• 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.

Feb Heritage Auction

Started by clarkkentdds,

612 posts in this topic

detective35

detective35

Posted
Posted
I don't agree with some of the rules cgc makes up as it goes along, but at least they are generally consistent:

 

All Star 3 MH with largish dust shadow 9.6

 

They didn't make them up as they went along, the lenient stance on dust shadows and foxing has been around long before CGC. It's just a total coincidence that prominent pedigrees featured books with those defects, and that the right people benefited from not having said books dinged by harsh grading either pre or post CGC.

 

Why is a stain caused by foxing negligible and a stain caused by water worthy of being hammered? Why is a sun shadow the kiss of death and a dust shadow not worthy of notice? It makes zero sense and it always bugs me.

 

 

Steve Borock seemed to be fairly tough on dust Shadows. To a certain degree he was not quite as tough on foxing (if they were on Larsons or not to detracting), but Steve would be a good one to ask.

 

I personally detest dust Shadows that detract the the aesthetic appeal of the book. If I was grading, I would not be kind on those books.

 

However to be objective, I guess CGC needs to give the book a technical grade, because aesthetic appeal is too subjective.

 

Dwight

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted
I don't agree with some of the rules cgc makes up as it goes along, but at least they are generally consistent:

 

All Star 3 MH with largish dust shadow 9.6

 

They didn't make them up as they went along, the lenient stance on dust shadows and foxing has been around long before CGC. It's just a total coincidence that prominent pedigrees featured books with those defects, and that the right people benefited from not having said books dinged by harsh grading either pre or post CGC.

 

Why is a stain caused by foxing negligible and a stain caused by water worthy of being hammered? Why is a sun shadow the kiss of death and a dust shadow not worthy of notice? It makes zero sense and it always bugs me.

 

 

Steve Borock seemed to be fairly tough on dust Shadows. To a certain degree he was not quite as tough on foxing (if they were on Larsons or not to detracting), but Steve would be a good one to ask.

 

I personally detest dust Shadows that detract the the aesthetic appeal of the book. If I was grading, I would not be kind on those books.

 

However to be objective, I guess CGC needs to give the book a technical grade, because aesthetic appeal is too subjective.

 

Dwight

 

Aesthetic appeal is not so subjective that it would make sense to say dirt caused by dust shadows doesn't make the cover look dirty.

 

CGC definitely assesses other forms of defects using subjective criteria that is aesthetic and emotion-based, rather than on a pure mathematical assessment of the damage. Otherwise resto would be treated simply as damage that happens to look good. And missing chunks from the back cover would matter no less than a chunk missing from the front

 

One can always count on the seller to point that out when the CGC grade goes against the typical human response, just as you can count on the seller to play down or ignore any lack of aesthetic appeal if the CGC grade doesn't take it into account. Buyers should understand all of that and base what they'll pay on how much they agree with the grade.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
detective35

detective35

Posted
Posted
thanks for the heads up dwight, the book value of $2500 bucks which I thought was a high price for any pulp. It seems super cool and it under 1k now in bidding,thanks buddy, do you know what the highest price ever paid for a pulp is and when?????

 

Hi Mitch,

 

I think the highest price paid was for teh All Story 1912 (first Tarzan), when it went for about 40K or more. It probably would not go for that much now (30K ish).

The next highest price paid was about 6K for any pulp.

 

A person has to be careful with pulps, because there are alot less buyers and demand out there, and if you overpay, you might be stuck with it, but with the Zepplin Stories, you are OK.

 

Dwight

 

 

Sound advice, Dwight. BTW, speaking of pulps, it's about time that I share my latest acquisition with folks here.

 

Dwight, your pulp and art collection is truly awesome and classy! (worship)

 

What I've collected is but a Shadow of yours, though I can't complain! :grin:

 

photo-1-3.jpg

 

The Shadow knows... smiley-dance005.gif

 

photo-2-1-1-1.jpg

 

 

:whee::whee::whee::whee::whee:

 

Hi David,

 

The painting looks awesome. You will have to send me a picture hi-res picture when you have a chance to take one. Congrats on your purchase!!!

 

Dwight

Link to comment
Share on other sites
detective35

detective35

Posted
Posted
I don't agree with some of the rules cgc makes up as it goes along, but at least they are generally consistent:

 

All Star 3 MH with largish dust shadow 9.6

 

They didn't make them up as they went along, the lenient stance on dust shadows and foxing has been around long before CGC. It's just a total coincidence that prominent pedigrees featured books with those defects, and that the right people benefited from not having said books dinged by harsh grading either pre or post CGC.

 

Why is a stain caused by foxing negligible and a stain caused by water worthy of being hammered? Why is a sun shadow the kiss of death and a dust shadow not worthy of notice? It makes zero sense and it always bugs me.

 

 

Steve Borock seemed to be fairly tough on dust Shadows. To a certain degree he was not quite as tough on foxing (if they were on Larsons or not to detracting), but Steve would be a good one to ask.

 

I personally detest dust Shadows that detract the the aesthetic appeal of the book. If I was grading, I would not be kind on those books.

 

However to be objective, I guess CGC needs to give the book a technical grade, because aesthetic appeal is too subjective.

 

Dwight

 

Aesthetic appeal is not so subjective that it would make sense to say dirt caused by dust shadows doesn't make the cover look dirty.

 

CGC definitely assesses other forms of defects using subjective criteria that is aesthetic and emotion-based, rather than on a pure mathematical assessment of the damage. Otherwise resto would be treated simply as damage that happens to look good. And missing chunks from the back cover would matter no less than a chunk missing from the front

 

One can always count on the seller to point that out when the CGC grade goes against the typical human response, just as you can count on the seller to play down or ignore any lack of aesthetic appeal if the CGC grade doesn't take it into account. Buyers should understand all of that and base what they'll pay on how much they agree with the grade.

 

 

I agree,

 

For me personally, I would rather have a 9.0 book with some minor defect, but still has the look of a brand new book off the newsstand, white pages, dripping with gloss and ink reflectivity; over a book that is graded 9.4 or 9.6 and is technically superior, but does not have that newsstand fresh look. I remember having this exact discussion with Danny Kramer and he is of the same opinion, putting the aesthetic look of the book first.

 

I have always maintained that I would take a 9.0 SanFrancisco or Mile High (with no dust shadow) over most 9.4 non-pedegrees (because they have that right-off-the printer look), but that is just me. Having once owned pedegrees of every Moldoff covered golden age Flash comic (8 MH, 9SF, etc.), I now look at the 9.8 Billy Wright Flash 10 and compare it to the 9.4 Mile High, and there is no question that I would snap up the Mile high in a second as to me it has a more clean, fresh, newsstand type of look, but that is just my personal preference.

 

Dwight

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mmehdy

Mmehdy

Posted
Posted

this auction is going to break a Ha.com record....great stuff, A lot of bargains out there if you stay away from the headline books, although cap 2 is a winner.

 

Another winner I just got from Amazon is Lee-Kirby the wonder years for $12 bucks on amazon, best read in the last 5 years for 12 bucks. It goes into the "Why" as to how the best 10 year run in comic book history was created. check it out on line, there are some sample pages on the kirby collector website.

 

FF10 looks like a good deal...9.6

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Silver Surfer

Silver Surfer

Posted
Posted
I don't agree with some of the rules cgc makes up as it goes along, but at least they are generally consistent:

 

All Star 3 MH with largish dust shadow 9.6

 

They didn't make them up as they went along, the lenient stance on dust shadows and foxing has been around long before CGC. It's just a total coincidence that prominent pedigrees featured books with those defects, and that the right people benefited from not having said books dinged by harsh grading either pre or post CGC.

 

Why is a stain caused by foxing negligible and a stain caused by water worthy of being hammered? Why is a sun shadow the kiss of death and a dust shadow not worthy of notice? It makes zero sense and it always bugs me.

 

Totally agree. I think they would be hard pressed to justify the logic behind it too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tb

tb

Posted
Posted
this auction is going to break a Ha.com record....great stuff,

 

When I checked yesterday, the total bids on the first page (50 lots) was around $2M excluding fees. Seems like this auction has the potential to not just break but shatter the previous record...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timely

Timely

Posted
Posted
30 more books of billys coming up on the sunday action also....they look good to, and the carl barks paintings are at 250K already. What is the highest auction total for a ha.com auctio to date ??????

 

Over 5 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mmehdy

Mmehdy

Posted
Posted

that number is gonna be hard to break, must have been when det 27 sold for over 1 million right????? 3 Mil for billy? including the sunday auction and 4 remaining books next auction, and they need to break 2 million on the other items.????

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cat-Man_America

Cat-Man_America

Posted
Posted
I went to the Heritage preview today. The Billy Wright books are really wonderful to see in person though there is some light foxing on a lot of the books. The PQ really makes the difference with these books.

 

light foxing? hm

 

I'm not sure who is being foxed, but the PQ is under the pedigree slab.

 

:popcorn: Since this is Oscar week I'm going for a movie analogy for the Billy Wright pedigree. Unlike the wonderful Wizard of Oz Toto has been impounded and won't be on hand to pull the curtain back that reveals the professor's better side.

 

The audience, however, is still being asked to suspend disbelief for the gruff looking exteriors seen in some scans and accept at face value the hidden virtuous interior that's as pure as the driven snow.

 

Now, that's all well and good, but removing pedigree books from CGC slabs could jeopardize both grade and pedigree status, so how much does the PQ matter except as a cursory acknowledgement? (shrug)

 

I'm not trying to rain on the Billy Wright parade, but seriously, the surface of these books will inevitably determine whether this collection turns out to be a blockbuster for the ages or a flop that takes forever to recoup it's investment in GA Munchkinland.

 

Full disclosure: YES, I'm a humbug. :sorry: That's because I'm tracking and bidding on certain books! That said, I'm doing so very cautiously.

 

In my less-than-humble opinion, unless you've got the good Professor Marvel's crystal ball or a pair of ruby slippers bigger than Bedrock's feet, I'd advise taking the Billy Wright page quality with a grain of salt.

 

Bottom line: As a pedigree the Billy Wright collection only gets a luke-warm appraisal from me overall. That's just my opinion; other's mileage may vary. meh

 

 

:juggle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted
that number is gonna be hard to break, must have been when det 27 sold for over 1 million right????? 3 Mil for billy? including the sunday auction and 4 remaining books next auction, and they need to break 2 million on the other items.????

 

I think the record 5m+ auction was the auction with the 400k miller dark knight piece.

 

I don't think 5m will be a problem. Don't forget about all those curator FF's, they will bring huge money. And speaking of miller dark knights, there are a couple good ones too, plus the calvin & hobbes and whatever else.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cat-Man_America

Cat-Man_America

Posted
Posted
I don't share the same feeling. I would pay a premium for a white page book in a slab. I would pay less for a lt tan/off white page book in a slab.

 

There is a lot of room between tan and white and even some margin for error in CGC grading as that's only an opinion that might even be influenced by the number of White and Off-White copies coming through at any one time. It isn't an exact science after all.

 

COW (Cream to Off White) is more common for GA book interiors, and while not the most desirable, it is perfectly acceptable. Off-White to White and White is much less common, but found often enough even outside of pedigree copies.

 

Personally, I'd rather have a COW copy with fantastic exterior than a White pager with structural flaws and foxing, but that's just me; everyone's mileage varies. (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicdonna

comicdonna

Posted
Posted
I don't share the same feeling. I would pay a premium for a white page book in a slab. I would pay less for a lt tan/off white page book in a slab.

 

There is a lot of room between tan and white and even some margin for error in CGC grading as that's only an opinion that might even be influenced by the number of White and Off-White copies coming through at any one time. It isn't an exact science after all.

 

COW (Cream to Off White) is more common for GA book interiors, and while not the most desirable, it is perfectly acceptable. Off-White to White and White is much less common, but found often enough even outside of pedigree copies.

 

Personally, I'd rather have a COW copy with fantastic exterior than a White pager with structural flaws and foxing, but that's just me; everyone's mileage varies. (shrug)

I guess I misunderstood your original post. I got the impression that page quality on the label didn't matter to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing