Double Cover's Appreciation!!!

[Clark Khaos-migration]

What the hell is the point of the second grade for the interior "hidden" cover, anyway? How can the UNSEEN cover RAISE a lower-grade book?

[chromium]

Do the words "objective 3rd party grading" mean anything to you?

 

Yep, means a hell of a lot more than 'Golden Age' means to me....

[PovertyRow]

The reason the Punisher's 2nd, 3rd etc... appearances (and others) are singled out is because his early appearances are random and scattered. Obviously under Action Comics #2 is does not say "2nd Appearance of Superman" in the guide...it's pretty much implied.

 

Timely

 

Uhm, I just wrote that the 3rd appearance is in Jackpot #4, following Pep 22 and 23. Kind of scattered, wouldn't you think? 3 appearances in 2 titles?

 

Sounds a mite scattered to me. Shield - got a couple of questions for you - this past Overstreet is in work so I cannot reference - can you lookup Jackpot 4 and see if 3rd app of Archie is listed there? It would be interesting. Also, while you are there, could you lookup that Giant Size Spidey 4 and see if OS notates that is Punisher's 3rd appearance?

 

Thanks!

[Shield]

The reason the Punisher's 2nd, 3rd etc... appearances (and others) are singled out is because his early appearances are random and scattered. Obviously under Action Comics #2 is does not say "2nd Appearance of Superman" in the guide...it's pretty much implied.

 

Timely

 

Uhm, I just wrote that the 3rd appearance is in Jackpot #4, following Pep 22 and 23. Kind of scattered, wouldn't you think? 3 appearances in 2 titles?

 

Sounds a mite scattered to me. Shield - got a couple of questions for you - this past Overstreet is in work so I cannot reference - can you lookup Jackpot 4 and see if 3rd app of Archie is listed there? It would be interesting. Also, while you are there, could you lookup that Giant Size Spidey 4 and see if OS notates that is Punisher's 3rd appearance?

 

Thanks!

 

Alas, I cannot. My latest guide was left in my last "sale" that involved the back-half of my books. I left it in a box at the guy's house.

 

[Shield]

Do the words "objective 3rd party grading" mean anything to you?

 

Yep, means a hell of a lot more than 'Golden Age' means to me....

 

That's mature of you. Look, if there was a notation on the books I mentioned but CGC didn't do it for the modern age and YOU complained about it, I certainly wouldn't "dis" you for pointing it out, and bad mouth whatever company/age you collected. How childish!

[PovertyRow]

Alas, I cannot. My latest guide was left in my last "sale" that involved the back-half of my books. I left it in a box at the guy's house.

 

Ack! OK - looking around.............well - got an OS #31 (couple of years old) - states for Jackpot 4 "Archie begins. 1st app Mrs. Grundy".

 

Does CGC mention either of these things on the label?

[Timely]

The reason the Punisher's 2nd, 3rd etc... appearances (and others) are singled out is because his early appearances are random and scattered. Obviously under Action Comics #2 is does not say "2nd Appearance of Superman" in the guide...it's pretty much implied.

 

Timely

 

Uhm, I just wrote that the 3rd appearance is in Jackpot #4, following Pep 22 and 23. Kind of scattered, wouldn't you think? 3 appearances in 2 titles?

 

Actually Jackpot #4 is his 2nd appearance, not his 3rd, but at least the price is indicative of a 2nd appearance as Jackpot #3 is $1200 and #4 is $4500! Pep #23 (3rd app) is $1800.

 

Timely

[greggy]

The reason the Punisher's 2nd, 3rd etc... appearances (and others) are singled out is because his early appearances are random and scattered. Obviously under Action Comics #2 is does not say "2nd Appearance of Superman" in the guide...it's pretty much implied.

 

Timely

 

Uhm, I just wrote that the 3rd appearance is in Jackpot #4, following Pep 22 and 23. Kind of scattered, wouldn't you think? 3 appearances in 2 titles?

 

Sounds a mite scattered to me. Shield - got a couple of questions for you - this past Overstreet is in work so I cannot reference - can you lookup Jackpot 4 and see if 3rd app of Archie is listed there? It would be interesting. Also, while you are there, could you lookup that Giant Size Spidey 4 and see if OS notates that is Punisher's 3rd appearance?

 

Thanks!

Jackpot 4 - Archie begins (Win/41; on sale 12/41) - (also see Pep Comics #220); 1st app. Mrs. Grundy, the principal; Novick-c

 

GS Spider-man 4 - 3rd Punisher app.; Bynre, Ditko-r

[Shield]

Sounds a mite scattered to me. Shield - got a couple of questions for you - this past Overstreet is in work so I cannot reference - can you lookup Jackpot 4 and see if 3rd app of Archie is listed there? It would be interesting. Also, while you are there, could you lookup that Giant Size Spidey 4 and see if OS notates that is Punisher's 3rd appearance?

 

Thanks!

 

Found a #32 guide.

 

Jackpot 4: "-Archie begins.(Win/41); (on sale 12/41)-(also see Pep Comics #22); 1st app. Mrs. Grundy, the principal, Novick-c

 

(MY NOTE - Pep #24, the Feb 1942 issue, was on sale 12/41 as well. Pep #22, Cover dated 12/41, was on sale in October)

 

Giant Size Spidey 4 - (4/75)-3rd Punisher app.

[PovertyRow]

Jackpot 4 - Archie begins (Win/41; on sale 12/41) - (also see Pep Comics #220); 1st app. Mrs. Grundy, the principal; Novick-c

 

Thanks Greggy! Looks like current OS entry is the same.

[Shield]

Actually Jackpot #4 is his 2nd appearance, not his 3rd, but at least the price is indicative of a 2nd appearance as Jackpot #3 is $1200 and #4 is $4500! Pep #23 (3rd app) is $1800.

 

Timely

 

Timely, Timely, Timely...*sigh*

 

Sorry, but - I've owned Pep 22, 23, 24 and Jackpot 1-9.

 

Pep 22, Cover dated 12/41, on stands 10/41. Here's a scan of an arrival date from an actual copy:

 

 

October 17 (1941).

 

Now, here a scan of my old Jackpot Comics #3 (Keep in mind this book was published quarterly, i.e. every 3 months):

 

 

September 26 (1941).

 

So that would put Jackpot #4 on the stands around the last week of December, 1941, a full 2 months past the release of Pep #22.

 

Point #2.

 

Pep #22 has house ads for another quarterly MLJ title, Shield-Wizard Comics - # FIVE, the Fifth issue. So do all the January 1942 MLJ books, i.e. Blue Ribbon #20 as well.

 

Jackpot #4 has house ads for Shield-Wizard #6, as well as the other Feb/March/April 1942 MLJ's.

 

Also, if you read the Pep 22, 23, then Jackpot 4, the stories flow much better. Have you?

 

Here's something I listed in an auction once when I sold a Pep #23:

 

" Anyone who claims Jackpot #4 is the 2nd Archie is flat wrong. Overstreet states (concerning Jackpot #4) "On the stands same month as Pep 22". Well, friends, Pep 22 was on the stands 2 months prior to the cover date of December 1941, and Pep #23 was on the stands in November 1941, a full month before Jackpot #4. If you read Pep 22, 23, 24 and then Jackpot #4 you'll feel the flow and character development of Archie unfold. Here's some more reasons why Pep 23 was first:

 

If Jackpot 5, a spring 1942 book, was released 3 months after Pep 22 ("SAME MONTH AS PEP 22" - Released in October 1941 to have a December 1941 cover date), that would make JACKPOT 5 THREE MONTHS LATER, or January 1942. In January 1942, the March books were on the stands. Pep 25 is the March 1942 book. Veronica wasn't introduced until Pep 26, which is cover dated April 1942. How could Jackpot 5 then have her in those pages?

 

Real release dates (day you could by them on the stands)

 

Pep 22 - Oct 1941 (Ads for Shield-Wizard 5 in the interior)

Pep 23 - Nov 1941 (Ads for Shield-Wizard 5 in the interior)

Pep 24- December 1941 (Ads for Shield-Wizard 5 in the interior)

Jackpot 4 - Late December 1941/January 1942 (Ads for Shield-Wizard 6 on the interior)(Ads for March 1942's Zip Comics #24) (Both available here on the site as proof).

Pep 25 - January 1942 (Ads for Shield-Wizard 6 in the interior)

Pep 26 - February 1942

Pep 27 - March 1942

Jackpot 5 - Late March/Early April 1942

Pep 28 April 1942

Pep 29 May 1942"

 

C'mon Timely...I would never debate you as to which Captain America cover so closely ripped off the Shield that Timely Comics had to change it! (#1 by the way)...

[LordRahl]

I have a couple of Adams double cover books, this one being the best of the lot.

[chromium]

Do the words "objective 3rd party grading" mean anything to you?

 

Yep, means a hell of a lot more than 'Golden Age' means to me....

 

That's mature of you. Look, if there was a notation on the books I mentioned but CGC didn't do it for the modern age and YOU complained about it, I certainly wouldn't "dis" you for pointing it out, and bad mouth whatever company/age you collected. How childish!

 

... How can I "dis" (olf fogeys using street-talk, how paradoxical ) Golden Age books...I don't care enough about them....

Now let's get back to discussing cool books with double covers....

[greggy]

[osborn_fr]

DD#8 double cover NM/MT sold for $275 in 2000.

 

Incredible comic book !

Slab it and get a top census !

[Shield]

... How can I "dis" (olf fogeys using street-talk, how paradoxical ) Golden Age books...I don't care enough about them....

Now let's get back to discussing cool books with double covers....

 

Old Fogey? I just turned 30. How old are you?

[Rickdogg]

I just picekd up a MTU #147 CGC 9.6 double cover Working on a deal with 2 triple covers as we speak

[Darthdiesel]

Are you telling me that the Punisher is more popular than the 63 years of Archie combined? If you say yes you're wrong.

 

Um, no?

 

classic "golden-age' thinking last I checked, Archie currently has a Sat morning cartoon that is a hybrid of funnies and horror and a sad knockoff/ripoff of "Scooby Doo and friends"- type plots. Punisher = Marvel = superior = much larger fan base who care enough how a movie will do and marketable enough to draw in new fans/speculators

 

Even the Dolph Lundgren Punisher movie still has some nostalgic value for me... .

 

The olny way I'd be more interested in an Archie movie is if was a Skinemax special late Friday night and Archie somehow talked Betty and Veronica into making an Jugghead sandwich, while he would be busy trying to "spread the mustard"...

 

Classic modern age thinking. You're missing the point clearly - those notations are for historical references. The bottom line is this - which character has had more of an effect on comics period - the Punisher, or Archie? One has only been around from the (boring) 1970's, and the other was the basis of a company that has been in business since 1939. Perhaps you haven't seen Sabrina the Teenage Witch or Josie & the Pussycats either, eh? I guarantee you more people worldwide alive right now have heard of Archie, Betty and Jughead than the Punisher. You're avoiding the question by labeling me as a golden age elitist - why have "Punisher's 3rd appearance" when they don't even list the first 3 Archie appearances?

 

Potshots at what we like aside (since we are now both 30 - same age, tastes are world apart when it comes to comics ), here's a simple explanation if you will have it. The folks who determine what notation goes on a CGC label have just not gotten to the Archies yet? I'm almost willing to bet more Punisher related material has been submitted for slabbing so it became a priority to get the 1st-3rd and any crossover appearances of the Punisher correct. Now, I like reading Archie digests rather than collecting high grade copies. I've always pulled them off supermarket shelves when I was young and page thru them while standing in line. I know Josie and the pussycats all too well and the movie had Tara Reid which was enough for me I don't think CGC's programmers/people in charge of label quality control are making decision based on historical importance here. Maybe they will get to Archie in a bit, but when you submit I've always included special notes from overstreet/wizard in the part of the submission form that asks for them. I note when something is a 30 cent variant, has an insert, has a crossover appearance - just in the hope that it would bring their attention to it should they not know already. S if you should feel like doing so next time you submit, mark it as "Archie's 3rd appearance", "innuendo cover", whatever and cross your fingers...it may just show up

[Darthdiesel]

You're avoiding the question by labeling me as a golden age elitist - why have "Punisher's 3rd appearance" when they don't even list the first 3 Archie appearances?

 

Jeeze Shield, you have a knack for picking up on the obvious yet obscure! I think this is a VERY valid question. CGC should NOT, in fact MUST not, cater to any particular trend. They should be as objective as possible in reporting on a book. If they are going to report on the 2nd or 3rd appearance of a SA character or a BA character or a (well - you get it) then they damned well better be doing the same for GA characters as well. I really cannot believe that Archie's 2nd or 3rd appearance is not noted by CGC. It is this kind of thing that will end up biting them in the rump roast.

 

They do have a notation, albeit incorrect (because Overstreet is wrong) on Jackpot #4 that reads "Same month as Pep #22 (First Archie)". That book should read "3rd appearance of Archie" and Pep 23 should read "2nd appearance of Archie, Betty and Jughead".

 

But c'mon...just because the Punisher hype is at an all time high, it's listed on some worthless (to me) Bronze age book?

 

Darth, I welcome your reply to this thread.

 

I replied above. My answer stands. It is not because of the Punisher hype. They have listed sequential and crossover apps of Punisher/hulk/wolverine etc. for a while now since the inception of the company and not as a response to upcoming movie releases.

 

I don't know why Archie apps are not listed. Maybe they are going by Overstreet notation? Also CGC takes on a huge liability by "determining" what is or is not an official appearance as there is big $$$ tied into such a determination. PLease see Hulk 180 vs 181 as Wolverine's "first appearance" or ASM 50 vs 51 for Kingpin's first appearance or MArvel Superheroes secret wars 8 vs ASM 252 for Spiderman's new costume/venom/alien symbiote first app...

 

my point is that sometimes these notation are vague or can be interpreted validly but with different conclusions. there is a lot of inherent risk on labelling, especially if incorrect, that it becomes more cost effectine, IMO, to avoid the label, unless it is "safe" = proven and time tested, accepted by a majority of the comic community...

 

 

I don't see it as catering to a trend or any specific favoring of a genre over another....just what affects the bottom line ($$$)

[Shield]

Well, even though you collect new ad-riddled comics that sell for $3.00 per book unless you want the chrome edition (Had to get that last potshot out of the way)

 

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

 

I don't think this is a CGC thing as much as its an Overstreet thing. I'll bet if the guide were accurate on Archie's first 3 appearances then books sent in to get graded would reflect it.

 

So how does it feel to be an old man like me?