New pedigree - Suscha News

[fantastic_four]

The Mound City books were not bought off the newsstand

 

Where were they bought from? My recollection is that they were bought from the stands, but CGC didn't think there was enough volume of high grade to get the pedigree nod. If that's the case and Suscha News turns out to have worse material, I can see a real storm brewing around here that Metro got preferential treatment.

[Scrooge]

Haven't been on the boards much lately, so I'm surprised not to see a thread about this--looks like CGC has recognized a new pedigree discovered by Metropolis, the "Suscha News" pedigree.

 

http://www.cgccomics.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=960

 

The story sounds a lot like that collection Sheldon of Heroes found this year where the original owner bought many of the books from a distributor. Anyone seen some impressive books in this collection yet? The most impressive ones I saw currently on the ComicLink site were Avengers 13 CGC 9.8 and Spidey 35 and 37 CGC 9.6, all tough books in those grades, but nothing to die for. Not seeing yet why this one's a pedigree.

 

Where do you get pedigree from? :shrug:

 

The article is clearly labeled: Suscha News Collection!, not pedigree? All this discussion already but I didn't see any mention of pedigree-status assigned to this collection

[DrWatson]

The Mound City books were not bought off the newsstand

 

Where were they bought from? My recollection is that they were bought from the stands, but CGC didn't think there was enough volume of high grade to get the pedigree nod. If that's the case and Suscha News turns out to have worse material, I can see a real storm brewing around here that Metro got preferential treatment.

I thought some where bought as back issues, I may be wrong. However, some of the bronze books had price stickers over the original price box on the front cover.

 

When seeing the books as a whole at the auction, pedigree was not the first word that came to mind. There were some nice books, but nothing out and out impressive. The X-Men 1 had a freaking dust shadow down the book. I don't know why it got a 9.4 to begin with.

[fantastic_four]

Where do you get pedigree from? :shrug:

 

The link I got in the CGC newsletter email described it explicitly as a pedigree. I wasn't sure either when they started interchangeably using the term "collection" in the actual article, so I looked at one of the slabs and the designation is on the same right side of the label they use to designate pedigrees and not "FROM THE SUSCHA NEWS COLLECTION" in the center of the label as they did with the Nic Cage, Dallas Stephens, etc collections. Here's an example of a book I've never seen in this grade offered for sale, ever--note the writing in the upper-left, that appears to be present on most of the books I've seen so far, which likely will eliminate me from buying many:

 

[VintageComics]

 

When seeing the books as a whole at the auction, pedigree was not the first word that came to mind. There were some nice books, but nothing out and out impressive. The X-Men 1 had a freaking dust shadow down the book. I don't know why it got a 9.4 to begin with.

 

Not to derail, but the dust shadow was actually barely noticeable on the X-men #1 MC copy and the rest of the book was extremely white with almost no wear.

 

For those who may not know, many of the CGC 9.8 Rocky Mountain books also have dust shadows on them.

 

I guess the grade depends on the over all book and not just a particular defect.

 

[fantastic_four]

if you're putting together this pedigree during the era of comic collecting, it sounds like a collection to me

 

Was the late 50s/early 60s the era of comic collecting? I'm under the impression that it wasn't. I wasn't alive then, but that was long before Overstreet even started printing a guide or we were commonly using the coin "mint" terms to describe condition.

[fantastic_four]

When seeing the books as a whole at the auction, pedigree was not the first word that came to mind. There were some nice books, but nothing out and out impressive. The X-Men 1 had a freaking dust shadow down the book. I don't know why it got a 9.4 to begin with.

 

I've already seen some dust shadows on these Suscha books...this one is a bit darker than any I saw on Mound City books:

 

[Bosco685]

For those who may not know, many of the CGC 9.8 Rocky Mountain books also have dust shadows on them.

The three raw copies I bought second-hand before this was a pedigree are sharp. I sent in the Spectacular Spider-Man 27 and it came back a CGC 9.8 WP, which I expected nothing less it is so new looking.

 

Unfortunately, since it wasn't a pedigree when I bought them, there is no proof they came from the Rocky Mountain collection.

[DrWatson]

When seeing the books as a whole at the auction, pedigree was not the first word that came to mind. There were some nice books, but nothing out and out impressive. The X-Men 1 had a freaking dust shadow down the book. I don't know why it got a 9.4 to begin with.

 

I've already seen some dust shadows on these Suscha books...this one is a bit darker than any I saw on Mound City books:

 

That amazes me. Of course, I don't like dust shadows. However, it also strikes me odd that non color breaking crease can deduct as many grade points as a dust shadow.

[jimjum12]

The Mound City books were not bought off the newsstand

 

Where were they bought from? My recollection is that they were bought from the stands, but CGC didn't think there was enough volume of high grade to get the pedigree nod. If that's the case and Suscha News turns out to have worse material, I can see a real storm brewing around here that Metro got preferential treatment.

I thought some where bought as back issues, I may be wrong. However, some of the bronze books had price stickers over the original price box on the front cover.

 

When seeing the books as a whole at the auction, pedigree was not the first word that came to mind. There were some nice books, but nothing out and out impressive. The X-Men 1 had a freaking dust shadow down the book. I don't know why it got a 9.4 to begin with.

 

In addition, the runs in the Mound City group were not complete. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[rob_react]

if you're putting together this pedigree during the era of comic collecting, it sounds like a collection to me

 

Was the late 50s/early 60s the era of comic collecting? I'm under the impression that it wasn't. I wasn't alive then, but that was long before Overstreet even started printing a guide or we were commonly using the coin "mint" terms to describe condition.

 

That era actually marks the beginning of the hobby. It started with ECs and Legion of Superheroes in the1950s and then moved on Marvels in the 1960s. It really started to bloom in the mid 1960s, which is why books become so plentiful at that point.

 

 

[VintageComics]

When seeing the books as a whole at the auction, pedigree was not the first word that came to mind. There were some nice books, but nothing out and out impressive. The X-Men 1 had a freaking dust shadow down the book. I don't know why it got a 9.4 to begin with.

 

I've already seen some dust shadows on these Suscha books...this one is a bit darker than any I saw on Mound City books:

 

 

The Mound City FF #5 had a pretty dark shadow in it from what I remember.

 

Again, this just reinforces the idea that the defect is worked into the over all grade. The books must be really sharp to garner a 9.4 with a shadow (meaning very few other defects).

 

 

[fantastic_four]

if you're putting together this pedigree during the era of comic collecting, it sounds like a collection to me

 

Was the late 50s/early 60s the era of comic collecting? I'm under the impression that it wasn't. I wasn't alive then, but that was long before Overstreet even started printing a guide or we were commonly using the coin "mint" terms to describe condition.

 

That era actually marks the beginning of the hobby. It started with ECs and Legion of Superheroes in the1950s and then moved on Marvels in the 1960s. It really started to bloom in the mid 1960s, which is why books become so plentiful at that point.

 

 

It was only a handful of guys at that point though, right, maybe a few hundred who went to the handful of conventions out there? Guys like Overstreet were buying Stan Lee's Marvels for profit potential, but comics as anything valuable was completely off the radar for the general public which is why early 60s books are still so hard to find. It's the rarity of those books in grade due to the very low number of grade hoarders that elicits the pedigree designation from CGC.

[tth2]

if you're putting together this pedigree during the era of comic collecting, it sounds like a collection to me

 

Was the late 50s/early 60s the era of comic collecting? I'm under the impression that it wasn't. I wasn't alive then, but that was long before Overstreet even started printing a guide or we were commonly using the coin "mint" terms to describe condition.

 

That era actually marks the beginning of the hobby. It started with ECs and Legion of Superheroes in the1950s and then moved on Marvels in the 1960s. It really started to bloom in the mid 1960s, which is why books become so plentiful at that point.

 

To me, the "era of comic collecting" is from 1965 onwards.

[Jeffro.]

There have been a few pedigree's that just make no sense (to me). If a pedigree is made up of some books in the collection that were bought as back issues that doesn't qualify to me as a pedigree (to me).

Which pedigrees are these?

 

I believe Diamond Run was removed from ped status because a significant portion were not OO copies. Resto played a part as well. Maybe a big part/

[fantastic_four]

The Mound City FF #5 had a pretty dark shadow in it from what I remember.

 

Again, this just reinforces the idea that the defect is worked into the over all grade. The books must be really sharp to garner a 9.4 with a shadow (meaning very few other defects).

 

To repeat what we've said dozens of times already, the most likely reason CGC doesn't deduct much for dust shadows is that they're safely removable. They similarly don't downgrade for the dark soiling you'll very commonly see on the back white covers down the spine of 1970s and 1980s books because that can all be cleaned off quite well, whereas staining, tanning, and foxing all cause permanent damage to the paper.

[fantastic_four]

To me, the "era of comic collecting" is from 1965 onwards.

 

What happened in or around 1965? One of the significant milestones is the first Overstreet guide in 1970.

[Scrooge]

Where do you get pedigree from? :shrug:

 

The link I got in the CGC newsletter email described it explicitly as a pedigree. I wasn't sure either when they started interchangeably using the term "collection" in the actual article, so I looked at one of the slabs and the designation is on the same right side of the label they use to designate pedigrees and not "FROM THE SUSCHA NEWS COLLECTION" in the center of the label as they did with the Nic Cage, Dallas Stephens, etc collections. Here's an example of a book I've never seen in this grade offered for sale, ever--note the writing in the upper-left, that appears to be present on most of the books I've seen so far, which likely will eliminate me from buying many:

 

Thanks

[tth2]

To me, the "era of comic collecting" is from 1965 onwards.

 

What happened in or around 1965?

That`s when comic collecting started becoming a real recognized hobby, as opposed to just a bunch of individuals doing their own thing in total isolation from each other. It started taking an organized form where collectors could meet up and communicate, thus allowing the hobby to achieve critical mass.

[Jeffro.]

CGC seems to be the deciding factor on establishing a pedigree and I'm not so sure that should be done without an outside panel of experts in our hobby to determine. I'm not sure how other pedigree's were established pre-CGC...i'd love to know if someone here knows.

 

Nobody establishes pedigrees, and CGC's opinion is their own. If people keep talking about a pedigree because there's something memorable about it, it gets popular, talked about, and remembered, that's as much establishment as we've got.

 

Yes, but CGC's opinion has now lends an air of legitimacy. Unlike the days pre-CGC.

I don't see a problem with it, but it's different now than before 2000.