, even junkyards knew to ask a lot for National Geographic. I recall prices for generic 40s issues being $3 to $5, and double that if they had a Coke ad on the back cover. The earlier all-text covers were $10 and up. The first issue was a holy grail worth $10,000 and up. It’s just remarkable what that same money spent on comics could’ve bought in comics or pulps. 

I never really understood why most magazines have zero collectability but comics became such a major collectible.  Time magazines to old Playboys to National Geographics to Home and Garden - all but a handful of issues are basically worthless even when they are 50 - 60 years old.  

On 11/7/2023 at 4:11 PM, MAR1979 said:

Or another multi-week banning? Whats the over/under?

By the way - Roy only has 352 post until he hits 100,000 posts!  Will he hit this milestone this week??

On 11/7/2023 at 3:01 PM, NewWorldOrder said:

Sure, but again what does that have to do with selling your books to a dealer or a reseller? I had a guy a couple months back want to sell me his X-Men 94-143 run.  Books were in heavily read condition, and his asking price was probably 3 times high then what I could re-sell the comics for.    He said these comics were his 7/11 store bought comics from when he was a kid so if he sells them he wants more.  Needless to say I quickly passed on the run and left feeling that he wasted my time. 

I have some emotional attachment to my personal collection, but not to my regular inventory.  Just remember we are all just curators of our comics till we are dead.  Once I realized that in my late 20's I just stopped being so attached to anything, especially since most comics are not rare and are easily replaced.  I think its very normal to have some kind of emotional attachment to your personal comics, but if you have to sell you cant expect me to share in that emotional attachment and pay you more money because of it.

Fair point but I can't have it both ways.  I lean heavily into the emotional attachment of buyers in terms of getting them to buy my books (heck my booth motto is Buy Back Your Childhood) so I can't expect the same people to not have an attachment when it comes time to sell their books.  That is why I love buying books from dealers (or at least people selling at cons) since my experience buying from collectors has been terrible.  They typically want top dollar for everything and they get insulted when I give them a fair offer for their books. 

I don't expect dealers to pay more than they want but it seems strange to say books should be seen as a commodity when an emotional attachment gives them most of their value.

On 11/7/2023 at 2:09 PM, NewWorldOrder said:

I really don't understand when collectors say what I highlighted above.

Define "priced out?"  That is such a generic statement that for me makes no sense.

Most collectors are not priced out of buying most comic books.

What books specifically are people priced out on?  What's annual collectors budget?

Or is it more the buyer is just upset they can't afford the comic in the grade they truly want.

Example.  They want a HULK #181 in CGC 9.4, but only have the money for a CGC 6.0.

The way I see the hobby right now it seems to be a great time for collectors to price themselves into the book they want.  I think the COVID gripes from collectors were for sure justified, but now I dont see what the problem is for most comic books buyers to not dive in and get what they want.

I also think what Bob @blazingbob was referring to was when people try to sell books or trade with dealers they sometimes think their "emotional" attachment to the books should garner a higher premium .  Which I have seen many times, and my rebuttal to them is your personal attachment to these books doesn't help me re-sell them faster!  So yes when you sell your comic books they are just a commodity, that is correct.

But don't comics have no value other than an emotional attachment (especially if you take away reading the book)?  I hope people continue to have an emotional attachment to their funny books because things get tricky very fast if people start asking why a small book is worth thousands of dollars just because it includes the 1st time an artist drew a character.  

I give away comic books at Halloween and it’s definitely an eye opening experiences.  Most kids are excited to get the book but I hear so many 10 - 15 years olds say that I just gave them their 1st comic ever.  I’m not sure if very many will actually read them when they get home but I’m hoping at least a couple to make it worth my time.  

The million dollar question is will these teens get to a certain age and get an appetite for old comic books?  Will they like the characters because of the movies and desire a long box of books to read and collect?  My gut tells me not a chance in heck but who knows.  We still have a bunch of years left before we get to the point where the teens of today will need to keep the hobby afloat so not really an immediate concern of mine.

Marvel and DC seem to be on a collision course for stopping printing new comic books (print runs can’t go much lower).  I think the elimination of new books will be the first step in the collapse of comic book as a collectible (as we know it).  If they stopped play hockey do we believe people wouldn’t eventually stop collecting hockey cards?  There will always be people that want Gretzky cards but the hobby must have new blood and new exposure to not become model train collectors.

Who could have predicted 2020 - 2021 craziness so there is no certainty but life typically runs in cycles and the predictors don’t look great once the Boomers are gone and Gen-X retires.

On 11/4/2023 at 10:58 AM, VintageComics said:

Andrew, this is an example of a non-comprehensive view.

If a book triples 3 years ago and then halves you're STILL ahead.

Does anyone think the book is going to halve in value again?

If a book tripled in value from let’s say 2017 - 2021 then I’d not be shocked if a lot of books revert to the 2017 prices.  I don’t think the correction (especially for Silver and newer) is close to being done.

On 11/4/2023 at 10:58 AM, VintageComics said:

Andrew, this is an example of a non-comprehensive view.

If a book triples 3 years ago and then halves you're STILL ahead.

Does anyone think the book is going to halve in value again?

Only if you bought prior to 2020.  Prices only spiked because actual people were buying at the inflated (3x) prices and now they have lost their shirt.  I think the writing was on the wall that prices were not sustainable but I can still pity those that got caught buying something and then quickly took a huge loss.

On 11/3/2023 at 5:16 PM, bc said:

@DC# does a good job of that over here:

Here's one of his recent graphs:

-bc

 

Looks like pretty much every grade has halved in value since the beginning of 2022.  That is a lot of money considering that is only one particular book.  

On 11/3/2023 at 5:09 AM, Bosco685 said:

That was actually good. Though I had a feeling who the killer was in the end. Still, a good story with some interesting twists.

With that $20M budget, $152M is a clear box office win. So I expect more.

I 100% agree.  A simple, but enjoyable movie with a $20 Million price tag sure seems to make sense in today's climate.  I can't imagine running a movie theater is a success is a $152 million flick but thankfully that is not where I've invested.

On 11/3/2023 at 11:33 AM, Dr. Balls said:

I'd say they're getting salty after one or two "low balls". I discovered last night that a seller I made an offer to a week ago blocked me (Listing a $199 common BA book with a $100 OSPG value - I offered $100 with previous sales around $100). The butthurt runs deep these days.

Unless that was their only book then I'm sure they have received plenty of low ball offers.  A lot of people switched over to selling books basically as a full time job during the hype days so a 50% haircut on a big book means they have to go back to flipping burgers.  We had plenty of great years to be selling books but I don't see the gravy days coming back anytime soon.