Pedigrees... are they really worth the cash

[PovertyRow]

The ting about Pedigree books is the same thing as Provenance in the antiques world.

 

Thing is that in the antiques world there are singular items whose Provenance, or ownership, can be traced back for years or centuries. Take, for example, a chair that was owned by George Washington and has the provenance to back it up. The provenance can take many forms: sketches, letters, ultimately early photographs that also link back to the sketches and letters etc. This lays the foundation for a Provenance that shows George Washington indeed owned that chair.

 

Basically Provenance tries to show a history back to either an original owner or an important owner (That chair owned by George Washington may have been a piece of junk from 50 years before he was born but because he owned it the price is hugely escalated).

 

Now onto comic books. In the world of antiques we can go back many centuries to show a provenance. But comic books are so new relatively speaking, that their provenance basically ends with an original owner living and collecting in the 40's or later (that"40's" reflecting the later dates of her/his books - I know of no Pedigree that ends in the 30's. If so please let me know!)

 

Anyway, Mark Zaid's talk is fairly accurate. The Original Owner is really key in a Pedigree. His assessment of the higher grade, the number of keys etc. is accurate. But his including publishers is, to my mind, off. You may ask "Why, Pov?"

 

Why, Pov? Well, take for example, the Bill ("William") Gaines file copies. These were not really collected by a Comic Book Collector. The Gaines books were taken by the publisher, Bill Gaines, before they hit the newsstand. Nor could they be considered "File Copies". (More on that in a bit). Basically, Bill Gaines snagged several copies of many of the EC issues from the printer, wrapped them up, put them in a closet and they were left there in remarkable condition. But was Gaines a real comic book collector? I do not think so. So do these fall under Pedigree? I do not think so. I think these books (I know of no other set of books like this that was taken pre-distribution from a printer, wrapped and stored and eventually re-discovered). To me the Gaines copies are a notch above a "Pedigree" as they did not go through the normal distribution channels a normal Pedigree would have.)

 

Now we have "File Copies". Steve Borock and I have had many interesting chats about this concept. To me, a "File Copy" is a copy of a book retained in the publisher’s files for certain uses. The so called "Pay Copies" of books could be considered true file copies. As would books retained by the publisher in their own archives for reference purposes: for example, to retain continuity in a story line from a previously published issue.

 

But CGC has also labeled various warehouse finds as "file copies" which is incorrect (and the source of my chats with SB). These are warehouse finds of multiple copies of books. Harvey immediately comes to mind. These were NOT books retained by the publisher as reference material. To me, a File Copy means a Reference Copy. These were just surplus books that never got distributed. I have to wonder if the publisher was even aware of them/

 

But back to Pedigrees. Are they worth more? To my mind, yes. If one is a collector who appreciates the concept of Provenance. Otherwise, there are many collectors out there who would gladly pay a fair amount less for the same book in the same condition that was not Pedigreed. You have to decide for yourself what is worth what.

 

 

 

[thehumantorch]

I would be more interested in cheaper Silver or Bronze age pedigrees to start with. Those are all Golden Age, right?

 

You might want to look at the Northland pedigree. They seem to be fairly new on the market and relatively cheap compared to Pacific Coast or White Mountain.

[Benchwarmer-migration]

Northland. Thanks, that's exactly the info I was hoping for.

 

I'll take a look at them. (thumbs u

 

 

 

[143ksk]

You could also look at the Don Rosa books (thumbs u

 

My answer to the original question is that, in general, yes pedigrees are worth the extra $. All pedigrees are not created equal, however. Some get large pedigree bumps (Church, Reilly, Allentown, Larson), others significantly less (Crowley, Rockford, Crippen).

 

For silver age, the two biggies IMO are Pacific Coast and Curator.

[esquirecomics]

The ting about Pedigree books is the same thing as Provenance in the antiques world.

 

Thing is that in the antiques world there are singular items whose Provenance, or ownership, can be traced back for years or centuries. Take, for example, a chair that was owned by George Washington and has the provenance to back it up. The provenance can take many forms: sketches, letters, ultimately early photographs that also link back to the sketches and letters etc. This lays the foundation for a Provenance that shows George Washington indeed owned that chair.

 

Basically Provenance tries to show a history back to either an original owner or an important owner (That chair owned by George Washington may have been a piece of junk from 50 years before he was born but because he owned it the price is hugely escalated).

 

Now onto comic books. In the world of antiques we can go back many centuries to show a provenance. But comic books are so new relatively speaking, that their provenance basically ends with an original owner living and collecting in the 40's or later (that"40's" reflecting the later dates of her/his books - I know of no Pedigree that ends in the 30's. If so please let me know!)

 

Anyway, Mark Zaid's talk is fairly accurate. The Original Owner is really key in a Pedigree. His assessment of the higher grade, the number of keys etc. is accurate. But his including publishers is, to my mind, off. You may ask "Why, Pov?"

 

Why, Pov? Well, take for example, the Bill ("William") Gaines file copies. These were not really collected by a Comic Book Collector. The Gaines books were taken by the publisher, Bill Gaines, before they hit the newsstand. Nor could they be considered "File Copies". (More on that in a bit). Basically, Bill Gaines snagged several copies of many of the EC issues from the printer, wrapped them up, put them in a closet and they were left there in remarkable condition. But was Gaines a real comic book collector? I do not think so. So do these fall under Pedigree? I do not think so. I think these books (I know of no other set of books like this that was taken pre-distribution from a printer, wrapped and stored and eventually re-discovered). To me the Gaines copies are a notch above a "Pedigree" as they did not go through the normal distribution channels a normal Pedigree would have.)

 

Now we have "File Copies". Steve Borock and I have had many interesting chats about this concept. To me, a "File Copy" is a copy of a book retained in the publisher’s files for certain uses. The so called "Pay Copies" of books could be considered true file copies. As would books retained by the publisher in their own archives for reference purposes: for example, to retain continuity in a story line from a previously published issue.

 

But CGC has also labeled various warehouse finds as "file copies" which is incorrect (and the source of my chats with SB). These are warehouse finds of multiple copies of books. Harvey immediately comes to mind. These were NOT books retained by the publisher as reference material. To me, a File Copy means a Reference Copy. These were just surplus books that never got distributed. I have to wonder if the publisher was even aware of them/

 

But back to Pedigrees. Are they worth more? To my mind, yes. If one is a collector who appreciates the concept of Provenance. Otherwise, there are many collectors out there who would gladly pay a fair amount less for the same book in the same condition that was not Pedigreed. You have to decide for yourself what is worth what.

 

 

 

Some very good points Pov!

 

I was purposefully keeping the video discussions very simplistic as the intended audience was primarily newbies. Superficially I would include Gaines as a pedigree but I certainly understand your stated distinction and would personally have no problems with subcategories. Of course, this is likely more academic than anything else, but no less interesting!

[oakman29]

What about the Western Penn.pedigree? Bone white pages

If your looking for silver and bronze comics I would think Western Penn. would be a perfect fit.

[143ksk]

Western Penns are fine, too (thumbs u

[Limited66]

For some cool GAs with a great backstory, look into Okajima

[jkrk]

I like pedigrees. I am willing to pay a premium for a MH, SF, Larson, Macon, etc. I am paying to own a part of the history.

 

I won't pay very much, if any, premium for a book listed as part of a collection (with the exception of cage). If anyone wishes to pay a pemium for a collection you can you can own mine for the right price. (thumbs u

 

Jay

[PovertyRow]

The ting about Pedigree books is the same thing as Provenance in the antiques world.

 

Thing is that in the antiques world there are singular items whose Provenance, or ownership, can be traced back for years or centuries. Take, for example, a chair that was owned by George Washington and has the provenance to back it up. The provenance can take many forms: sketches, letters, ultimately early photographs that also link back to the sketches and letters etc. This lays the foundation for a Provenance that shows George Washington indeed owned that chair.

 

Basically Provenance tries to show a history back to either an original owner or an important owner (That chair owned by George Washington may have been a piece of junk from 50 years before he was born but because he owned it the price is hugely escalated).

 

Now onto comic books. In the world of antiques we can go back many centuries to show a provenance. But comic books are so new relatively speaking, that their provenance basically ends with an original owner living and collecting in the 40's or later (that"40's" reflecting the later dates of her/his books - I know of no Pedigree that ends in the 30's. If so please let me know!)

 

Anyway, Mark Zaid's talk is fairly accurate. The Original Owner is really key in a Pedigree. His assessment of the higher grade, the number of keys etc. is accurate. But his including publishers is, to my mind, off. You may ask "Why, Pov?"

 

Why, Pov? Well, take for example, the Bill ("William") Gaines file copies. These were not really collected by a Comic Book Collector. The Gaines books were taken by the publisher, Bill Gaines, before they hit the newsstand. Nor could they be considered "File Copies". (More on that in a bit). Basically, Bill Gaines snagged several copies of many of the EC issues from the printer, wrapped them up, put them in a closet and they were left there in remarkable condition. But was Gaines a real comic book collector? I do not think so. So do these fall under Pedigree? I do not think so. I think these books (I know of no other set of books like this that was taken pre-distribution from a printer, wrapped and stored and eventually re-discovered). To me the Gaines copies are a notch above a "Pedigree" as they did not go through the normal distribution channels a normal Pedigree would have.)

 

Now we have "File Copies". Steve Borock and I have had many interesting chats about this concept. To me, a "File Copy" is a copy of a book retained in the publisher’s files for certain uses. The so called "Pay Copies" of books could be considered true file copies. As would books retained by the publisher in their own archives for reference purposes: for example, to retain continuity in a story line from a previously published issue.

 

But CGC has also labeled various warehouse finds as "file copies" which is incorrect (and the source of my chats with SB). These are warehouse finds of multiple copies of books. Harvey immediately comes to mind. These were NOT books retained by the publisher as reference material. To me, a File Copy means a Reference Copy. These were just surplus books that never got distributed. I have to wonder if the publisher was even aware of them/

 

But back to Pedigrees. Are they worth more? To my mind, yes. If one is a collector who appreciates the concept of Provenance. Otherwise, there are many collectors out there who would gladly pay a fair amount less for the same book in the same condition that was not Pedigreed. You have to decide for yourself what is worth what.

 

 

 

Some very good points Pov!

 

I was purposefully keeping the video discussions very simplistic as the intended audience was primarily newbies. Superficially I would include Gaines as a pedigree but I certainly understand your stated distinction and would personally have no problems with subcategories. Of course, this is likely more academic than anything else, but no less interesting!

 

Thanks, Mark. I agree a lot of this is academic. But I think many who have been collecting for a long time have seen shifts in definitions. I remmeber the days when those warehouse finds were actually called Warehouse Copy and when File Copies often were cited with a publishers File Copy stamp or similar. But over the years there seems to be a dilution of such distinctions, and not just in definition of Pedigree. Restoration, Ages, even what constitutes a "horror" as opposed to "Supernatural etc) book has seen shifts. Most of the shifts tend to a dumbing down or to a prejudice in favor of a publisher (the Horror thing). It is a troubling trend. Even though some issues may be seen as nit-picking, simple acceptance (even in opinion) simply allows the dilution to continue.

 

For a pedigree I would put Church first (little surprise there). But I would find the Gaines copies even more appealing than a Church copy.

[buttock]

I think a reasonable way to discern a "pedigree" copy would be to define it as a copy you would choose over a similarly graded non-ped copy.

 

That would really shorten the list. Huge collections like Crippen, Crowley, Rockford, Boston, maybe Bethlehem, Lost Valley, Aurora, Cosmic Aeroplane, Windy City would all fall out.

 

Truly desirable collections - e.g. Church, Reilly, White Mountain, Spokane, PC, Palo Alto, Central Valley - would be given the recognition they deserve and the debate would be tempered a bit.

 

I've heard stories/seen examples where people would try to hide the fact that a book was a Windy City or Crowley because they knew people wouldn't want them. That right there should exclude a book from being a ped.

[VintageComics]

I haven't read the entire thread completely but I think there are two main advantages to a Pedigree.

 

Backstory/provenance. Very desirable to own an artifact with a story behind it and a lineage. It's a beautiful thing to us nostalgic types.

 

State of Preservation. This is one of the prerequisites for a collection to receive pedigree status by CGC. If you have never held, smelled or opened and felt a book from a nice pedigree collection you owe it to yourself.

 

There are some that are better than others and within a certain pedigree you will have some copies that outshine others...but once you see a fine example of a pedigree book you will never ever look at a non pedigree book the same way.

 

Take the time to inspect a nice Church or O'reilly/San Fran book. Stephen Ritter had some raw SF books that were utterly mind blowing.

 

You've never quite seen a snow white, fresh-and-bright-as-the-day-it-was-printed 70 year old book until you see one of these.

 

Unless you invent a time machine you'll never see another like it again.

 

This is why the big boys throw silly money at these books.