Aman619

yeah.  Im always amazed at all the book I DID pull the trigger on when remembering the ones I talked myself out of cause of price, or I already had a copy etc.  Then again, not all of our purchases pay off in the end.  If a $600 comic is now worth 1200, but you bought it 30 years ago,  thats not such a great return.  And plenty haven't gone up at all, or lost collector fervor since then, or failed to keep up with the big books.

ok  I was wondering if Comiclink shipped it, wouldn't it say "Comiclink"?  either way I hope you get your package!

why would Fedex refer to our shorthand "C-link" for Comiclink???

scam?  I get texts saying my shipment/package cant be delivered often lately.  but Im not expecyting anything.

these are very cool!   WHY are the box cover images b/w??  

we take for granted how much info we have each consumed about comics... while knowing next to nothing about so many other collectibles.

t just leave it alone huh?  : )  

Add it to my list.  Another mystery to be finally resolved someday. 

geez.  now your repetitious catchphrase is getting old...  and doesn't prove anything.... To borrow your analogy:  repeating something over and over doesn't prove the point.   I liked your take on it, but to me, clearly the drawing IS the Joker... recolored.  If Superman's costume was colored green would he NOT be Superman?  Was the grey Hulk NOT the same Hulk after they made him green?  Editorial reasons caused the change, like the Joker on Dec 40.

yes I know its not the same thing, and yes I admit there some wiggle room because DC didnt want us to know it was the Joker in the artwork.  I mean, after they originally DID want that and assigned the artist to draw the Joker similar to the panel in the story that was supposed to be in Tec 40.   (That both Clayface and Joker wore raincoats and shared a hat has more to do with the artists limitations than proof its Clayface, or NOT Joker)

bottom line our hobby has a few remnant declarations of key books etc. Hulk 180 or 181, OOAW 81 or 83, WW 105 or 98... And occasionally, the collectors vote with the wallets and the hobby moves away from what they thought they knew.  So this COULD go that way.  A few of us arguing over it wont be the deciding factor.   

On 10/19/2023 at 12:38 AM, blackterror said:

batman_fan didn't leave it out ... because it's not a Joker cover and it's way past time to get this straight.

Things that are different are not the same.

Detective Comics 62 is the FIRST JOKER COVER. Detective 40 is a MODIFIED Joker panel from Batman 1. The modification made what WAS the Joker in the Bat 1 panel appear more like Clayface on the cover of Tec 40. Things that are different are not the same!

 

Why did DC do this? Bat 1 was going to print before Tec 40 and DC needed another Bat story to complete the book. So, they moved the Bat/Joker story that was intended for Tec 40 into the Bat 1. Then DC prepared a new story for Tec 40 featuring Clayface to replace the Bat/Joker story they moved to Bat 1.

 

Now the Tec 40 had a Joker cover that no longer lined up with the Clayface story inside ... so rather than redraw the cover - DC CHANGED THE COVER and recolored what WAS the Joker on the cover of Tec 40 to appear like Clayface.

 

The cover of Tec 40 WHILE SIMILAR to the Joker panel in Bat 1 is - NOT THE SAME. Things that are different are not the same.

 

After re-coloring the cover of Tec 40 - the Joker was NO LONGER the Joker by intent or actual appearance.

 

Detective 62 is truly the FIRST Joker cover - not Tec 40.

 

But wait ... some Bat 11's have earlier news-stand dates than Tec 62 so maybe - just maybe - Batman 11 is the first JOKER cover

 

Now this has been a matter of debate for some time - here's a link to an earlier thread - but even in this thread nearmint states that the cover of TEC 40 is PRACTICALLY a mirror image from the Joker story in BAT 1 - the word practically is another way of saying - THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT ARE NOT THE SAME.   Two identical twins are NOT the same person although they may be  - practically - mirror images of one another.  

 

  

 

makes a lot of sense!   however.   Artist is hired to draw a Joker cover based on a panel with Joker.  He draws it.  It exists.  An editorial decisions says that it's NO LONGER the Joker, and to make it so and repurpose it rather than redraw it, they just COLOR it differently than as planned.   Does that really make it NOT the Joker anymore?  To me it lives in a duality, a quantum state as two things at the same time (if you will).  The Joker artwork appears first in a comic book, even though DC wants us to forget that the drawing is the Joker and the matching story appears elsewhere.  There's too much still linking it to being a joker drawing for me to be fully convinced.

I'm sure there's more than one size.

or a mix  !  so bidders keep coming back.

sounds like a case of that OTHER comics syndrome -- Fear of fear of missing out!

On 10/15/2023 at 2:04 AM, lou_fine said:

Hey Aman;

Although I find that you are pretty much always spot on when it comes to your comic book history and analysis, it appears that this is one of the very few and rare times that you are actually incorrect with respect to your time frame here.  

I bought my first Overstreet Guide (i.e the Barks Porky Pig cover edition) in 1977 and I clearly remember the guide a few years later having an extensive multi-page section written by Ernie Gerber and Bill Sarill where they discussed the preservation and restoration of comic book, including a section on the value of restored comic books.  Depending upon the type and extent of the restoration, it was stated that the increase in valuation for restored comic books could be enormous when compared to unrestored books in their original lower condition grade.    

Needless to say, this marketplace sentiment did not last very long due apparently to the proclivity for this restoration work to go undisclosed upon resale even though it was seen as a net positive in terms of adding value to a book.   I remember switching my collecting focus from new books to vintage pre-hero and GA books back in '87 and the big red flag back then was to watch out for and to avoid restored books.  Especially when you had dealers like Mark Wilson around at the time who just couldn't pass up doing some type of work on a book no matter how nice it already was.  Still remember asking him in every which way possible if he had done anything to a book prior to me expressing an interest in purchasing it from him and this was quite a few years before Sotheby's arrived with their comic book auctions in 1991/92.  

My first guide was #12 so I missed the hobby’s stance on restoration in the 70s.  I can’t speak to how collectors responded to the Sarill article then,  but clearly recall it as on the upward trend due to the Sotheby’s auctions a decade later.  Susan was trained by Sarill and her business boomed as dealers and collectors bought low grade books shipped to her, for the next auction…. So I guess this is a recurring thing - or used to be - that rose twice.  Certainly many collectors have liked restored books because they get a nice looking copy at a low price.  But I was always a high grade no resto collector, and was surprised when it became fashionable in the 90s.

No. The “restoration is okay” period was a decade later once Sothebys began their auctions.  Now that comics were in a big time worldwide renowned auction house, where most other collectibles allow restoration, and Susan was a very well respected and classically trained restorer, and well known but the grading committee, restoration gained support as inevitable in our hobby.  For a while….  One could actually but a beater key, pay for restoration, and flip it for a profit.  For a while anyway. 
 

the isolated moments I refer to are collectors admiring their almost perfect copies, and getting a marker to fill in a few tiny spots here and there.  It was a temptation that seemed to have no consequences cause who cared what you did with your own comic book. And, in a larger sense, hardly anyone cared about comic books in general. They’re were worth a fraction of what they are now. Of course some dealers worked their books for immediate profit too, but I was talking about how John alone with his Church treasures, couldn’t resist making them more perfect.  Good thing he didn’t hit them all!

Always a good idea to write out scenarios of what may happen to your stuff, and ask your insurance provider each of your possible scenarios -- one by one -- to describe how much you will collect.  There was a poster here on the boards years ago who took a valuable piece of OA to a framer.  And the guy accidentally cut it in pieces.  Owner assumed he just had to make a claim and would be made whole.  But, insurance said that he wasn't covered while the piece was in someone else's control/hands.  That he needed to go after the framer's insurance.

and of course the framer had none. Surprise, surprise surprise!

These insurance contracts are written in ways that differ from how we laymen think. "We think, gee my premium is expensive, but Im all set!"  Not necessarily.  Make sure you are getting full coverage for the protection you need.

On 10/13/2023 at 11:33 AM, buttock said:

I think it (the Church) initially graded as 8.0 and was bumped to 8.5.  In these days of "improvement" DA could be kicking himself as the Church could now technically be nicer.  

in an arms race, when your opponent upgrades, just do the same... or better, to maintain your place in line.

Ugh.  Cmon, stop playing with words.  A book isn’t GRADED while still slabbed, but it can be evaluated for upgrade potential.  Many times the grade wont improve due to unseen defects… 

as for it being WRONG to touch a comic of “historic importance”  remember that it was just a funny book back then.  A handful of people felt it was worth a significant amount of money, but that it.  And it was never assured that it would BE the holy grail copy, in part because there was a good chance there were better copies out there… and there was at least one such that it’s owner sold it and kept that better one.  Many collectors == alone at hole bothered by a cover defect == would do a little color touch to “fix” a small area of color loss and be happy with the improvement!  These moments of madness when extremely minor, were ultimately seen by CGC as unfortunate lapses of judgement and given a label note and not a purple label.

So, “a little higher” means a 9.0?

nice copy!

Have you decided which way to go?

I think your best bet (assuming building a vault room, and murdering the construction crew like the pharaohs used to, is out of the question) is to buy as big of a TL-30 safe as you can afford. They run to 72" high and hold a dozen boxes or so.   Maybe two of them!.  You can fit a lot of raws in there and plenty of slabs.   And check your insurance to know EXACTLY what they will pay for!!  "Insured collectibles" doesn't mean what you/we think it does.  

Maybe low grade duplicates!  Or bought a collection and weeded out the killer stuff already, selling to get his cash back.  

Matt has this figured out Im sure..

haha.  thats pretty. pretty savvy for sure!   I'll admit Im a little tempted by many of these cool covers, but, prices have exploded too far and fast.  and of course, (like you) there are just too few high grade opportunities to make a run for them.

any guesses or thoughts on why the worlds savviest comic collector is selling off so many pulps with slabbing right around the corner?  Low grade dupes?  bad timing? Novocaine prices skyrocketing?? 

the final 10K bid may have been automatic.  (If thats the CL bidding increment at 200K?)  Im not suggesting any more than there weren't 2 frantic bidders vieing for it at the last second as is often the case on big books... or was anyway