gpanalysis

On 12/1/2023 at 8:36 AM, seanfingh said:

I do not see anyone paying multiples of GPA because of a written remarque

This is true in almost every case except when it comes to Stan Lee, and why we do mention a written remarque on SS books with his signature. They do appear to attract a higher price than the same book with just his signature. Additionally if Stan has signed the book on his birthday, bam! 

Putting aside SS books that are signed by multiple creators, looking at single creator SS books, in descending order of unique counts by cert number:

1. Stan Lee

2. Todd McFarlane

3. Chris Claremont

4. Neal Adams

5. George Perez

6. Jim Lee

7. Robert Kirkman

8. Skottie Young

9. Donny Cates

10. Frank Miller

Unique Stan Lee signed books we have recorded are at a factor of 5 compared to Todd McFarlane, and a factor of almost 20 to Frank Miller

Could you try force reloading the page please - the service should be up. People were having login issues and I tried restarting our servers, but the problem persisted. Seems to have been a reCaptcha error where once someone ticked "I'm not a robot" it would time out trying to reach Google's authentication server. My apologies on the error.

I've just taken another look at listing 333975689723 and it appears that although the seller relisted the book, with the same pics as per his previous listing, days later changed those images for what must be the second book he is offering (CGC cert number is different). So we'll bring that $4499 sale out of "relists" and include it in the main analysis. 

On 1/30/2022 at 12:19 PM, Domo Arigato said:

If you really want to get your blood boiling......do a little digging into Nostalgic Mad comic books.

If you're not familiar with them, these were reprints of early issues of Mad Comics from the 1950's that were included as free inserts in Mad Specials (magazines) in the 1970's.  These reprints had a cover price of 10 cents that was marked out and "FREE" was written beneath it.  I remember getting a few of these as a kid, and as far as I know, these were not reprinted as stand-alone comics (someone correct this if I'm wrong).  They were literally bound with glue along their ENTIRE spine into the Mad Special magazines in the 1970's.  The only way to get them out was to rip them away from the spine of the magazine or cut them along the entire spine of the reprint to separate if from the magazine (which, as kids we often did, and then taped up the remnants of the spine to keep the comic from falling completely apart). 

Here is a link to one on Ebay that's still bound along its spine into the magazine.

      

 

Why do I bring this up?  Because, if I'm not wrong.....and these were not reprinted and distributed separately from the magazines.....how did these two universal blue label copies happen?

 

 

And why is this restored copy that was sold on Ebay on 11-8-2021 not listed on GPA???

 

Maybe turn on restored listings in your filters? 

On 1/1/2022 at 7:26 PM, lou_fine said:

Greatly appreciate your response here, but I find that kind of hard to believe because some of the missing sales (at least on the other guy's site) are their record setting ones which they have hyped up afterwards and also shows up in their summary to Overstreet the following year. 

In addition, if the sales did not complete, you would expect to see at least some of them to come back in the following auction or on a competing auction website.  Is it possible that it's due to their crapola revamp they did resulting in possible communications interface problems?  

May well be - we report what they share with us

On 1/1/2022 at 6:29 PM, lou_fine said:

Greatly appreciate your prompt response here and fantastic to see that you are keeping on top of these things for us.  

Anyways, just wondering about some of these auction results that are sometimes nnot being captured.  Although we all know about CL not providing their results to both you and your competitor, I thought this was not the case with CC.  Especially when we can go onto the CC website and see all of their historical auction results in their archives as they are loaded virtually immediately when an auction ends, yet they do not seem to show up consistently in the auction tracking websites like yours.    

Just wondering why since they all seem to be their for public consumption right in their auction archives?  

My understanding is that although they appear as sold, sometimes the transactions don't complete. They do remove them eventually, but there are some that remain even though they did not complete.  

On 1/1/2022 at 2:02 PM, Off Panel said:

Thanks for filling in the gaps.

I knew there were a couple of big sales I was missing, but I’m surprised the $66K Heritage sale isn’t in the GPA data. I think of Heritage as sharing all their data with GPA. (Is that indicative of a sale that may have been walked back, or just a longer than usual lag in reporting?)

It sounds like all the big sales ($50K+) are still clustered in June with the price eroding ever since.

GSX #1 is a great book and it was probably undervalued when it was selling in the teens, but those sales at $60k and $70k + were real head scratchers for all the reasons you listed.

The $66K HA sale is included - it's an SS by Lee/Wein so separated into its own row in the analysis. Is there a chance you have the SS filter off and hence aren't seeing the signature series data?

On 11/24/2021 at 12:02 AM, goldust40 said:

I owned a copy of that book as well. There are two on the census, so it's either the one you've posted or the other one listed. The copy I had I sold for a pittance (I regret selling it) and it ended up in the U.S. (I spotted it at a dealer's table when I attended a convention there years ago).

I can't argue that it's all an attempt by CGC to bypass facts regarding what constitutes something that is separate from the norm. It does simplify things for them but also creates other issues - I tried to find information about the Mystic 40 on GPA, and had no luck. Would it be under TTA or Mystic (British Title)? I couldn't find it under either, and there was no entry for the book, so if there are recorded sales they haven't been logged in, which could technically be construed as marginalization.

That Mystic 40 would be considered a curio by the U.S. market, which in effect it is, and it may well be very scarce indeed. But it isn't a Tales To Astonish 13, it's a comic that contains the Groot story amongst other tales.

Yep. It needs to be called that so as to retain its importance to that section of the market rather than it being subsumed by the main focus of the market. It's a reprint book published for a separate readership that would otherwise have had no access to American comic books, which means it is of historical and cultural significance. Not a great deal of it to those who aren't bothered obviously, but let's not airbrush it out of existence!

It was categorised under Mystic #40 (UK Edition), but now it's been re-assigned in the census as Tales to Astonish #13 (UK Edition). When you look at the TOA #13 pricing on GPA, scroll right to the bottom and you'll see this issue separated and grouped under its own section (due to the fact it has a different publisher, L.Miller & Son Ltd).

https://comics.gpanalysis.com/analyse-prices/sales-data/54/13#l111963

Hmm, it was definitely reported at the lower offer price (the taxexclusive price isn't always accurate), but now it's not showing up in the feed results, so it could have fallen through. I think we'll remove it for the moment until we can follow up and see if we can confirm it.

I'm not sure how they're going to handle all titles, especially the example you give here. I guess we'll see as more are graded with the new categorisation  method. But it could well be the case that it is grouped in with the US title and the label notes the foreign information including the internals. 

I believe this is the way it's going to be done moving forward. I don't necessarily favour one way or the other, but I think it's a reasonable way of categorising these as the cover is one way they can be grouped together and tracked efficiently. 

It could also be due to the fact that getting the foreign title correct could be a sticking point at times, and hence why moving the same covers under one unified title/issue, and then noting anything of the original foreign title on the label, is preferable. 

I should add the Greek "T" is not a "D" as I have noted in SPAINDER, just that it would most likely be pronounced in that way when you look at the context of the word.

As a side note with respects to what the Greek title is, if we use the English equivalent letters to the Greek letters, it is actually spelled:

SPAINDER MAN

The first letter is an S (the Greek capital Sigma), the second a soft "p", and the last "P" is actually a Greek capital "R". So in fact it is as close to "Spider Man" as it gets.

I think from what I've been privy to, CGC are moving these foreign titles under their US equivalent and using the cover to group them together - so the above cover on the Greek publication is the US #252 cover, so it's being categorised under that, and the label notes the original Greek numbering, which is #164

While both this new categorisation method and the way these foreign books were previously categorised exist, there will be some overlap until all are brought together under the sale title in the census and the newer way of labelling these books prevails.

In GPA we're also categorising these in the same way going forward - older labels will exist and as we come across these we'll move them over to their respective titles and let CGC know to update on their end so they get moved in the census also.

12 minutes ago, Aman619 said:

well, in a positive light, the fact that CC auction site wasn't built to handle buyers premiums supports the idea that this was never in Metros plans, and was sprung on them by the Kentucky consignor, no?  Shouldn't be too hard for them or GPA/George to change the final prices to include the BC... a spreadsheet should do the trick.

We'll have no problem in including the BP - CC share their data with us. 

1 hour ago, onlyweaknesskryptonite said:

My apologies. I should have been clear with my text. I definitely did not mean to infer that you were having issues with the specific service of sets of data you supply , nor did I intend to have people extrapolate that you provide or offer a prediction of fair market value .  

I know you do not track raw copies which several of these sales I posted were and as you said your reporting partners, meaning there are sales that are not part of this data. 

I do uses several sources to get some of my sales data.

Which includes your service.  (Which I still hold as one of the gold standards for any graded comic with measurable sales data) 

Thank you for the correction, information, as well as the amazing service you provide and I am sorry about the confusion.  

No apology needed  I was simply clarifying how often we update

7 minutes ago, onlyweaknesskryptonite said:

I don't disagree with the 9.8 and lower  or that the two currently listed may be fishing, but the sales data is off. I watch ebay and many sites often tracking sales. Go collect and GPA both have been having issues keeping up with current prices and tracking data. Here are just a few of the most recent 9th prints sold on ebay and yes the offers were still a little lower than ask, but when filtered low to high they all still land above $350 with the highest being the most recent that a bidding war broke out and ended at $810 + $8.45 shipping for a raw.

We haven't been having any issues with keeping up with recording prices from all our reporting partners. We still report daily, GPA continues to be updated daily across all books.

Just to be clear and FYI, we don't do "fair market value" with predictions of where the prices are going, if that's what you mean by "keeping up with current prices". We simply report on what has happened with respect to recent sales.