Amazing Fantasy #15 Club

[Bluetooth-migration]

I know this won't sit so well with some but I have had a previous cr/ow book pressed and regraded and it was given W. and like peewee I have had W books pressed and regraded and gotten one cr/ow. So it is subjective and pq can and will change from time to time.

 

My point is ow or better is desirable over cr/ow when it comes to sa but I rarely see any pricing diff or premiums on ow or ow/w or w

 

The market will see a WP book superior over a lower PQ book and will value it a bit more. Just as a 9.2 will be price higher than a 9.0. The FMV will be price on the label and the overall structure and appeal of the book. There are books that I've got graded should deserve the WP designation and some I do not think garner the WP designation...and certain books a bit over graded or under graded. That's why folks regrade their books to attain a higher assign grade, I do agree, PQ from OW/W could be W one day and W can be OW/W. I agree, a SA book in CRM/OW loose appeal and some pool of buyers, but a OW/W or a WP more appealing. Nonetheless, certain superior WP book will represent better than other WP book.

 

Why does anyone, or everyone, blather on about the CGC label designation about PQ. In my opinion it is almost useless, useful but almost useless.

 

The cover paper quality is 100 times more important than the interior pages PQ. CGC is describing their opinion of the interior pages. It appears to me that the cover paper quality is only judged by CGC as a factor in the overall grade of the book. There are examples available of books with labels showing OW/W pages, yet the grade is low due to poor cover paper quality.

 

It should not be a guessing game for us to figure out what the cover paper is like by the CGC grade. If that is what they are doing, I think that is stupid, it's an injustice to buyers and collectors who attempt to decide whether a book will last a long time for the future, and for resale.

 

My point is that I have no desire to own a brittle cover paper book, or anything with cover PQ that you might describe with any other fragile adjective.

 

Everyone is assuming that the label PQ(interior page paper quality) is the same as the cover PQ. That is a horrible assumption to make. I have seen several comics that came out of CGC slabs that have poor cover PQ, yet the label listed the interior PQ as white, or OW/W, or OW. I have not seen as many books as I'm sure the majority of big members here, so why is this such an unspoken subject?

 

For the cost of these books, for long term keepers, I would think everyone would take them out of the slabs to see the actual total book PQ, the condition of the cover paper, not just the CGC label which doesn't accurately convey what the cover paper is.

 

I'd love to bust my AF15 out and see all the characteristics about it, inside and outside. But I don't have the balls.

 

I figure the only people to see my book were the OO (who died in the car crash in '73), his parents (maybe), HA, and CGC.

 

 

Wonder how much it was worth back in '73

[cloudofwit]

I know this won't sit so well with some but I have had a previous cr/ow book pressed and regraded and it was given W. and like peewee I have had W books pressed and regraded and gotten one cr/ow. So it is subjective and pq can and will change from time to time.

 

My point is ow or better is desirable over cr/ow when it comes to sa but I rarely see any pricing diff or premiums on ow or ow/w or w

 

The market will see a WP book superior over a lower PQ book and will value it a bit more. Just as a 9.2 will be price higher than a 9.0. The FMV will be price on the label and the overall structure and appeal of the book. There are books that I've got graded should deserve the WP designation and some I do not think garner the WP designation...and certain books a bit over graded or under graded. That's why folks regrade their books to attain a higher assign grade, I do agree, PQ from OW/W could be W one day and W can be OW/W. I agree, a SA book in CRM/OW loose appeal and some pool of buyers, but a OW/W or a WP more appealing. Nonetheless, certain superior WP book will represent better than other WP book.

 

Why does anyone, or everyone, blather on about the CGC label designation about PQ. In my opinion it is almost useless, useful but almost useless.

 

The cover paper quality is 100 times more important than the interior pages PQ. CGC is describing their opinion of the interior pages. It appears to me that the cover paper quality is only judged by CGC as a factor in the overall grade of the book. There are examples available of books with labels showing OW/W pages, yet the grade is low due to poor cover paper quality.

 

It should not be a guessing game for us to figure out what the cover paper is like by the CGC grade. If that is what they are doing, I think that is stupid, it's an injustice to buyers and collectors who attempt to decide whether a book will last a long time for the future, and for resale.

 

My point is that I have no desire to own a brittle cover paper book, or anything with cover PQ that you might describe with any other fragile adjective.

 

Everyone is assuming that the label PQ(interior page paper quality) is the same as the cover PQ. That is a horrible assumption to make. I have seen several comics that came out of CGC slabs that have poor cover PQ, yet the label listed the interior PQ as white, or OW/W, or OW. I have not seen as many books as I'm sure the majority of big members here, so why is this such an unspoken subject?

 

For the cost of these books, for long term keepers, I would think everyone would take them out of the slabs to see the actual total book PQ, the condition of the cover paper, not just the CGC label which doesn't accurately convey what the cover paper is.

 

I'd love to bust my AF15 out and see all the characteristics about it, inside and outside. But I don't have the balls.

 

I figure the only people to see my book were the OO (who died in the car crash in '73), his parents (maybe), HA, and CGC.

 

 

Wonder how much it was worth back in '73

 

For what it's worth, according to the 1973 Overstreet Guide (3rd edition), I'm thinking in the ballpark of 22.50.

 

Here was the breakdown: Good 15.00 / Fine 20.00 / Mint 25.00.

[Buzzetta]

I did bust out a 6.0, a 7.0 and a 7.5 but that's back when they were 5 figure books.

 

A nice 8.0 (which is what I now own) could potentially push six figures, making my fingers nervously tremble upon handling.

 

I would be very nervous cracking the 6.0 I picked up last month. There is a big difference between a 5.5 and a 6.0. To me, I do not think it is worth the risk in cracking and resubmitting and hoping for a higher grade. On a $1000 book, maybe. On a 5 figure book? I don't think I can risk something like that.

[roulette44]

I've opened up several AF15s, i just love huffing them!

 

I think Rick has a point about the (atleast two) folks bidding up the last 7.0 copy to $53K, but the reason I don't fully subscribe to the theory is that the CConnect book had serious chipping - would have a hard time believing it was upgrade eligible......

 

But, as my old boss used to say (and one of my favorite expressions) .... "opinions are like azzholes...everybody's got one!"

 

[G.A.tor]

I've opened up several AF15s, i just love huffing them!

 

I think Rick has a point about the (atleast two) folks bidding up the last 7.0 copy to $53K, but the reason I don't fully subscribe to the theory is that the CConnect book had serious chipping - would have a hard time believing it was upgrade eligible......

 

But, as my old boss used to say (and one of my favorite expressions) .... "opinions are like azzholes...everybody's got one!"

 

if one called for notes I was told there were multiple non color breaking issues that were pressable. Worth half a point ? I don't know but obviously imo some bidders must have Otherwise why bid that much on a 7.0 when at least 2 other copies that in theory had as nice if not nicer eye appeal were both available in the low 40s (in fact both are still available in the low 40s today I believe) (thumbs u

[roulette44]

again, just my opinion, but 100 pressable defects on a book chipped from top to bottom and already a 7.0, offer little upside room.

 

I believe the buyer of that AF15 was not intending on CPR'ing the book, neither was the underbidder.

[Junkdrawer]

I know this won't sit so well with some but I have had a previous cr/ow book pressed and regraded and it was given W. and like peewee I have had W books pressed and regraded and gotten one cr/ow. So it is subjective and pq can and will change from time to time.

 

My point is ow or better is desirable over cr/ow when it comes to sa but I rarely see any pricing diff or premiums on ow or ow/w or w

 

The market will see a WP book superior over a lower PQ book and will value it a bit more. Just as a 9.2 will be price higher than a 9.0. The FMV will be price on the label and the overall structure and appeal of the book. There are books that I've got graded should deserve the WP designation and some I do not think garner the WP designation...and certain books a bit over graded or under graded. That's why folks regrade their books to attain a higher assign grade, I do agree, PQ from OW/W could be W one day and W can be OW/W. I agree, a SA book in CRM/OW loose appeal and some pool of buyers, but a OW/W or a WP more appealing. Nonetheless, certain superior WP book will represent better than other WP book.

 

Why does anyone, or everyone, blather on about the CGC label designation about PQ. In my opinion it is almost useless, useful but almost useless.

 

The cover paper quality is 100 times more important than the interior pages PQ. CGC is describing their opinion of the interior pages. It appears to me that the cover paper quality is only judged by CGC as a factor in the overall grade of the book. There are examples available of books with labels showing OW/W pages, yet the grade is low due to poor cover paper quality.

 

It should not be a guessing game for us to figure out what the cover paper is like by the CGC grade. If that is what they are doing, I think that is stupid, it's an injustice to buyers and collectors who attempt to decide whether a book will last a long time for the future, and for resale.

 

My point is that I have no desire to own a brittle cover paper book, or anything with cover PQ that you might describe with any other fragile adjective.

 

Everyone is assuming that the label PQ(interior page paper quality) is the same as the cover PQ. That is a horrible assumption to make. I have seen several comics that came out of CGC slabs that have poor cover PQ, yet the label listed the interior PQ as white, or OW/W, or OW. I have not seen as many books as I'm sure the majority of big members here, so why is this such an unspoken subject?

 

For the cost of these books, for long term keepers, I would think everyone would take them out of the slabs to see the actual total book PQ, the condition of the cover paper, not just the CGC label which doesn't accurately convey what the cover paper is.

 

I'd love to bust my AF15 out and see all the characteristics about it, inside and outside. But I don't have the balls.

 

I figure the only people to see my book were the OO (who died in the car crash in '73), his parents (maybe), HA, and CGC.

 

 

Wonder how much it was worth back in '73

 

For what it's worth, according to the 1973 Overstreet Guide (3rd edition), I'm thinking in the ballpark of 22.50.

 

Here was the breakdown: Good 15.00 / Fine 20.00 / Mint 25.00.

Back in 73', even if you had $22.50, where would you find an 11 yr old back issue comic book?

[roulette44]

Back in 73', even if you had $22.50, where would you find an 11 yr old back issue comic book?

 

Great point.

[Sqeggs]

I know this won't sit so well with some but I have had a previous cr/ow book pressed and regraded and it was given W. and like peewee I have had W books pressed and regraded and gotten one cr/ow. So it is subjective and pq can and will change from time to time.

 

My point is ow or better is desirable over cr/ow when it comes to sa but I rarely see any pricing diff or premiums on ow or ow/w or w

 

The market will see a WP book superior over a lower PQ book and will value it a bit more. Just as a 9.2 will be price higher than a 9.0. The FMV will be price on the label and the overall structure and appeal of the book. There are books that I've got graded should deserve the WP designation and some I do not think garner the WP designation...and certain books a bit over graded or under graded. That's why folks regrade their books to attain a higher assign grade, I do agree, PQ from OW/W could be W one day and W can be OW/W. I agree, a SA book in CRM/OW loose appeal and some pool of buyers, but a OW/W or a WP more appealing. Nonetheless, certain superior WP book will represent better than other WP book.

 

Why does anyone, or everyone, blather on about the CGC label designation about PQ. In my opinion it is almost useless, useful but almost useless.

 

The cover paper quality is 100 times more important than the interior pages PQ. CGC is describing their opinion of the interior pages. It appears to me that the cover paper quality is only judged by CGC as a factor in the overall grade of the book. There are examples available of books with labels showing OW/W pages, yet the grade is low due to poor cover paper quality.

 

It should not be a guessing game for us to figure out what the cover paper is like by the CGC grade. If that is what they are doing, I think that is stupid, it's an injustice to buyers and collectors who attempt to decide whether a book will last a long time for the future, and for resale.

 

My point is that I have no desire to own a brittle cover paper book, or anything with cover PQ that you might describe with any other fragile adjective.

 

Everyone is assuming that the label PQ(interior page paper quality) is the same as the cover PQ. That is a horrible assumption to make. I have seen several comics that came out of CGC slabs that have poor cover PQ, yet the label listed the interior PQ as white, or OW/W, or OW. I have not seen as many books as I'm sure the majority of big members here, so why is this such an unspoken subject?

 

For the cost of these books, for long term keepers, I would think everyone would take them out of the slabs to see the actual total book PQ, the condition of the cover paper, not just the CGC label which doesn't accurately convey what the cover paper is.

 

I'd love to bust my AF15 out and see all the characteristics about it, inside and outside. But I don't have the balls.

 

I figure the only people to see my book were the OO (who died in the car crash in '73), his parents (maybe), HA, and CGC.

 

 

Wonder how much it was worth back in '73

 

For what it's worth, according to the 1973 Overstreet Guide (3rd edition), I'm thinking in the ballpark of 22.50.

 

Here was the breakdown: Good 15.00 / Fine 20.00 / Mint 25.00.

Back in 73', even if you had $22.50, where would you find an 11 yr old back issue comic book?

 

A lot of mail order dealers with extensive back lists were going strong by 1973.

[G.A.tor]

again, just my opinion, but 100 pressable defects on a book chipped from top to bottom and already a 7.0, offer little upside room.

 

I believe the buyer of that AF15 was not intending on CPR'ing the book, neither was the underbidder.

I find it implausible that 2 potential af15 buyers would both be uneducated in the matter. Most 50k spenders do their due diligence

2 assume both did not is illogical, so logic dictates potential motive (thumbs u

[cloudofwit]

Back in 73', even if you had $22.50, where would you find an 11 yr old back issue comic book?

 

Great point.

 

I have memories of going to a used book store called the Book Gallery in Gainesville, FL between 1974 and 1976 (age 7-9) and picking up comics. I definitely don't remember the extent of their back issues until later, but I feel sure they had the goods.

 

I just flipped through the '73 Guide and there's a section about conventions spanning 1964-1972. Robert Bell advertised on the back cover: "Over 100,000 comics in stock, send for free list"; one dollar for a list from Passaic Book Center (Passiac, New Jersey), "thousands of comics from the Golden Age to the present"; 60 cents for a giant catalogue, 1900-1973, Howard Rogofsky (Flushing, NY); and there's about 20 pages of ads in the back of the Guide. However, it is interesting to note there are a TON less ads than now--but this was only Overstreet's third edition and the hobby was in its infancy.

 

So I guess even though there were local comic shops, they hadn't (I don't think) taken off yet in a big way, but there were tons of fanzines, definitely some conventions, and a decent number of mail order options.

[roulette44]

again, just my opinion, but 100 pressable defects on a book chipped from top to bottom and already a 7.0, offer little upside room.

 

I believe the buyer of that AF15 was not intending on CPR'ing the book, neither was the underbidder.

I find it implausible that 2 potential af15 buyers would both be uneducated in the matter. Most 50k spenders do their due diligence

2 assume both did not is illogical, so logic dictates potential motive (thumbs u

 

You're certainly entitled to your opinion. I have mine, too.

[G.A.tor]

Agreed. We are all entitled to our opinions. That said opinions are generally supported to some extent. I believe I have presented my support. What's yours

[jimjum12]

I know this won't sit so well with some but I have had a previous cr/ow book pressed and regraded and it was given W. and like peewee I have had W books pressed and regraded and gotten one cr/ow. So it is subjective and pq can and will change from time to time.

 

My point is ow or better is desirable over cr/ow when it comes to sa but I rarely see any pricing diff or premiums on ow or ow/w or w

 

The market will see a WP book superior over a lower PQ book and will value it a bit more. Just as a 9.2 will be price higher than a 9.0. The FMV will be price on the label and the overall structure and appeal of the book. There are books that I've got graded should deserve the WP designation and some I do not think garner the WP designation...and certain books a bit over graded or under graded. That's why folks regrade their books to attain a higher assign grade, I do agree, PQ from OW/W could be W one day and W can be OW/W. I agree, a SA book in CRM/OW loose appeal and some pool of buyers, but a OW/W or a WP more appealing. Nonetheless, certain superior WP book will represent better than other WP book.

 

Why does anyone, or everyone, blather on about the CGC label designation about PQ. In my opinion it is almost useless, useful but almost useless.

 

The cover paper quality is 100 times more important than the interior pages PQ. CGC is describing their opinion of the interior pages. It appears to me that the cover paper quality is only judged by CGC as a factor in the overall grade of the book. There are examples available of books with labels showing OW/W pages, yet the grade is low due to poor cover paper quality.

 

It should not be a guessing game for us to figure out what the cover paper is like by the CGC grade. If that is what they are doing, I think that is stupid, it's an injustice to buyers and collectors who attempt to decide whether a book will last a long time for the future, and for resale.

 

My point is that I have no desire to own a brittle cover paper book, or anything with cover PQ that you might describe with any other fragile adjective.

 

Everyone is assuming that the label PQ(interior page paper quality) is the same as the cover PQ. That is a horrible assumption to make. I have seen several comics that came out of CGC slabs that have poor cover PQ, yet the label listed the interior PQ as white, or OW/W, or OW. I have not seen as many books as I'm sure the majority of big members here, so why is this such an unspoken subject?

 

For the cost of these books, for long term keepers, I would think everyone would take them out of the slabs to see the actual total book PQ, the condition of the cover paper, not just the CGC label which doesn't accurately convey what the cover paper is.

 

I'd love to bust my AF15 out and see all the characteristics about it, inside and outside. But I don't have the balls.

 

I figure the only people to see my book were the OO (who died in the car crash in '73), his parents (maybe), HA, and CGC.

 

 

Wonder how much it was worth back in '73

 

For what it's worth, according to the 1973 Overstreet Guide (3rd edition), I'm thinking in the ballpark of 22.50.

 

Here was the breakdown: Good 15.00 / Fine 20.00 / Mint 25.00.

Back in 73', even if you had $22.50, where would you find an 11 yr old back issue comic book?

 

A lot of mail order dealers with extensive back lists were going strong by 1973.

 

....and they had no problem getting the Lion's share of my paper route money. We were getting a couple shows a year back then......picked up a NM copy of FF 5 for 20 bucks.......and felt GUILTY about it GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[roulette44]

I spoke with the underbidder.

[G.A.tor]

I spoke with the underbidder.

That would certainly trump any evidence i could provide as i know neither

Hopefully they made offer on your copy

[roulette44]

[Peter Loves Gwen]

Back in 73', even if you had $22.50, where would you find an 11 yr old back issue comic book?

 

Great point.

 

I was hunting for older ASM in 1974, and as a kid I only thought of the ads in the comics themselves. I wrote to as few of them, and each only advertised their books by "VG or better" in catalogs.

 

I didn't know any better, now I would have contacted more people and asked specifically about high grade copies. I think making a connection with a dealer back then was the only way to find the good HG books. The retail level was low grade books, or whatever came in that they didn't save for private customers or themselves. So I never found the really HG stuff at any convention or store I went to.

 

I did discover that Bob Overstreet still had new PG's available from 1972 on. Bob took my first order over the phone, for soft bound new copies of #2-8. I wish then I had chosen the hard bound copies, since those were harder to get later, and you can look at those more.

[fantastic_four]

If mine could only be worth half as yours.

 

I think your 7.5 copy is worth about half as mine or close .. If a 7.0 sold for $53k, there's a good chance a 7.5 could sell for $75k.

 

Three 7.5s sold within the last month all in the mid-40s with one going for the low 50s. Some of these estimates are really high based upon that one anomalous 7.0 sale.

[peewee22]

If mine could only be worth half as yours.

 

I think your 7.5 copy is worth about half as mine or close .. If a 7.0 sold for $53k, there's a good chance a 7.5 could sell for $75k.

 

Three 7.5s sold within the last month all in the mid-40s with one going for the low 50s. Some of these estimates are really high based upon that one anomalous 7.0 sale.

 

This is new news to me.