Bone #1 9.8 on ComicLink

[DrWatson]

 

Come to Boston and bring my favorite hick with you and then we will talk about fun

We talked about it, but it just isn't feasible given the time frame.

[DocGo]

:cry:

 

Put me on your waiting list Nik...pretty please?

[supapimp]

dude, i was just in boston during the thunderstorms, i hated that city. :shrug: i did go see fenway park though. (thumbs u

[SolitaireOne]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

Must be, on the 2nd Print the Bone logo is Green.

 

$8K, not likely... are HG 2nd Prints worth anything?

 

[brasseye]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

Must be, on the 2nd Print the Bone logo is Green.

 

$8K, not likely... are HG 2nd Prints worth anything?

 

 

Now the cat is amongst the pidgeons.... can regular contributor on the Bone appreciation thread jump on in here...Doc

[The Question?]

 

 

People collect this title?...really?

[comicwiz]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

 

If it isn't designated on the label, that means it is a first printing. CGC only designates later printings, variants, and things like that.

 

I understand the reasoning behind it, but would it really be that hard to put first edition on the label? People like to see it, makes them feel all safe and happy.

 

And regarding the price, will it sell for that ? Doubtful, but why not ask insane money and see if someone bites? If listed for much less and sold right away the seller would kick themselves.

 

 

Sometimes second printings don't come out until well after the initial printing was released. In that case, CGC will have graded dozens of copies of a particular book without knowing that a second printing is going to exist, so the label on those copies won't have any notation of what printing the book is. If they were to start putting "first printing" on the labels of first printings after they realized a second printing was being released, you'd have a bunch of first printing books with "first printing" on them and a bunch without, and then people would complain about that.

 

Of all the excuses I've heard, this the lamest. Sorry Scott, I don't mean to antagonize you on this point, but this easily could be overcome by making it a referenced condition (ie. if its referenced as a first print in any published guide, then it should defnitely denote it on the label). The issue of it still being in circulation is not subject to the same market scrutiny and value impact of a well established back issue book with a premium attached to that printing notation.

 

If the collector is that intent on slabbing a book within the first few weeks of it being released, then they should make sure its at least refereneced in the OSPG guide before they do, or take a chance selling it without the notation. This said, CGC could base this convention on ad hoc principles with new releases as publishers generally make the notation on the inside cover or the second page. The hype factor on a new release shouldn't even be put into the same discussion with the kind of questions it brings up when a person looks at a slabbed book that's been referenced for years in print guides and among collectors, and can't figure out why it makes no mention on the label. In the case of a first printing copy that is not recognizable by a cover tell, the CGC case ought to make mention as it does and will impede on its ability to command a fair market value.

[MrBedrock]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

 

If it isn't designated on the label, that means it is a first printing. CGC only designates later printings, variants, and things like that.

 

I understand the reasoning behind it, but would it really be that hard to put first edition on the label? People like to see it, makes them feel all safe and happy.

 

And regarding the price, will it sell for that ? Doubtful, but why not ask insane money and see if someone bites? If listed for much less and sold right away the seller would kick themselves.

 

 

Sometimes second printings don't come out until well after the initial printing was released. In that case, CGC will have graded dozens of copies of a particular book without knowing that a second printing is going to exist, so the label on those copies won't have any notation of what printing the book is. If they were to start putting "first printing" on the labels of first printings after they realized a second printing was being released, you'd have a bunch of first printing books with "first printing" on them and a bunch without, and then people would complain about that.

 

Of all the excuses I've heard, this the lamest. Sorry Scott, I don't mean to antagonize you on this point, but this easily could be overcome by making it a referenced condition (ie. if its referenced as a first print in any published guide, then it should defnitely denote it on the label). The issue of it still being in circulation is not subject to the same market scrutiny and value impact of a well established back issue book with a premium attached to that printing notation.

 

If the collector is that intent on slabbing a book within the first few weeks of it being released, then they should make sure its at least refereneced in the OSPG guide before they do, or take a chance selling it without the notation. This said, CGC could base this convention on ad hoc principles with new releases as publishers generally make the notation on the inside cover or the second page. The hype factor on a new release shouldn't even be put into the same discussion with the kind of questions it brings up when a person looks at a slabbed book that's been referenced for years in print guides and among collectors, and can't figure out why it makes no mention on the label. In the case of a first printing copy that is not recognizable by a cover tell, the CGC case ought to make mention as it does and will impede on its ability to command a fair market value.

I think you are missing Scott's point. By your reasoning, every new comic slabbed should have "first print" on the label. Every new comic published has the potential of having a second print. CGC shouldn't have to predict whether or not someone decides to have a comic graded in the first week of release or years later.

[mschmidt]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

Must be, on the 2nd Print the Bone logo is Green.

 

$8K, not likely... are HG 2nd Prints worth anything?

 

 

Now the cat is amongst the pidgeons.... can regular contributor on the Bone appreciation thread jump on in here...Doc

 

Nope - HG 2nd Print aren't really worth anything special as they're widely available from pretty much all the large comic book retailers (Lone Star, Mile High, etc).

[comicwiz]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

 

If it isn't designated on the label, that means it is a first printing. CGC only designates later printings, variants, and things like that.

 

I understand the reasoning behind it, but would it really be that hard to put first edition on the label? People like to see it, makes them feel all safe and happy.

 

And regarding the price, will it sell for that ? Doubtful, but why not ask insane money and see if someone bites? If listed for much less and sold right away the seller would kick themselves.

 

 

Sometimes second printings don't come out until well after the initial printing was released. In that case, CGC will have graded dozens of copies of a particular book without knowing that a second printing is going to exist, so the label on those copies won't have any notation of what printing the book is. If they were to start putting "first printing" on the labels of first printings after they realized a second printing was being released, you'd have a bunch of first printing books with "first printing" on them and a bunch without, and then people would complain about that.

 

Of all the excuses I've heard, this the lamest. Sorry Scott, I don't mean to antagonize you on this point, but this easily could be overcome by making it a referenced condition (ie. if its referenced as a first print in any published guide, then it should defnitely denote it on the label). The issue of it still being in circulation is not subject to the same market scrutiny and value impact of a well established back issue book with a premium attached to that printing notation.

 

If the collector is that intent on slabbing a book within the first few weeks of it being released, then they should make sure its at least refereneced in the OSPG guide before they do, or take a chance selling it without the notation. This said, CGC could base this convention on ad hoc principles with new releases as publishers generally make the notation on the inside cover or the second page. The hype factor on a new release shouldn't even be put into the same discussion with the kind of questions it brings up when a person looks at a slabbed book that's been referenced for years in print guides and among collectors, and can't figure out why it makes no mention on the label. In the case of a first printing copy that is not recognizable by a cover tell, the CGC case ought to make mention as it does and will impede on its ability to command a fair market value.

I think you are missing Scott's point. By your reasoning, every new comic slabbed should have "first print" on the label. Every new comic published has the potential of having a second print. CGC shouldn't have to predict whether or not someone decides to have a comic graded in the first week of release or years later.

 

I know the reasoning very well - this is a beaten horse Bedrock. Its a convenient argument that overlooks the fundamental fact that there are certain comics in our hobby which command a significantly higher premium for first prints. As a selling tool, if I have to explain to a buyer that CGC doesn't bother noting first print on the label because then they would have to label every comic, its a disconnect from the reality that was taught to them either through a guide or uniform acceptance among a community of collectors. If its a book whose printing cannot be determined by its covers, the lack of notation will eventually drag out the scenario of cracking out the book from the slab to confirm the print, making the selling tool element of 3rd-party grading pointless. If OS used CGC's line of reasoning, then we would never know a Dark Knight first print should be priced differently from a second print.

[VintageComics]

With CGC it is simply assumed to be a 1st print unless otherwise stated, right?

 

That seems like a decent policy.

 

R.

 

 

[MrBedrock]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

 

If it isn't designated on the label, that means it is a first printing. CGC only designates later printings, variants, and things like that.

 

I understand the reasoning behind it, but would it really be that hard to put first edition on the label? People like to see it, makes them feel all safe and happy.

 

And regarding the price, will it sell for that ? Doubtful, but why not ask insane money and see if someone bites? If listed for much less and sold right away the seller would kick themselves.

 

 

Sometimes second printings don't come out until well after the initial printing was released. In that case, CGC will have graded dozens of copies of a particular book without knowing that a second printing is going to exist, so the label on those copies won't have any notation of what printing the book is. If they were to start putting "first printing" on the labels of first printings after they realized a second printing was being released, you'd have a bunch of first printing books with "first printing" on them and a bunch without, and then people would complain about that.

 

Of all the excuses I've heard, this the lamest. Sorry Scott, I don't mean to antagonize you on this point, but this easily could be overcome by making it a referenced condition (ie. if its referenced as a first print in any published guide, then it should defnitely denote it on the label). The issue of it still being in circulation is not subject to the same market scrutiny and value impact of a well established back issue book with a premium attached to that printing notation.

 

If the collector is that intent on slabbing a book within the first few weeks of it being released, then they should make sure its at least refereneced in the OSPG guide before they do, or take a chance selling it without the notation. This said, CGC could base this convention on ad hoc principles with new releases as publishers generally make the notation on the inside cover or the second page. The hype factor on a new release shouldn't even be put into the same discussion with the kind of questions it brings up when a person looks at a slabbed book that's been referenced for years in print guides and among collectors, and can't figure out why it makes no mention on the label. In the case of a first printing copy that is not recognizable by a cover tell, the CGC case ought to make mention as it does and will impede on its ability to command a fair market value.

I think you are missing Scott's point. By your reasoning, every new comic slabbed should have "first print" on the label. Every new comic published has the potential of having a second print. CGC shouldn't have to predict whether or not someone decides to have a comic graded in the first week of release or years later.

 

I know the reasoning very well - this is a beaten horse Bedrock. Its a convenient argument that overlooks the fundamental fact that there are certain comics in our hobby which command a significantly higher premium for first prints. As a selling tool, if I have to explain to a buyer that CGC doesn't bother noting first print on the label because then they would have to label every comic, its a disconnect from the reality that was taught to them either through a guide or uniform acceptance among a community of collectors. If its a book whose printing cannot be determined by its covers, the lack of notation will eventually drag out the scenario of cracking out the book from the slab to confirm the print, making the selling tool element of 3rd-party grading pointless. If OS used CGC's line of reasoning, then we would never know a Dark Knight first print should be priced differently from a second print.

Well, that Amazing Fantasy 15 you were inquiring about doesn't say first print on it. If Marvel decides to go back to print on it, should I have it reslabbed? I know that is a reach, but if Marvel or DC goes back to print on one of last year's books should all of those folks who have already had a first print graded have their books reslabbed or should folks just be aware that CGC will note the later printing only?

[comicwiz]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

 

If it isn't designated on the label, that means it is a first printing. CGC only designates later printings, variants, and things like that.

 

I understand the reasoning behind it, but would it really be that hard to put first edition on the label? People like to see it, makes them feel all safe and happy.

 

And regarding the price, will it sell for that ? Doubtful, but why not ask insane money and see if someone bites? If listed for much less and sold right away the seller would kick themselves.

 

 

Sometimes second printings don't come out until well after the initial printing was released. In that case, CGC will have graded dozens of copies of a particular book without knowing that a second printing is going to exist, so the label on those copies won't have any notation of what printing the book is. If they were to start putting "first printing" on the labels of first printings after they realized a second printing was being released, you'd have a bunch of first printing books with "first printing" on them and a bunch without, and then people would complain about that.

 

Of all the excuses I've heard, this the lamest. Sorry Scott, I don't mean to antagonize you on this point, but this easily could be overcome by making it a referenced condition (ie. if its referenced as a first print in any published guide, then it should defnitely denote it on the label). The issue of it still being in circulation is not subject to the same market scrutiny and value impact of a well established back issue book with a premium attached to that printing notation.

 

If the collector is that intent on slabbing a book within the first few weeks of it being released, then they should make sure its at least refereneced in the OSPG guide before they do, or take a chance selling it without the notation. This said, CGC could base this convention on ad hoc principles with new releases as publishers generally make the notation on the inside cover or the second page. The hype factor on a new release shouldn't even be put into the same discussion with the kind of questions it brings up when a person looks at a slabbed book that's been referenced for years in print guides and among collectors, and can't figure out why it makes no mention on the label. In the case of a first printing copy that is not recognizable by a cover tell, the CGC case ought to make mention as it does and will impede on its ability to command a fair market value.

I think you are missing Scott's point. By your reasoning, every new comic slabbed should have "first print" on the label. Every new comic published has the potential of having a second print. CGC shouldn't have to predict whether or not someone decides to have a comic graded in the first week of release or years later.

 

I know the reasoning very well - this is a beaten horse Bedrock. Its a convenient argument that overlooks the fundamental fact that there are certain comics in our hobby which command a significantly higher premium for first prints. As a selling tool, if I have to explain to a buyer that CGC doesn't bother noting first print on the label because then they would have to label every comic, its a disconnect from the reality that was taught to them either through a guide or uniform acceptance among a community of collectors. If its a book whose printing cannot be determined by its covers, the lack of notation will eventually drag out the scenario of cracking out the book from the slab to confirm the print, making the selling tool element of 3rd-party grading pointless. If OS used CGC's line of reasoning, then we would never know a Dark Knight first print should be priced differently from a second print.

Well, that Amazing Fantasy 15 you were inquiring about doesn't say first print on it. If Marvel decides to go back to print on it, should I have it reslabbed? I know that is a reach, but if Marvel or DC goes back to print on one of last year's books should all of those folks who have already had a first print graded have their books reslabbed or should folks just be aware that CGC will note the later printing only?

 

It's a reach because there is no reference to a later printing for AF 15 anywhere. As I see, if the reference exists, it should be noted.

[comicwiz]

With CGC it is simply assumed to be a 1st print unless otherwise stated, right?

 

That seems like a decent policy.

 

R.

 

 

It is what it is Roy. I do know enough collectors that resigned to accepting it for what it is, but it doesn't mean that it serves the collecting community well, and IMO it does very little to educate new entrants, and carry forward what I consider to be important work that went into determining variations in print by publishers outside of the mainstream.

[VintageComics]

With CGC it is simply assumed to be a 1st print unless otherwise stated, right?

 

That seems like a decent policy.

 

R.

 

 

It is what it is Roy. I do know enough collectors that resigned to accepting it for what it is, but it doesn't mean that it serves the collecting community well, and IMO it does very little to educate new entrants, and carry forward what I consider to be important work that went into determining variations in print by publishers outside of the mainstream.

 

Then maybe you should talk to CGC about placing this policy in print (such as on their website or on the back of their holder) to give your buyers confidence.

 

That seems like the best solution.

 

R.

 

 

[comicwiz]

With CGC it is simply assumed to be a 1st print unless otherwise stated, right?

 

That seems like a decent policy.

 

R.

 

 

It is what it is Roy. I do know enough collectors that resigned to accepting it for what it is, but it doesn't mean that it serves the collecting community well, and IMO it does very little to educate new entrants, and carry forward what I consider to be important work that went into determining variations in print by publishers outside of the mainstream.

 

Then maybe you should talk to CGC about placing this policy in print (such as on their website or on the back of their holder) to give your buyers confidence.

 

That seems like the best solution.

 

R.

 

 

I've tried my friend, as some members who replied in this post might attest - thus my beaten horse reference.

[FFB]

With CGC it is simply assumed to be a 1st print unless otherwise stated, right?

 

That seems like a decent policy.

 

R.

 

 

It is what it is Roy. I do know enough collectors that resigned to accepting it for what it is, but it doesn't mean that it serves the collecting community well, and IMO it does very little to educate new entrants, and carry forward what I consider to be important work that went into determining variations in print by publishers outside of the mainstream.

 

Then maybe you should talk to CGC about placing this policy in print (such as on their website or on the back of their holder) to give your buyers confidence.

 

That seems like the best solution.

 

R.

 

 

Joseph went around and around with CGC on this issue regarding underground comix a few years ago. Apparently it makes more of a difference in the UG arena than in non-UG comics. I don't agree with Joseph on this issue, but I do understand where he's coming from.

[General Zod]

And regarding the price, will it sell for that ? Doubtful, but why not ask insane money and see if someone bites? If listed for much less and sold right away the seller would kick themselves.

 

 

I can't be the only one who would automatically assume that seller is bananas and look for a better deal elsewhere? It's kind of like looking at a Dodge Neon on a car dealership lot with a $50,000 sign on it.

 

Not defending the price, but this is a poor analogy given that there is only one 9.8 for a key book that is notoriously hard to find in high grade (not to mention unsigned).

 

All analogies require a little suspension of belief to work. My point is that a Dodge Neon does not justify such a tag in the year 2008. And Bone #1 clearly does not justify $12K in the year 2008. This is the point of my analogy.

[DocGo]

I hope it is a 1st printing for that kind of loot. Never designated on the Cgc label.

Must be, on the 2nd Print the Bone logo is Green.

 

$8K, not likely... are HG 2nd Prints worth anything?

 

 

Not really. I've only seen one of the CGC'd later printings up for sale and it was a 9.2Q (7th printing I believe, which was bought for $10 I think). The only difference between the Cartoon Books printings is the color of the logo so there's not a lot of desire to collect them.

 

However, I'm sure 9.8s of the Image reprints (#1-20) could bring in a little cash. All of them had different covers than the CB original printings.

[COI]

Boy, that would be a real pisser.

 

Yes, yes it would be. Think of all the other key books you could buy in decent shape for that kind of scratch.

 

FF #1

Hulk #1

IM #1 in 9.8 and a few K's left over

JIM #83

TOS #39

Daredevil #1

 

Just to name a few.

 

Why the heck is an IM #1 in 9.8 listed with those other books? Just asking...

 

Anyway, crazy asking price aside, I never understood this kind of argument. Not everyone wants the books you've listed(especially IM 1 in 9.8) and most of the outside world would think spending this kind of money on any comic book(s), even if it's the sum of your entire collection, is .