• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Batman #1, which one would you have?

Batman #1  

54 members have voted

  1. 1. Batman #1

    • 1998
    • 1996
    • 1997


26 posts in this topic

I know it's hard to do, but try, just for a minute. Try to ignore the personal financial gain of owning this book. Lets just say it's your, and yours for keeps. Now, secondly, lets forget the purple label, forget it ever existed.

 

Now look at the following links in turn:

 

Batman #1 - 1.5

Batman #1 - 8.0

Batman #1 - 8.5

 

Now, which one of these comics (not the slabs) would you most like in your collection (you HAVE to look at the links first).

 

 

 

 

After you have thought about it and given your answer. Now answer this. Judging on the current auction price,

is the 1.5 overpriced?

is the 8.0 overpriced?

and is the 8.5 underpriced?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 1.5 looks like it got run over by a car. The 8.5 looks a little too weirdly bright. Even outside of a slab I would wonder about that one.

 

The 8.0 is a very nice looking book. If I won the lottery tomorrow, I'd bid up to the NM price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd go with none of them. The 1.5 got run over by a truck and it backed up The blue lable 8.0 looks oddly tired or maybe its just the scan. The restored copy had a lot of work done and has that artifical restored look. Batman 1 is over priced anyways and there are a ton of them out there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 8.5 Restored book. But then I happily collect restored copies-- great values, great eye appeal. I hear what folks are saying about the too-yellow color of the 8.5, but do you remember the oversized Famous First Edition reprint of the 1970s? I think this is exactly the brightness you would see in the original book from 1940.

 

So, to answer your other questions...

- the 1.5 is overpriced

- the 8.0 is overpriced

- the 8.5-R is underpriced.

 

But then again, what do those terms mean in the context of an auction? The price is the price when you have a half-dozen people bidding on the book. Once again, the PLOD represents one of the best values out there, assuming you're primarily interested in collecting instead of flipping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of you say the Batman #1 CGC 8.5 looks unnaturally bright and looks weird, but I have a feeling that's what they DID look like 63 years ago and I'd bet dollars to dounuts and pickles to nickles that the Mile High copy looks just as "unnatural" as that restored 8.5 copy. Something to think about! 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I'd take that 8.5 hands down.

 

Timely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of you say the Batman #1 CGC 8.5 looks unnaturally bright and looks weird, but I have a feeling that's what they DID look like 63 years ago and I'd bet dollars to dounuts and pickles to nickles that the Mile High copy looks just as "unnatural" as that restored 8.5 copy. Something to think about! 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I'd take that 8.5 hands down.

 

Timely

 

Right-o. Let's find a scan of the Famous First Edition reprint and compare the yellows to the restored Heritage book (unless anyone here has the Church Bat #1 lying around!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forget the price for a minute... I thought the original question was "ignoring the label and the price, which would you rather own?"

 

I'd take the PLOD 8.5 in a heartbeat. Why? Because the unrestored VF 8.0 copy looks to be no better than a FN+ 6.5 from where I sit. Come on - between the foxing, the blunted corners, the "marvel chipping" and the overall grunginess and lack of gloss, there's no WAY this is an 8.0 ! If it weren't a GA key, it would have fetched a FN/FN+, IMO.

 

Meanwhile, the PLOD 8.5 looks, if anything, slightly better, and certainly prettier by far. Has it been cleaned? Perhaps. I agree with Timely and ComicManKev that the color and brightness look about right for a very well-preserved copy. But even if it's been cleaned, that's a rather small nit to be picking with a book that has plenty of other resto going on... It doesn't look suspiciously bright and clean to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites