Kripsys99

On 9/22/2022 at 6:12 AM, Timely said:

You are all wrong. They first appeared together in the same story in All Star Comics #7.

Right you are! Hadn't even come across this one as a possibility.

On 9/15/2022 at 7:13 PM, scooter99 said:

This is such an underrated Neal Adams Batman cover. The more time goes by, the more it grows on me. Batman, the Batcave, THE Batmobile, Alfred, Robin's hanging costume, an awesome teaser text bubble - this cover has it all. And it's a significant issue too - arguably (inarguably in my opinion) the start of the Batman Bronze Age.

People love 227 and 241. But after 221, I think this is maybe my favourite. Glad to see it getting some love lately.

I've got such a soft spot for Mile High - as a young collector in Canada in the 90s, they were one of the few places online where I could find every book I needed to fill out my runs. Their pricing and grading were fair, and they shipped to Canada! Upon rekindling my love of collecting a few years ago, I was sad to see what had become of their site and prices. Would definitely visit the store if I were ever in the area though.

On 9/21/2022 at 4:19 PM, Hottohman said:

Superman #76 according to the GCD. They learn each other's secret identities and "1st Superman-Batman team (outside of radio and the Justice Society of America). The World's Finest Comics Archives reprint was taken from the World's Finest #179 reprint, as evidenced by the splash page blurb: "Now that you've read the 'origin' of the World's Finest Team, here's the natural follow-up...from Superman No. 76, May-June 1952...." Inker credits corrected by Craig Delich; they were reversed. It appears that Kaye's inks actually begin on lower half of page 8"

Awesome. Thanks very much!

This question predates my particular era of collecting, but I'm curious when Batman and Superman first met in the comics?

From my own very cursory search, I've come up with various potential answers, ranging from World's Best Comics #1 (1941), to Superman #76 (1952), to World's Finest Comics #71 (1954).

I know it depends somewhat on how one defines crossover, and in this instance I mean when the two characters first participated in the same story.

Thanks in advance!

On 9/6/2022 at 11:54 PM, FirstRunComics said:

Just when the drama was dying down... Black Flag just did a Facebook live where he talks about Crain stealing his wife.

On 8/22/2022 at 4:57 PM, CGC Mike said:

We appreciate everyone being patient with our follow-up regarding the Clayton Crain acetate covers. After discussions this past week, CGC will assign a Qualified Signature Series label to comics that contain an acetate cover by Mr. Crain, as well as his signature that has been witnessed by a CGC representative. This also applies to the Ultimate Fallout: Facsimile Edition #4 that sold in C2E2. The grade assigned will take into consideration the grade of the acetate cover as well as the interior book.  For members who have already submitted copies of the Ultimate Fallout issue to CGC, we will extend an opportunity to have Mr. Crain’s signature applied to their copies so they receive the Qualified Signature Series label. If a copy does not exhibit Mr. Crain’s witnessed signature, the book will receive a qualified grade. 

Going forward, CGC will only certify artist-created covers that are first approved by CGC, and those covers must be signed by the artist through the Signature Series program to receive the Qualified Signature Series label. The cover must be created by a published artist.

Appreciate the tacit admission that CGC F'ed up, and the steps CGC is taking to rectify the issue moving forward.

Still waiting for CGC to apologize for making such an egregious unforced error, for refusing to acknowledge the error for weeks, and for diminishing the faith that both myself and others now have in the grades assigned to our own comics.

Maybe after a few more weeks of sustained pressure, CGC will deign to consider same.

Or (more likely) CGC is content to simply say: "Let them eat qualified copies of the bootlegged books which kicked off this debacle to begin with, signed by the cover artist!!!"

On 8/16/2022 at 6:11 PM, Towhead said:

On 8/16/2022 at 5:48 PM, Kripsys99 said:

"We're Sorry"

A message to the comic community from CGC President Matt Nelson regarding "Acetate Gate":

"On behalf of both CGC and myself, I would like to extend a sincere apology to the comic collecting community for CGC's role in what has come to be termed 'Acetate Gate.' To put it as simply as possible: we screwed up, and we're sorry. When Black Flag approached us regarding the possibility of CGC grading and encapsulating their limited release acetate cover variant of Ultimate Fallout #4, we saw an opportunity to bring something novel to our customers, while simultaneously cultivating a new revenue stream for the company. However, we failed to think through the consequences of grading a dealer produced variant as if it was a publisher produced variant, and the effect that would have on the comic collecting community's confidence in our grading standards. We should have thought it through, but we didn't. The Black Flag variants, essentially being "bootlegged" copies, should never have been graded by CGC in the first place, and certainly should not have been given Universal grades without notations. In recognition of same, we will be removing already graded copies from the census, and offering refunds to anyone who sends the already encapsulated books back to us (the books themselves will be returned once cracked from their cases). I would also like to address the issue of BF variants receiving an inordinate number of 9.9 an and 10 grades. Most grade deductions for modern comics submitted to CGC are attributable to imperfections in the outer cover. In the case of the BF variants, we assigned grades based on the acetate outer cover of the books. Acetate, being a more resilient medium than paper, resulted in a substantially higher number of the comics being graded 9.8, 9.9, and 10. CGC has never, and will never, "sell grades" - but under the circumstances, I can understand why some of you may have questioned same. We know that our handling of this matter has caused many in the comic collecting community - including many of our biggest supporters - to question our judgement, our business model, and our integrity. We understand your concerns, and take them seriously. Please rest assured that we care as much about the integrity of our grades as you do, and that we will never allow something like this to happen again. In closing, I want to thank the comic collecting community for caring enough about this issue, and our company, to hold us to account for our role in this matter. We look forward to the opportunity to prove to all of you that CGC remains the preeminent comic grading company, and that we remain worthy of being the gold standard for serious collectors world-wide.

Sincerely,

Matt"

Just to be clear, this is not the response CGC ACTUALLY provided, it's the one they SHOULD have provided in the first place.

After reading this entire thread, I just got tired of the condescending breadcrumbs CGC was tossing down to us plebs justifying their highly questionable actions, and decided to fan-fic the apology I would have liked to have seen in the first place.

Matt, if you decide to use this, I can PM you my address so you can send a cheque.

On 7/12/2022 at 12:54 PM, PovertyRow said:

Working now.

Thanks! Turns out CGC's shipping department simply failed to mark the book as shipped, so the certification number didn't get uploaded to their system.

Tried looking up a certification # (4035613001) of a book from a trusted seller in the verification tool tonight, and got no result. Never encountered this before.

Wondering if this ever happens with genuine books?

I've emailed CGC in the interim.

On 6/26/2022 at 11:21 PM, speedcake said:

For someone who has never collected Batman, nor read much Batman (although I've always loved the movies go figure), how readable is the average late 60s and 70s era Batman story? I know many/most/(all?) of the "must read" story lines often cited are from the 80s and later, I don't see anyone speak much about earlier Bat stuff. I've considered starting a low grade collection of earlier Batman, but I want to be able to enjoy reading them. I don't want to collect them just for the art, as incredible as some of it is.

so....verdict?

I love these books, but even I'll admit it's a bit of a mixed bag. There are some great one offs, and some great runs, that give us the likes of modern Joker, modern Two-Face, Ra's and Talia Al Ghul, and Man-Bat. You can't go wrong with the Denny O'Neil stories - the Frank Robbins stories, less so. That's just my opinion though. If you're interested in Adams' art in particular, you can always pick up the TPBs of his collected Bronze-Age Batman works, and only go for the stories which are of interest to you.

Not a huge fan myself. I get too much of a "Stanger Things" vibe from it.

Lots of great answers. Never considered the Overstreet Guide, or the fact that the "Bronze Age" only became the Bronze Age after sometime had passed (like how the Great War only became WW1 once there was a WW2). Thanks for the replies!

On 6/22/2022 at 1:52 PM, seanfingh said:

I don't think you are missing anything. It is strange language all the way around.  It realistically should say "First appearance since Golden Age."

Agreed, that would be much better wording.

Idea for this topic spring from a discussion on a different thread the other day:

Can anybody explain to me why CGC labels Batman #234 as the "1st Silver age appearance of Two-Face"?

I know the definition of the various Ages of comics can vary by title, who you ask, etc. However, I can't really make sense of this one on any level.

The book has an August 1971 publication date. That's after the publication of Green Lantern #76 (widely considered the launch point of the Bronze Age), after the publication of Batman #217 (which was published in 1969, and is considered by most to kick off Batman's Bronze run), and squarely within the years of 1970-1979 which CGC uses for its own registry.

What am I missing here?

Thanks.

On 6/21/2022 at 11:24 AM, GypsyGhost said:

Smart man. 222 is overrated imo.

Totally agree, but damn if this book isn't: a) tough to find in grade (thanks in no small part to the lower staple issue); and b) jumping in price fast - I WAY overbid on two 9.2 copies in two consecutive ComicLink auctions, just to get it into my collection. The first was the better copy, and went for over $1400, the second was (in my opinion) a lesser copy, and went for $1700!!! Needless to say, I didn't win either.

On 6/21/2022 at 12:11 PM, Jesse-Lee said:

In the case of Batman, a lot of the heavy hitters first appeared in the golden age. And even the ones who did appear first in silver/bronze (Batgirl, Ivy, Ra's, Man-Bat, etc.) don't quite compare to first appearances like Wolverine or Punisher overall.

A lot of the books we're talking about for bronze Bats are "keys" mostly because of their covers - Bats 221, 222, 227, 244, 251 are all great and favorites of mine, but none are truly "keys" from a content standpoint

I only agree partly with this. While Batgirl, Poison Ivy, Ra's, Talia, Man-Bat (or someone like Darkseid in SPJO) and the lot may not rate alongside the likes of Wolverine, they rank a fair bit higher than a lot of Marvel first appearances which have gone for inflated prices the last few years.

Also, characters like the Joker and Two-Face were completely reimagined - their "Silver Age" first appearances (after lengthy absences) may as well be first appearances, as the popularity of these characters today stems from their Silver/bronze appearances, not their Golden Age appearances.

I whole heartedly agree about the likes of Bats 221, 222, 227, and 244 - but you get Spidey "2nd appearance of character X in a new costume" (sarcasm) counting as keys nowadays, so it seems that anything goes!

P.S. - Love the Bats 251 pun.

On 6/21/2022 at 11:49 AM, Comic-Fan said:

I recently added 221 simply for the cover alone, I feel it's his best on the run and outshines 227.  

 

Agreed, this is his best cover, and the value being imputed to the book recently is reflective of that. This is another book that is tough to get in grade. That said, Reece Comics has had a 9.6 for sale for $1200 for what seems like an eternity, and I can't believe it hasn't been snatched up yet (granted it's a weak 9.6, with CR/OW pages, but this book is tough to find!).

On 6/21/2022 at 8:22 AM, Tec-Tac-Toe said:

I agree, as some of the issues, both Batman and DC, are difficult to find in the higher grades in raw and CGC graded.

Yeah, that's the thing, even good quality raw books are exceedingly hard to come by.

On 6/21/2022 at 12:17 AM, Jesse-Lee said:

That's a theory on my part, I don't know if the CGC census bears that out. I do see you say it isn't evidenced in the registry though, so maybe I'm wrong.

Yeah, I meant to say the census doesn't show a tonne of these books in circulation, at least not compared to the similarly aged Marvel runs.