New pedigree - Suscha News

[blazingbob]

I graded the Oaklands and it has a very good story. However while I would have named it I don't think it's a pedigree.

 

Boston's should not be a pedigree. I saw one long box of early stuff, most of it is post 66 stuff and multiple copies. Technically not a pedigree to me, just a really really really nice collection with page quality that Mark Haspel claims he can identify. No markings to speak of. Not sure of a master list. What makes me chuckle is that the collection came from Long Island, not Boston.

 

Don't know the Rocky Mountain's master list so I cannot comment on it.

 

I also don't know the Suscha News master list so I cannot comment on it.

 

Again, I'm all for "naming" a find. You publish a good story and it sticks. But as with CGC grading I couldn't tell you their "standard" for giving out a pedigree destinction. Clearly mine is different from their's which won't be the first time that will happen.

 

If people didn't like the story or the "brand name" that has been assigned we wouldn't be having this conversation. Auction houses love names, it's a headline, it's eye catching, a good story sells books and gets news. Imagine Shug Night selling the Sucka News collections on the Sci Fi channel. The debate over what copy you would rather have has been discussed for years between collectors. It never mattered to me what pedigree a book came from, it mattered what condition it was in. The story was just additional information that helped me sell it.

[jimjum12]

Just got through checking out the first 76 books on the Metro website.....NICE. Naturally, I'll have to reserve judgement until I see the FF's.....often they're not as nice as the other titles in many collections....probably due to the fact that they're so much better a read, and read more often than the other titles . GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[tth2]

I'm not really following your "annointed" comment.

What I'm saying is that CGC has so much influence in the marketplace that when they agree to designate a collection as a "pedigree", the general market pretty much falls in line and accepts it as a pedigree.

 

Whereas if some Joe Schmoe, or even a heavyweight like Metropolis, screams to the heavens that a collection is a pedigree but CGC doesn't agree, then that pedigree gets accepted much more slowly by the market (if at all), and in most cases I would say that it even gets stigmatized because people assume something must be wrong with it if CGC wouldn't designate it as a pedigree.

 

My impression is that Slobodians and Golden States, just to name a few examples, are considered less prestigious by collectors today than they were pre-CGC, mostly because CGC has (rightly or wrongly) declined to recognize them as pedigrees. Similarly, my impression is that the status of Diamond Runs immediately declined in the minds of many collectors after CGC decided to "de-certify" it as a pedigree.

 

Frankly if I'm reading your note correctly the issue should be more with CGC publishing their "Pedigree standards" versus Metropolis's "special interest group" annointing their collection.

Not exactly my point, but I totally agree that CGC should publish their pedigree standards. The problem is they've given us glimpses of what appear to be their unofficial policies, but then they contradict them a lot in actual practice (prime examples being Rocky Mountain and now Suscha News).

 

My pedigree standard is one that the pre-65 material should be pedigree worthy.

I agree on the pre-65 criteria, but my approach is different than yours, although your approach is perfectly valid.

 

To me, whether a collection gets designated as a pedigree should be based solely on the breadth, depth and quality of its pre-65 books. If it doesn't satisfy this criteria even if every post-65 book is 9.8, it shouldn't be a pedigree.

 

Where I differ from you is if the pre-65 portion of the collection is pedigree-worthy, then the entire collection should be designated as a pedigree to maintain the provenance of the collection. While this could result in something as ludicrous as a pedigreed Cable #1, it seems a fair trade-off to me.

[tth2]

I graded the Oaklands and it has a very good story. However while I would have named it I don't think it's a pedigree.

(thumbs u

 

Boston's should not be a pedigree. I saw one long box of early stuff, most of it is post 66 stuff and multiple copies. Technically not a pedigree to me, just a really really really nice collection with page quality that Mark Haspel claims he can identify. No markings to speak of. Not sure of a master list. What makes me chuckle is that the collection came from Long Island, not Boston.

(thumbs u

 

I used to think that CGC was simply being more flexible and pragmatic with named collections that had surfaced prior to CGC's existence and had generally been accepted by the market, and that they might not have given pedigree status if the same collections had surfaced afterwards. Unfortunately, I've started to think that's not the case at all.

 

Don't know the Rocky Mountain's master list so I cannot comment on it.

Based on what I've seen emerge from the collection, I would say no.

 

Again, I'm all for "naming" a find. You publish a good story and it sticks. But as with CGC grading I couldn't tell you their "standard" for giving out a pedigree destinction. Clearly mine is different from their's which won't be the first time that will happen.

(thumbs u

 

[blazingbob]

The problem with the slobodians is that I never saw Calvin publish a master list. The FF #1 Slobodian was a CGC 9.2 that was stolen. Again, a collection that Doug liked quite a bit and people frankly have different thoughts about. The DD Slobodian run was pretty weak from what I remember, was advertised as being super high grade but really wasn't. I did try to buy the FF #1 slobodian from Marnin but Doug made a better offer at the time. I did own the FF #74 Slobodian copy. I do believe Slobodians have a identifying mark on their back cover if I remember them. Good page quality, tend to have a bit of yellowing on their spines.

 

The Golden States I did see with Barton in Dan's store. Again, a much better collection than the Winnipeg's which he also had in the store at the time. I bought the AS #41 NM, Avengers #9 NM-, Avengers #39 NM, Avengers #51 NM, Daredevil #16 NM-, FF #30 NM-, FF #33 NM-, FF #38 NM, FF #46 NM/NM+, FF #55 NM+, FF #62 NM, FF #63 NM (CGC graded a 9.6), FF #71 (CGC graded 9.8), TOS #48 NM-/NM, TOS #50 NM-/NM, TOS #56 NM-/NM, TTA #60 NM-/NM (CGC graded 9.0), X-Men #33 NM. If Dan had a Golden State certificate I certainly didn't keep it. All of these were bought for my personal collection at the time.

 

Going back and checking my old collection even though I don't think the Oaklands are pedigree worthy many of the Oaklands I bought CGC graded 9.6/9.8.

[namisgr]

Pedigree-worthy or not, I like that all of these collections get a designation on the CGC label that allows books from the same collection to be tracked. It's one of the coolest parts of collecting SA to be able to link bunches of comics across multiple titles as having come from the same original collection.

[adamstrange]

The problem with the slobodians is that I never saw Calvin publish a master list. The FF #1 Slobodian was a CGC 9.2 that was stolen. Again, a collection that Doug liked quite a bit and people frankly have different thoughts about. The DD Slobodian run was pretty weak from what I remember, was advertised as being super high grade but really wasn't. I did try to buy the FF #1 slobodian from Marnin but Doug made a better offer at the time. I did own the FF #74 Slobodian copy. I do believe Slobodians have a identifying mark on their back cover if I remember them. Good page quality, tend to have a bit of yellowing on their spines.

Slobodians included some very sweet 10 cent DCs. This one, iirc, came from you.

 

[wee_s2e-migration]

Not exactly my point, but I totally agree that CGC should publish their pedigree standards. The problem is they've given us glimpses of what appear to be their unofficial policies...

 

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, or direct me to where it's answered in this thread I have only skimmed, but aren't these CGC's official Pedigree standards?

 

http://www.cgccomics.com/resources/pedigree.asp

[comicdonna]

Not exactly my point, but I totally agree that CGC should publish their pedigree standards. The problem is they've given us glimpses of what appear to be their unofficial policies...

 

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, or direct me to where it's answered in this thread I have only skimmed, but aren't these CGC's official Pedigree standards?

 

http://www.cgccomics.com/resources/pedigree.asp

It would appear so, seems they are listed on CGC's website.

[blazingbob]

I was not aware of this. I stand corrected.

 

I would still have questions on these standards.

 

For example the Oaklands would have passed the original owner criteria, large number of books and also the below. However I would question why 1966-1970 9.4's constitute a pedigree collection.

 

The collection must be of vintage material. This means that a large collection consisting of comics from the 1970s to present cannot be considered a pedigree. In fact, until the sale of some key White Mountain books in a Sotheby’s auction in the early 1990s, Silver Age comics were not accepted as pedigree collections. Comic books from 1966 and after are relatively common in high grade compared to earlier issues. This occurred as a direct result of a tremendous explosion in the number of collectors in fandom in the mid-1960s. Collections that are primarily from 1966 and after must have average grades of at least 9.4 to be considered a pedigree.

 

 

 

 

[blazingbob]

Yes it is, great cover.

[wee_s2e-migration]

Not exactly my point, but I totally agree that CGC should publish their pedigree standards. The problem is they've given us glimpses of what appear to be their unofficial policies...

 

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, or direct me to where it's answered in this thread I have only skimmed, but aren't these CGC's official Pedigree standards?

 

http://www.cgccomics.com/resources/pedigree.asp

It would appear so, seems they are listed on CGC's website.

 

The kicker is that they listed these standards years ago (2006 iirc).

[comicdonna]

Not exactly my point, but I totally agree that CGC should publish their pedigree standards. The problem is they've given us glimpses of what appear to be their unofficial policies...

 

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, or direct me to where it's answered in this thread I have only skimmed, but aren't these CGC's official Pedigree standards?

 

http://www.cgccomics.com/resources/pedigree.asp

It would appear so, seems they are listed on CGC's website.

 

The kicker is that they listed these standards years ago (2006 iirc).

Surely, they would have revised if there were any changes? Maybe I should say: Does anyone know of any changes?

[drdonaldblake]

Sorry but mid 60's to 1976 really shouldn't be a pedigree. Too small a time frame from a period of time when there were a lot of people buying.

 

Some or all of the early Marvel keys are in there, but they were bought second-hand and are low grade. It appears to be around 1963 on up which would imply most or all of the Spidey run unless he wasn't buying every issue. The story at the link says he was buying books before 1963 but they weren't superhero stuff.

 

its a gift pedigree designation

Metropolis gets them alot

eg the Oakland "PEdigree"

 

compare oakland and susha to aTrue pedigree liek ROcky mountain and you;ll see what i mean

[Foolkiller]

Today I had the privilege of visiting the Metropolis offices and inspecting many of the Suscha books in person.

 

If there is a debate about whether or not this should or shouldn't be a pedigree, I'm not sure I can really comment with any more authority or insight than that which has already been given.

 

With that said, I was able to look through several boxes of "rejects" and found them to be of absolutely stunning quality. And I do mean stunning. Some of the best raw books I have ever handled with amazing color and gloss and beautiful page quality. Most of the books when I opened them felt as if they had either never been opened or not opened in years. I found them to be universal in this quality.

 

While several had a minor or flaw or two (and hence not worth grading) I was impressed with the freshness of the "rejects" as well.

 

This is an unbelievable collection and if you have the opportunity to buy any of these books, I suggest you do so. On top of that, as a collector of this material, I found that even if the technical grade was slightly lower, I found that the books were so nice eye appeal wise, they were worth every penny. I am thrilled to own the handful I was able to pick up.

 

Here's what I was able to score:

 

Amazing Adventures 7 NM-

Avengers 57 VF/NM

Avengers 94 NM-

Avengers 95 NM-

Cap 124 VF+

Cap 138 VF+

Cap 139 NM-

Cap 144 VF+

Cap 155 VF+

Cap 161 VF/NM

Cap 167 NM-

Detective Comics 359 VF

FF 74 VF

 

Both VFs have very strong eye appeal. When I'm finally home again I will scan so all can see, but they are truly special books to me. The Rocky Mountains are nice, but in comparing the two collections, I would actually say they are equal in quality, but the Rocky Mountains have more earlier material. I can't say enough good things though about the Suscha News Collection. Thanks to Vinny for the opportunity to purchase a few.

[Mark 1]

I'll be in NYC in 2 weeks and might check this out. Any TOS Brian?

[fantastic_four]

If there is a debate about whether or not this should or shouldn't be a pedigree, I'm not sure I can really comment with any more authority or insight than that which has already been given.

 

Did you see any exceptional runs not already on the ComicConnect site? It's difficult to see it being pedigree-worthy if what's on their site is the cream of the crop.

[Foolkiller]

If there is a debate about whether or not this should or shouldn't be a pedigree, I'm not sure I can really comment with any more authority or insight than that which has already been given.

 

Did you see any exceptional runs not already on the ComicConnect site? It's difficult to see it being pedigree-worthy if what's on their site is the cream of the crop.

 

What's on their site merely scratches the surface of what's in this collection. Most of what I looked through was not graded yet nor listed as "rejects". But in speaking with Vinny, it was clear most books haven't even been graded yet. I would expect some stunning stuff on the way.

 

I'd happily buy these raw "rejects" all day long.

[Foolkiller]

I'll be in NYC in 2 weeks and might check this out. Any TOS Brian?

 

Most of the boxes weren't even processed yet, so I couldn't go through anything that Vinny himself hadn't checked out. So I never hit the TOS pile as Vinny is still processing it.

 

Nothing is cheap, and expect to pay FMV prices. To me, these were unquestionably worth the price and I felt no need to negotiate. And I always feel the need to negotiate.

[Mark 1]

Thanks Brian. I'll check them out!

 

Enjoy your new comics.