• 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.

The Mound City resubmits begin!

162 posts in this topic

oh, if they belong to Doug, then I'm laying off. he's a nice guy, and everyone has got to eat.

 

he's got kids.

 

and trying run a good business.

 

when one handles and submits the large quantity and value of books as Doug, then I assume one is entitled to some friendly perks. Like extra bubble wrap on his packages etc

 

STOP BAITING PARATROOPER! (tsk) I could do with fewer dealer-trashing threads. :insane:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, Bidder 51 was indeed Schmell:

 

The group of Mound City’s includes 34 amazing books all in 9.0 and higher, most of which (25) are in ultra high grade (CGC certified 9.4 and higher) with a bunch of 9.6’s and a 9.8. For those of you who do not know, the Mound City Collection is an original owner accumulation of approximately 3,000 early Silver through early Bronze Age Marvels and DC’s. The original owner, who lived with his mother, passed away several years ago and his treasured books remained carefully stored in boxes under the stairwell in his mother’s house. When his mother died just recently, the entire inheritance went to the closing living heir, a cousin, who in turn consigned the comic books to an auction house. The auction house had most of the books CGC graded and then sold the entire collection in a live auction event. That auction was recently held on November 1st and 2nd, 2009, in St. Louis, Missouri with unbelievable results. Pedigree Comics, Inc. purchased the following 34 books and they will be available to bid on and buy in the Grand Auction:

Adventure Comics 293 9.4

Adventure Comics 297 9.4

Adventure Comics 300 9.4

Adventure Comics 303 9.6

Aquaman 2 9.6

Aquaman 7 9.6

Atom 7 9.2

Daredevil 4 9.2

Detective Comics 305 9.2

Detective Comics 306 9.6

Fantastic Four 3 9.2

Fantastic Four 5 9.4

Fantastic Four 11 9.0

Fantastic Four 15 9.4

Fantastic Four 18 9.4

Fantastic four 19 9.0

Flash 129 9.4

Flash 131 9.4

Incredible Hulk 5 9.4

Incredible Hulk Annual 1 9.4

Journey Into Mystery 85 9.6

Journey Into Mystery 91 9.4

Journey Into Mystery 112 9.4

Justice League of America 9 9.4

Justice League of America 20 9.4

Metal Men 1 9.8

Strange Tales 102 9.4

Strange Tales 106 9.4

Strange Tales Annual 1 9.2

Tales to Astonish 59 9.2

World’s Finest Comics 120 9.2

World’s finest Comics 132 9.6

World’s Finest Comics 134 9.4

World’s finest Comics 143 9.6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd already mentioned 3 DC's (that no one cares about) in another thread:

Metal Men #1 9.6 to 9.8

Detective #306 9.4 to 9.6

Aquaman #2 9.2 to 9.6 (looked like a weak 9.2 to begin with)

 

That's just amazing.

 

I thought that Metal Men #1 was a weak 9.6 to begin with. I was bidding on it to win so I looked at it closely. Just. Amazing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd already mentioned 3 DC's (that no one cares about) in another thread:

Metal Men #1 9.6 to 9.8

Detective #306 9.4 to 9.6

Aquaman #2 9.2 to 9.6 (looked like a weak 9.2 to begin with)

The Adventure #300 is an upgrade too, isn`t it? How wonderful for Legion collectors that one of their grails now finally exists in 9.4. :sick:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, and I thought that CGC had tightened things up a bit recently. That FF #3 should not even be a 9.0 with that type of crease even according to OSPG standards.

 

In addition, they seemed to be nailing books recently for dust shadows so I would have thought that the FF #5 would have been a 9.0, maybe 9.2, at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were actually a few I saw last year that had dust shadows that were downgraded a bit, but maybe they had stains as well? In any case, dust shadow should = 9.0 at best on a perfect book IMHO.

 

In any case, we should not complain too loudly as CGC might tighten things up again. I have some books I am looking at submitting shortly. :wishluck:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO, for the last couple of years, CGC ( mark haspel) has been hammering for dust shadows/tanning.

That is a personal preference of Mr. Haspel. As in the past, Steve Borock didn't seem to mind as much.

 

 

As evident with this Sensation Comics CGC 9.4, graded a while back, re holdered.

 

 

rad59f772009529184526.jpg

 

 

 

 

In recent years, It just seems for some reason, that the mound city collection was the exception. IMHO

 

Otherwise, with comics that have been graded the last couple of years, I've seen books with lesser dust shadows with virtually no other flaws, fail to break 8.5 / 9.0.

 

also, I find that the mound city collection was softly graded even when dust shadows/tanning were not apparent.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO, for the last couple of years, CGC ( mark haspel) has been hammering for dust shadows/tanning.

That is a personal preference of Mr. Haspel. As in the past, Steve Borock didn't seem to mind as much.

 

You appear to be equating dust shadows and tanning, but they're entirely different, tanning is much worse. I've seen no evidence Haspel downgrades more for tanning or dust shadows than Borock did. I'm guessing that Sensation 1 has a dust shadow and not tanning.

 

My understanding is that much as is true for dirt/soiling you quite often see vertically down the back cover of comics along the spine, they don't downgrade for shadows that they evaluate to be removable, as the paper itself isn't damaged. If it's tanning that has aged the paper, they can hammer for it if it's too severe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have plenty of evidence.

 

But with that Sensation, that was considered a dust shadow, OK, but I say it's light tanning, where part of the cover was exposed to the elements over a period of time.

 

Many consider that a dust shadow, but to me it's spot tanning.

 

this damage on this book is not removable without having the cover cleaned with solvents.

 

 

You want to rate a 9.4, Ok, maybe, but it's not removable, in regards to the area that was exposed.

 

 

rad59f772009529184526.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But with that Sensation, that was considered a dust shadow, OK, but I say it's light tanning, where part of the cover was exposed to the elements over a period of time.

 

I still haven't figured out how to tell the difference between particles on the surface and discoloration of the paper, have you? It all looks like discoloration to me. (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But with that Sensation, that was considered a dust shadow, OK, but I say it's light tanning, where part of the cover was exposed to the elements over a period of time.

 

I still haven't figured out how to tell the difference between particles on the surface and discoloration of the paper, have you? It all looks like discoloration to me. (shrug)

 

including from some sort of sunlight exposure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But with that Sensation, that was considered a dust shadow, OK, but I say it's light tanning, where part of the cover was exposed to the elements over a period of time.

 

I still haven't figured out how to tell the difference between particles on the surface and discoloration of the paper, have you? It all looks like discoloration to me. (shrug)

 

from some sort of sunlight exposure?

 

What I mean is, I am unable to tell the difference by visually examining a comic. Can you tell the difference? I don't know how to tell the difference between tanning, a sun shadow, and a dust shadow just by looking at the outside. I can tell tanning by looking at both sides, but I can't tell any of them apart just from looking at the cover. That's why I've been making assumptions based upon CGC's grading--if it's permanent discoloration of the paper, I presume CGC downgrades for it more, and if there's a shadow on a 9.4/9.6, I presume it's a removable dust shadow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites