THE AMAZING FANTASY #15 CLUB 39 39

[lou_fine]

2 hours ago, Gotham Kid said:

On 8/30/2017 at 8:24 PM, showcase22gr1959 said:

Just checked GPA and AF15 9.4 which sold in Heritage in 2016 has now resold in May 2017 for 705K. 

Not a single offer was made on it thru Heritage!? So where did it resell ?

https://comics.ha.com/itm/silver-age-1956-1969-/amazing-fantasy-15-marvel-1962-cgc-nm-94-off-white-pages/a/7124-91113.s?ic4=OtherResults-SampleItem-Thumbnail-022817&tab=ArchiveSearchResults-012417

+1

Same question which I have since the link clearly indicates that the book is still opened to offers with none received to this point in time. 

If there was a completed resale (i.e. offer and acceptance), the link would look like the following:

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/all-star-comics-3-billy-wright-pedigree-dc-1940-cgc-vf-85-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7054-91043.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

This link clearly shows that the Billy Wright  All-Star 3 which was sold for close to $50K back in February of 2012 was resold a week later for $200K through Heritage's Make An Offer to owner option. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by lou_fine

[lou_fine]

On 8/27/2017 at 5:23 AM, Glassman10 said:

On 8/26/2017 at 1:36 PM, SECollector said:

Is really that extra 0.1 point worth all that money and attention? Seriously? I guess that's something you consider when you have everything else (and a ton of extra money left ).

Well, look at the census for the extra .1.  Some people just gotta have the best regardless of the price. 

 

On 8/27/2017 at 5:39 AM, SECollector said:

I totally get that. But what one is buying with all these extra thousands is really the 0.1 grade difference on the label and the whatever feeling of having "the best". Even though unslabbed the 9.8 and the 9.9 one would probably be the same books with a naked eye. But -as always- whatever makes one happy.

+1

Well, to each their own, I would have to say.

Personally, I would be very wary about paying any additional significant dollars for only a 0.1 or 0.2 grade difference since grading is still only a subjective opinion and only at the time the book is graded, as opposed to something that is scientific and can be accurately determined beyond a shadow of doubt.  As have already been seen many times before in the past, a book that grades out at a certain level one day can grade out at a completely different condition level on another day, even though absolutely nothing has been done to the book at all. 

As stated before in the past, I would much rather buy a book where what I am paying for is in the underlying value of the book itself, as opposed to paying for a book where the underlying value is really being determined by that big number in the top left corner of the slab and not the underlying book itself. 

But once again, to each their own, I would have to say...........whatever turns your crank. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by lou_fine

[lou_fine]

On 8/27/2017 at 6:12 AM, Gotham Kid said:

On 8/27/2017 at 5:39 AM, SECollector said:

On 8/27/2017 at 5:23 AM, Glassman10 said:

Well, look at the census for the extra .1.  Some people just gotta have the best regardless of the price. 

 

I totally get that. But what one is buying with all these extra thousands is really the 0.1 grade difference on the label and the whatever feeling of having "the best". Even though unslabbed the 9.8 and the 9.9 one would probably be the same books with a naked eye. But -as always- whatever makes one happy.

Bragging rights are everything. Just ask the 181 9.9 guy. A friend of mine missed that boat by a couple hours ( was unaware of the listing and only saw my email too late ). At the time he had a handful of 9.8s, which in itself was a big deal. The census for 9.8s was a LOT lower than it is today.

Would your friend's name happen to be Boston and is he an university economics professor, and if so, how is he doing with that CGC 9.9 graded copy of New Mutants 98 which he brought for something like $12K and then proceeded to give all of us an economic lecture on how his purchase was a 100% guaranteed sure fire winner?   

I imagine your friend must now be happy that he missed the CGC 9.9 IH 181 boat by a couple of hours.  From the sounds of what I have been hearing from these boards over the years, the book would be lucky to get a CGC 9.6, let alone a CGC 9.8 grade if ever taken out and sent back in for a simple straight regrading.  It sounds as though it would need a perfect alignment of the stars and some serious praying to both the pressing Gods and the grading Gods for the buyer of this book not to lose some serious money on this lone CGC 9.9 graded copy if ever removed from its slab.   

Edited September 2, 2017 by lou_fine

[trmoore54]

On ‎8‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 10:11 PM, Gotham Kid said:

Resolution isn't good enough to get the CGC number

http://www.comiclink.com/itemdetail.asp?back=/search.asp%3Fwhere%3Dsell%26title%3DHULK%2B181%26x%3D0%26y%3D0%26ItemType%3DCB&id=873511

 

It's got a fuzzy bottom spine corner as well...

[SECollector]

1 hour ago, lou_fine said:

 

+1

Well, to each their own, I would have to say.

Personally, I would be very wary about paying any additional significant dollars for only a 0.1 or 0.2 grade difference since grading is still only a subjective opinion and only at the time the book is graded, as opposed to something that is scientific and can be accurately determined beyond a shadow of doubt.  As have already been seen many times before in the past, a book that grades out at a certain level one day can grade out at a completely different condition level on another day, even though absolutely nothing has been done to the book at all. 

As stated before in the past, I would much rather buy a book where what I am paying for is in the underlying value of the book itself, as opposed to paying for a book where the underlying value is really being determined by that big number in the top left corner of the slab and not the underlying book itself. 

But once again, to each their own, I would have to say...........whatever turns your crank. 

My point exactly. Whichever 9.9 book could easily be a 9.8 on another day. Its so subjective. But yes, as always in the surrealistic collecting universe, to each their own.

With that said, I can easily imagine myself in a different life, universe, timeline or whatever, where I have millions to burn, getting carried away and going for 9.9s...  (That is if I already had a super nice Action Comics 1, a Detective Comics 27, Cap 1, Marvel Comics 1, Batman 1, Superman 1, Pep 22, Archie 1, a dozen of original Ditko Spidey covers, a full issue of an early FF (original art of course), a couple of Picassos, a British Guiana Magenta stamp, a T206 Honus Wagner and - yeah you get the picture... ).

[lou_fine]

And for all you AF 15 potential buyers out there just itching to get their own personal copy:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canada/rare-spider-man-comic-for-sale-in-b-c-could-sell-for-1m-1.3571716

This newscast almost makes Gareth sound like a wanna be Darren Adams or this particular copy of AF 15 to be a wanna be CGC 9.6 graded copy when it clearly is not. 

I guess this is what they mean when they talk about fake news. 

Edited September 2, 2017 by lou_fine

[delekkerste]

 

12 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

And for all you AF 15 potential buyers out there:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canada/rare-spider-man-comic-for-sale-in-b-c-could-sell-for-1m-1.3571716

This newscast almost makes Gareth sound like a wanna be Darren Adams or this particular copy of AF 15 to be a wanna be CGC 9.6 graded copy when it clearly is not. 

“If we don’t sell it in a few weeks, next year it’ll be twice the price,” said Gaudin.  

#nobubblehere

Edited September 2, 2017 by delekkerste

[ThothAmon]

30 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

 

And for all you AF 15 potential buyers out there just itching to get their own personal copy:

 

Comic looked damn nice.  Some of the closeups did appear to show enough wear to keep it out of the 9.0 and above family though.

[lou_fine]

11 minutes ago, ThothAmon said:

43 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

 

And for all you AF 15 potential buyers out there just itching to get their own personal copy:

 

Comic looked damn nice.  Some of the closeups did appear to show enough wear to keep it out of the 9.0 and above family though.

It probably would have been a good idea for him to have pressed out the subscription crease and "fixed up" a few of the little defects on the book BEFORE having the big splash story and press about the book.  Clearly not as gorgeous as just coming off the printing press. 

I don't think Gareth is as on top of the market, especially in terms of finer and more extreme points of graded books as he claims to be with his 25 years of comic book experience. 

 

[VintageComics]

5 hours ago, lou_fine said:

I imagine your friend must now be happy that he missed the CGC 9.9 IH 181 boat by a couple of hours.  From the sounds of what I have been hearing from these boards over the years, the book would be lucky to get a CGC 9.6, let alone a CGC 9.8 grade if ever taken out and sent back in for a simple straight regrading.  It sounds as though it would need a perfect alignment of the stars and some serious praying to both the pressing Gods and the grading Gods for the buyer of this book not to lose some serious money on this lone CGC 9.9 graded copy if ever removed from its slab. 

All we've ever seen is smaller scans of the book so it's impossible to know for sure. Scanners (and old slabs) can ghost or create all sorts of defects that aren't really there.

Has anyone here held the book in their hands?

[VintageComics]

2 hours ago, lou_fine said:

It probably would have been a good idea for him to have pressed out the subscription crease and "fixed up" a few of the little defects on the book BEFORE having the big splash story and press about the book.  Clearly not as gorgeous as just coming off the printing press. 

What are you talking about? It's Mint. It's in a sleeve with cardboard and everything!?!?!?

[amazingspiderfan]

1 hour ago, VintageComics said:

All we've ever seen is smaller scans of the book so it's impossible to know for sure. Scanners (and old slabs) can ghost or create all sorts of defects that aren't really there.

Has anyone here held the book in their hands?

I have when Ideal Collectibles was selling it at SDCC around 2001 I believe. The speculation is true in this case it is an over-graded copy in my opinion , their is a pretty decent color breaking stress line in the middle of the spine. Not something I would expect to see in a 9.9. The only other 9.9 I have seen besides modern was Terry's ASM 19 and that copy is unbelievable, CGC missed the mark on the 181 .

[VintageComics]

36 minutes ago, amazingspiderfan said:

I have when Ideal Collectibles was selling it at SDCC around 2001 I believe. The speculation is true in this case it is an over-graded copy in my opinion , their is a pretty decent color breaking stress line in the middle of the spine. Not something I would expect to see in a 9.9. The only other 9.9 I have seen besides modern was Terry's ASM 19 and that copy is unbelievable, CGC missed the mark on the 181 .

Interesting.

I've had several 9.9 vintage books slabbed from raw (oldest would be late Bronze) and yes, they are absolutely stunning in hand.

I used to own one of the Wolverine #1 CGC 9.9's (Limited mini) as well as maybe #2 or #3 (I don't quite remember) and I did remember wondering if one of the books deserved a 9.9. It didn't have any color breaking wear but it did not seem as crisp and tight at the edges like most minty mint books did. I think there was a bit of a wave to one of the edges.

It's possible that the book was overgraded or it's also possible that damage  was incurred at some point after it was graded.

On a side note, I owned a CGC 9.6 copy that I bought from Jason Ewart back in 2003 or so. Some of the old timers might remember that book. It was the most flawless copy I'd ever seen in my life - razor sharp and nary a nick on the book - but the reason the book got a CGC 9.6 was due to a miswrap (back to front) so that it looked like it had a $0.05 price on the cover (the 2 was on the back)

A CGC 9.9 contender if I'd ever seen one, aside from the miswrap.

 

[lou_fine]

51 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

On a side note, I owned a CGC 9.6 copy that I bought from Jason Ewart back in 2003 or so. Some of the old timers might remember that book. It was the most flawless copy I'd ever seen in my life - razor sharp and nary a nick on the book

Well, all I can say is that if you put Jason Ewert and "razor sharp / nary a nick" together with respect to a particular book, I can think of only one thing. 

[peewee22]

1 hour ago, lou_fine said:

Well, all I can say is that if you put Jason Ewert and "razor sharp / nary a nick" together with respect to a particular book, I can think of only one thing. 

He sure sharpened the edge on an AF15 I purchased from him in the early 90s. Keith Contarino brokered the book and sent it straight back to JE. sharpened edge and all.

[delekkerste]

10 hours ago, VintageComics said:

All we've ever seen is smaller scans of the book so it's impossible to know for sure. Scanners (and old slabs) can ghost or create all sorts of defects that aren't really there.

Has anyone here held the book in their hands?

I have held it in my hands.  Somehow my notoriety preceded me (which is why I want to say it was probably a slightly later SDCC than 2001, though I was a known playa in BA slabs by 2001 as well) and so, when the guy at the Ideal booth saw my name on the SDCC badge, he invited me over to examine the book up close. 

It's obviously been a long time, but my impression then was that there's no way it should have been a 9.9 - I think it just got graded early on and won the lottery from early inconsistency.  I mean I was, of course, polite and complimented the book to the Ideal guy, but, all I could think of was why the book shouldn't be a 9.9. 

I'm sure it would still easily get a 9.8 by the more relaxed grading standards that have largely prevailed since I ditched slab collecting more than a decade ago (from what I've seen as a casual observer), but, by the standards prevailing for most of the time when I was active, it could have well gotten a 9.6 (my grading standards are frozen in 2004 when I quit slabs; I know what in talking about).  

In any case, it was/is a 9.9 in label only. But, just as possession is 9/10ths of the law, so the label is 9/10ths of the grade. 

Edited September 3, 2017 by delekkerste

[zhamlau]

On 9/1/2017 at 3:38 PM, NoMan said:

I honestly don't see how you guys keep all these AF15 sales straight. 

You have to, because it seems GPA isnt keeping very accurate records of public sales these days. Anyone else notice that many 5.0+ sales of note arent showing up on GPA? The 57k one still isnt there, and that was like 6 months ago I believe.

[Gotham Kid]

23 minutes ago, zhamlau said:

Anyone else notice that many 5.0+ sales of note arent showing up on GPA? The 57k one still isnt there, and that was like 6 months ago I believe.

[lou_fine]

7 hours ago, delekkerste said:

It's obviously been a long time, but my impression then was that there's no way it should have been a 9.9 - I think it just got graded early on and won the lottery from early inconsistency.  I mean I was, of course, polite and complimented the book to the Ideal guy, but, all I could think of was why the book shouldn't be a 9.9. 

I'm sure it would still easily get a 9.8 by the more relaxed grading standards that have largely prevailed since I ditched slab collecting more than a decade ago (from what I've seen as a casual observer), but, by the standards prevailing for most of the time when I was active, it could have well gotten a 9.6 (my grading standards are frozen in 2004 when I quit slabs; I know what in talking about).  

In any case, it was/is a 9.9 in label only. But, just as possession is 9/10ths of the law, so the label is 9/10ths of the grade. 

Highly doubt this copy would receive even a 9.8 without some additional revenue generating work being done to it.  With Matt Nelson and the current grading team in place, although grading standards may have relaxed in certain areas, it seems that creases and stress lines have moved right to the top of their hit parade when it comes to grading.  Different time periods and different grading standards, but how convenient that this subtle but significant change helps both the top line and the bottom line of their parent company. 

Interesting to note that everybody that has seen the book feels that it is overgraded and I have yet to hear even 1 person say that it was properly graded at a CGC 9.9 level:

16 hours ago, amazingspiderfan said:

I have when Ideal Collectibles was selling it at SDCC around 2001 I believe. The speculation is true in this case it is an over-graded copy in my opinion , their is a pretty decent color breaking stress line in the middle of the spine. Not something I would expect to see in a 9.9. The only other 9.9 I have seen besides modern was Terry's ASM 19 and that copy is unbelievable, CGC missed the mark on the 181 .

Based upon your last sentence, this is exactly why I believe you will never ever see this copy removed from its current slab.  Even with additional work done on the book, it is highly doubtful that it would ever see the same CGC 9.9 grade again.  

[VintageComics]

15 hours ago, lou_fine said:

16 hours ago, VintageComics said:

On a side note, I owned a CGC 9.6 copy that I bought from Jason Ewart back in 2003 or so. Some of the old timers might remember that book. It was the most flawless copy I'd ever seen in my life - razor sharp and nary a nick on the book

Well, all I can say is that if you put Jason Ewert and "razor sharp / nary a nick" together with respect to a particular book, I can think of only one thing. 

I bought that book well before the Ewert news broke.

I'm fairly certain that book was untouched. It was just naturally awesome.