Cerebus 1 a more valuable key than Hulk 181? Really Overstreet? Poll on Page 87 3 3

[chrisco37]

Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's.

 

But it hasn't been "I know a guy...".

 

Donut has said HE would price a Cerebus higher. He'd trade a Hulk 181 straight up for one. You know Donut. He'll be running the booth for Cards, Comics & Collectibles at Baltimore this weekend. You know, the shop that puts the entire show on.

 

Dale Roberts said HE would price a Cerebus higher. You know Dale. National dealer, does all the major shows. Makes his living dealing in vintage collectibles.

 

I'll ask a few dealers this weekend what they think and I'll report back (or is that too much "I know a guy who knows a guy"?).

 

Who do you want me to ask?

 

I'll ask Storms, Superworld, Kapelka, Metro (if they are there), Graham Crackers.

[Prince Namor]

 

No, the problem is, you're ON the SAME SIDE of the agreement, yet you're still trying to find ways to argue with the side you're agreeing with.

 

Hehehe...

 

Well, I could say the same for you and RMA.

 

Well you COULD, but you'd be wrong.

 

I have never said anything else than what I said above... and yet .. at least RMA seems to want to disagree with me.

 

Correcting you and disagreeing with you are two different things.

 

I might agree with RMA... BUT!.... it depends if he tries to claim Cerebus is the most valuable or King of the Bronze Age (and yes... at least one person in here did say that.. )

 

He didn't. He hasn't. He won't. No one did. NO ONE SERIOUSLY DID. NO ONE IS SERIOUSLY ARGUING THAT.

 

IT'S ALL IN YOUR HEAD.

 

because then we don't. If he words it correctly.. namely that under very specific circumstances (single copy, 9.2 etc.) a case can be made that Cerebus is more valuable.. then yes, I won't really disagree with him.

 

Yes, you will. You'll find a way. You'll say (see the next paragraph)....

 

Having said that.... I'm not entirely convinced either to agree with RMA because Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's. So for me it is still up in the air a bit whether Cerebus or H181 is in fact the most valuable even under those specifications of the term "valuable".

 

SEE!!!

 

But it could be he is right on that one... I just wish he could back it up with more hard evidence rather than anecdotale evidence.

 

Maybe you should get to know some national dealers. Buy some books from the big guys. Start conversations with them. You'll learn a lot.

 

However, that was (from the beginning of the thread) never my point. My point is that saying that Cerebus is more valuable or the King of BA is simply false.

 

Am I being punked? NO ONE HAS MADE THAT ARGUMENT. NO ONE HAS SERIOUSLY MADE THAT CLAIM.

 

IT'S IN YOUR HEAD!!!!

 

And yes, some people in this thread have argued that.

 

No. No they haven't. It's in you and jaydog's head. Because:

 

 

I know that RMA and you are specifically talking about this 9.2 grade for a single book etc. .. and as long as you remain this specific I don't argue with it. ..

 

Yes. Yes you do.

 

We have. Yet you still do.

 

although I might think it is being very selective and such a rare occurrence (Cerebus being more valuable) that is is an extremely bad representation of reality bordering on a worthless claim...

 

SEE!

 

Finally, I have nothing against RMA. In fact I respect the guy.

 

 

[AlexanderM]

Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's.

 

But it hasn't been "I know a guy...".

 

Donut has said HE would price a Cerebus higher. He'd trade a Hulk 181 straight up for one. You know Donut. He'll be running the booth for Cards, Comics & Collectibles at Baltimore this weekend. You know, the shop that puts the entire show on.

 

Dale Roberts said HE would price a Cerebus higher. You know Dale. National dealer, does all the major shows. Makes his living dealing in vintage collectibles.

 

I'll ask a few dealers this weekend what they think and I'll report back (or is that too much "I know a guy who knows a guy"?).

 

Who do you want me to ask?

 

I'll ask Storms, Superworld, Kapelka, Metro (if they are there), Graham Crackers.

 

Well, in order for that to be valid we would need:

 

1) a reasonable sample size of dealer.

2) to be fully sure that there is no response bias. In other words, that the dealers have not guessed the purpose of the question, and make a cost-less (and perhaps subconscious even) choice to agree with the person posing the question.

 

and even if those things were assured completely there would be the major issue that we would have data on 'intentions' rather than actual behavior. We know that there at times is a pretty big gulf between intentions and behavior (just think about green consumption etc.).

 

Actual sales is by (very) far a stronger source of evidence.

[AlexanderM]

 

No, the problem is, you're ON the SAME SIDE of the agreement, yet you're still trying to find ways to argue with the side you're agreeing with.

 

Hehehe...

 

Well, I could say the same for you and RMA.

 

Well you COULD, but you'd be wrong.

 

I have never said anything else than what I said above... and yet .. at least RMA seems to want to disagree with me.

 

Correcting you and disagreeing with you are two different things.

 

I might agree with RMA... BUT!.... it depends if he tries to claim Cerebus is the most valuable or King of the Bronze Age (and yes... at least one person in here did say that.. )

 

He didn't. He hasn't. He won't. No one did. NO ONE SERIOUSLY DID. NO ONE IS SERIOUSLY ARGUING THAT.

 

IT'S ALL IN YOUR HEAD.

 

because then we don't. If he words it correctly.. namely that under very specific circumstances (single copy, 9.2 etc.) a case can be made that Cerebus is more valuable.. then yes, I won't really disagree with him.

 

Yes, you will. You'll find a way. You'll say (see the next paragraph)....

 

Having said that.... I'm not entirely convinced either to agree with RMA because Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's. So for me it is still up in the air a bit whether Cerebus or H181 is in fact the most valuable even under those specifications of the term "valuable".

 

SEE!!!

 

But it could be he is right on that one... I just wish he could back it up with more hard evidence rather than anecdotale evidence.

 

Maybe you should get to know some national dealers. Buy some books from the big guys. Start conversations with them. You'll learn a lot.

 

However, that was (from the beginning of the thread) never my point. My point is that saying that Cerebus is more valuable or the King of BA is simply false.

 

Am I being punked? NO ONE HAS MADE THAT ARGUMENT. NO ONE HAS SERIOUSLY MADE THAT CLAIM.

 

IT'S IN YOUR HEAD!!!!

 

And yes, some people in this thread have argued that.

 

No. No they haven't. It's in you and jaydog's head. Because:

 

 

I know that RMA and you are specifically talking about this 9.2 grade for a single book etc. .. and as long as you remain this specific I don't argue with it. ..

 

Yes. Yes you do.

 

We have. Yet you still do.

 

although I might think it is being very selective and such a rare occurrence (Cerebus being more valuable) that is is an extremely bad representation of reality bordering on a worthless claim...

 

SEE!

 

Finally, I have nothing against RMA. In fact I respect the guy.

 

 

 

You know why I still respect RMA, even though we disagree? Because he doesn't resort to childishness like you just did. (thumbs u

[chrisco37]

How do you want me to phrase the question(s)?

 

I think the way I asked Dale earlier is fair and shouldn't sway a dealer to a certain position:

 

1. Which book would you price higher (in VF/NM or better): Hulk 181 or Cerebus 1?

 

2. Which book would you pay more for?

[AlexanderM]

How do you want me to phrase the question(s)?

 

I think the way I asked Dale earlier is fair and shouldn't sway a dealer to a certain position:

 

1. Which book would you price higher (in VF/NM or better): Hulk 181 or Cerebus 1?

 

2. Which book would you pay more for?

 

Those questions seem fair if asked with no other context.

 

However, it really is not me you should try to convince with this effort because I am not sure Cerebus is not the most expensive in 9.2. It might well be.

 

And even if you get such data from some dealers, it is still intentional data which is far weaker than actual sales data. So I doubt it would be worth the effort.

[bronze johnny]

That is a point I'm making. Hulk 181 is an iconic key. Cerebus is not.

 

Says the guy who calls DC 100 Page SS 5 a key.

 

OS is saying that a character like Cerebus has a more valuable 1st app. than Wolverine's.

 

Cerebus 1s value isn't (all) because it's the first appearance of an aardvark.

 

Coming from the guy who says DC 100 Page SS 5 is not a key -

 

Yes, Cerebus 1's value can be attributed to 3 things:

 

- 1st app.

 

- book that is credited with inititiating the independent black and white comic book genre

 

- scarcity in higher grades due to a limited print run

 

But you knew that already?

 

[Prince Namor]

Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's.

 

But it hasn't been "I know a guy...".

 

Donut has said HE would price a Cerebus higher. He'd trade a Hulk 181 straight up for one. You know Donut. He'll be running the booth for Cards, Comics & Collectibles at Baltimore this weekend. You know, the shop that puts the entire show on.

 

Dale Roberts said HE would price a Cerebus higher. You know Dale. National dealer, does all the major shows. Makes his living dealing in vintage collectibles.

 

I'll ask a few dealers this weekend what they think and I'll report back (or is that too much "I know a guy who knows a guy"?).

 

Who do you want me to ask?

 

I'll ask Storms, Superworld, Kapelka, Metro (if they are there), Graham Crackers.

 

Well, in order for that to be valid we would need:

 

1) a reasonable sample size of dealer.

2) to be fully sure that there is no response bias. In other words, that the dealers have not guessed the purpose of the question, and make a cost-less (and perhaps subconscious even) choice to agree with the person posing the question.

 

and even if those things were assured completely there would be the major issue that we would have data on 'intentions' rather than actual behavior. We know that there at times is a pretty big gulf between intentions and behavior (just think about green consumption etc.).

 

Actual sales is by (very) far a stronger source of evidence.

 

What would be the motive for lying?

That's what you're saying is, that they might not be truthful in their responses.

 

If a national dealer, from here on this forum says, "I'd pay X for that book in that grade" , you can damn well bet your bottom dollar they would.

 

To LIE, or have some kind of response bias as you call it, would call in to question their character. You think any of them would do that?

 

On ANY Comic or especially on a book they may not EVER even see the rest of their lives?

 

The REASON the ones who've come in here SAY it, is in the HOPES that someone on here HAS ONE and now KNOWING that it is VALUABLE, will BRING it FORWARD.

 

They sell comics for a living. Their job is to make money selling comics. A book like that will command a, some believe, higher price than it ever has.

 

That equates into: $$$$$

 

Lying about the VALUE of comics in some stupid forum thread isn't worth their time.

[AlexanderM]

Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's.

 

But it hasn't been "I know a guy...".

 

Donut has said HE would price a Cerebus higher. He'd trade a Hulk 181 straight up for one. You know Donut. He'll be running the booth for Cards, Comics & Collectibles at Baltimore this weekend. You know, the shop that puts the entire show on.

 

Dale Roberts said HE would price a Cerebus higher. You know Dale. National dealer, does all the major shows. Makes his living dealing in vintage collectibles.

 

I'll ask a few dealers this weekend what they think and I'll report back (or is that too much "I know a guy who knows a guy"?).

 

Who do you want me to ask?

 

I'll ask Storms, Superworld, Kapelka, Metro (if they are there), Graham Crackers.

 

Well, in order for that to be valid we would need:

 

1) a reasonable sample size of dealer.

2) to be fully sure that there is no response bias. In other words, that the dealers have not guessed the purpose of the question, and make a cost-less (and perhaps subconscious even) choice to agree with the person posing the question.

 

and even if those things were assured completely there would be the major issue that we would have data on 'intentions' rather than actual behavior. We know that there at times is a pretty big gulf between intentions and behavior (just think about green consumption etc.).

 

Actual sales is by (very) far a stronger source of evidence.

 

What would be the motive for lying?

That's what you're saying is, that they might not be truthful in their responses.

 

If a national dealer, from here on this forum says, "I'd pay X for that book in that grade" , you can damn well bet your bottom dollar they would.

 

To LIE, or have some kind of response bias as you call it, would call in to question their character. You think any of them would do that?

 

On ANY Comic or especially on a book they may not EVER even see the rest of their lives?

 

The REASON the ones who've come in here SAY it, is in the HOPES that someone on here HAS ONE and now KNOWING that it is VALUABLE, will BRING it FORWARD.

 

They sell comics for a living. Their job is to make money selling comics. A book like that will command a, some believe, higher price than it ever has.

 

That equates into: $$$$$

 

Lying about the VALUE of comics in some stupid forum thread isn't worth their time.

 

No, Chuck. I'm not saying they would be lying. It is complicated to explain - try to search for "response bias in scientific research".. or perhaps just "response bias". You will learn that it is not about lying or not.

[Prince Namor]

Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's.

 

But it hasn't been "I know a guy...".

 

Donut has said HE would price a Cerebus higher. He'd trade a Hulk 181 straight up for one. You know Donut. He'll be running the booth for Cards, Comics & Collectibles at Baltimore this weekend. You know, the shop that puts the entire show on.

 

Dale Roberts said HE would price a Cerebus higher. You know Dale. National dealer, does all the major shows. Makes his living dealing in vintage collectibles.

 

I'll ask a few dealers this weekend what they think and I'll report back (or is that too much "I know a guy who knows a guy"?).

 

Who do you want me to ask?

 

I'll ask Storms, Superworld, Kapelka, Metro (if they are there), Graham Crackers.

 

Well, in order for that to be valid we would need:

 

1) a reasonable sample size of dealer.

2) to be fully sure that there is no response bias. In other words, that the dealers have not guessed the purpose of the question, and make a cost-less (and perhaps subconscious even) choice to agree with the person posing the question.

 

and even if those things were assured completely there would be the major issue that we would have data on 'intentions' rather than actual behavior. We know that there at times is a pretty big gulf between intentions and behavior (just think about green consumption etc.).

 

Actual sales is by (very) far a stronger source of evidence.

 

What would be the motive for lying?

That's what you're saying is, that they might not be truthful in their responses.

 

If a national dealer, from here on this forum says, "I'd pay X for that book in that grade" , you can damn well bet your bottom dollar they would.

 

To LIE, or have some kind of response bias as you call it, would call in to question their character. You think any of them would do that?

 

On ANY Comic or especially on a book they may not EVER even see the rest of their lives?

 

The REASON the ones who've come in here SAY it, is in the HOPES that someone on here HAS ONE and now KNOWING that it is VALUABLE, will BRING it FORWARD.

 

They sell comics for a living. Their job is to make money selling comics. A book like that will command a, some believe, higher price than it ever has.

 

That equates into: $$$$$

 

Lying about the VALUE of comics in some stupid forum thread isn't worth their time.

 

No, Chuck. I'm not saying they would be lying. It is complicated to explain - try to search for "response bias in scientific research".. or perhaps just "response bias". You will learn that it is not about lying or not.

 

Yeah, I know what it is. We just had a big political issue with it here in the U.S.

It was viewed as 'lying'.

[AlexanderM]

Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's.

 

But it hasn't been "I know a guy...".

 

Donut has said HE would price a Cerebus higher. He'd trade a Hulk 181 straight up for one. You know Donut. He'll be running the booth for Cards, Comics & Collectibles at Baltimore this weekend. You know, the shop that puts the entire show on.

 

Dale Roberts said HE would price a Cerebus higher. You know Dale. National dealer, does all the major shows. Makes his living dealing in vintage collectibles.

 

I'll ask a few dealers this weekend what they think and I'll report back (or is that too much "I know a guy who knows a guy"?).

 

Who do you want me to ask?

 

I'll ask Storms, Superworld, Kapelka, Metro (if they are there), Graham Crackers.

 

Well, in order for that to be valid we would need:

 

1) a reasonable sample size of dealer.

2) to be fully sure that there is no response bias. In other words, that the dealers have not guessed the purpose of the question, and make a cost-less (and perhaps subconscious even) choice to agree with the person posing the question.

 

and even if those things were assured completely there would be the major issue that we would have data on 'intentions' rather than actual behavior. We know that there at times is a pretty big gulf between intentions and behavior (just think about green consumption etc.).

 

Actual sales is by (very) far a stronger source of evidence.

 

What would be the motive for lying?

That's what you're saying is, that they might not be truthful in their responses.

 

If a national dealer, from here on this forum says, "I'd pay X for that book in that grade" , you can damn well bet your bottom dollar they would.

 

To LIE, or have some kind of response bias as you call it, would call in to question their character. You think any of them would do that?

 

On ANY Comic or especially on a book they may not EVER even see the rest of their lives?

 

The REASON the ones who've come in here SAY it, is in the HOPES that someone on here HAS ONE and now KNOWING that it is VALUABLE, will BRING it FORWARD.

 

They sell comics for a living. Their job is to make money selling comics. A book like that will command a, some believe, higher price than it ever has.

 

That equates into: $$$$$

 

Lying about the VALUE of comics in some stupid forum thread isn't worth their time.

 

No, Chuck. I'm not saying they would be lying. It is complicated to explain - try to search for "response bias in scientific research".. or perhaps just "response bias". You will learn that it is not about lying or not.

 

Yeah, I know what it is. We just had a big political issue with it here in the U.S.

It was viewed as 'lying'.

 

Well, it is not.

[Prince Namor]

Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's.

 

But it hasn't been "I know a guy...".

 

Donut has said HE would price a Cerebus higher. He'd trade a Hulk 181 straight up for one. You know Donut. He'll be running the booth for Cards, Comics & Collectibles at Baltimore this weekend. You know, the shop that puts the entire show on.

 

Dale Roberts said HE would price a Cerebus higher. You know Dale. National dealer, does all the major shows. Makes his living dealing in vintage collectibles.

 

I'll ask a few dealers this weekend what they think and I'll report back (or is that too much "I know a guy who knows a guy"?).

 

Who do you want me to ask?

 

I'll ask Storms, Superworld, Kapelka, Metro (if they are there), Graham Crackers.

 

Well, in order for that to be valid we would need:

 

1) a reasonable sample size of dealer.

2) to be fully sure that there is no response bias. In other words, that the dealers have not guessed the purpose of the question, and make a cost-less (and perhaps subconscious even) choice to agree with the person posing the question.

 

and even if those things were assured completely there would be the major issue that we would have data on 'intentions' rather than actual behavior. We know that there at times is a pretty big gulf between intentions and behavior (just think about green consumption etc.).

 

Actual sales is by (very) far a stronger source of evidence.

 

What would be the motive for lying?

That's what you're saying is, that they might not be truthful in their responses.

 

If a national dealer, from here on this forum says, "I'd pay X for that book in that grade" , you can damn well bet your bottom dollar they would.

 

To LIE, or have some kind of response bias as you call it, would call in to question their character. You think any of them would do that?

 

On ANY Comic or especially on a book they may not EVER even see the rest of their lives?

 

The REASON the ones who've come in here SAY it, is in the HOPES that someone on here HAS ONE and now KNOWING that it is VALUABLE, will BRING it FORWARD.

 

They sell comics for a living. Their job is to make money selling comics. A book like that will command a, some believe, higher price than it ever has.

 

That equates into: $$$$$

 

Lying about the VALUE of comics in some stupid forum thread isn't worth their time.

 

No, Chuck. I'm not saying they would be lying. It is complicated to explain - try to search for "response bias in scientific research".. or perhaps just "response bias". You will learn that it is not about lying or not.

 

Yeah, I know what it is. We just had a big political issue with it here in the U.S.

It was viewed as 'lying'.

 

Well, it is not.

 

I can't speak for Dale or Donut, but if you went up to them and said, "Hey, I respect you're opinion and all, but I just don't value it as much as the comparatively minuscule amount of industry data reported on GPA, because I'm not completely sure the possibility of your 'response bias' is getting in the way of what you're telling me."

 

Pretty sure they might view that as you think they're lying.

[AlexanderM]

Jay's arguments are solid and less based on "I know a guy who knows a guy.." and more on publicly available data than RMA's.

 

But it hasn't been "I know a guy...".

 

Donut has said HE would price a Cerebus higher. He'd trade a Hulk 181 straight up for one. You know Donut. He'll be running the booth for Cards, Comics & Collectibles at Baltimore this weekend. You know, the shop that puts the entire show on.

 

Dale Roberts said HE would price a Cerebus higher. You know Dale. National dealer, does all the major shows. Makes his living dealing in vintage collectibles.

 

I'll ask a few dealers this weekend what they think and I'll report back (or is that too much "I know a guy who knows a guy"?).

 

Who do you want me to ask?

 

I'll ask Storms, Superworld, Kapelka, Metro (if they are there), Graham Crackers.

 

Well, in order for that to be valid we would need:

 

1) a reasonable sample size of dealer.

2) to be fully sure that there is no response bias. In other words, that the dealers have not guessed the purpose of the question, and make a cost-less (and perhaps subconscious even) choice to agree with the person posing the question.

 

and even if those things were assured completely there would be the major issue that we would have data on 'intentions' rather than actual behavior. We know that there at times is a pretty big gulf between intentions and behavior (just think about green consumption etc.).

 

Actual sales is by (very) far a stronger source of evidence.

 

What would be the motive for lying?

That's what you're saying is, that they might not be truthful in their responses.

 

If a national dealer, from here on this forum says, "I'd pay X for that book in that grade" , you can damn well bet your bottom dollar they would.

 

To LIE, or have some kind of response bias as you call it, would call in to question their character. You think any of them would do that?

 

On ANY Comic or especially on a book they may not EVER even see the rest of their lives?

 

The REASON the ones who've come in here SAY it, is in the HOPES that someone on here HAS ONE and now KNOWING that it is VALUABLE, will BRING it FORWARD.

 

They sell comics for a living. Their job is to make money selling comics. A book like that will command a, some believe, higher price than it ever has.

 

That equates into: $$$$$

 

Lying about the VALUE of comics in some stupid forum thread isn't worth their time.

 

No, Chuck. I'm not saying they would be lying. It is complicated to explain - try to search for "response bias in scientific research".. or perhaps just "response bias". You will learn that it is not about lying or not.

 

Yeah, I know what it is. We just had a big political issue with it here in the U.S.

It was viewed as 'lying'.

 

Well, it is not.

 

I can't speak for Dale or Donut, but if you went up to them and said, "Hey, I respect you're opinion and all, but I just don't value it as much as the comparatively minuscule amount of industry data reported on GPA, because I'm not completely sure the possibility of your 'response bias' is getting in the way of what you're telling me."

 

Pretty sure they might view that as you think they're lying.

 

I don't think so. I give them the benefit of the doubt. If they know anything about data quality and data collection.. then they surely wouldn't.

[wardevil0]

I can't speak for Dale or Donut, but if you went up to them and said, "Hey, I respect you're opinion and all, but I just don't value it as much as the comparatively minuscule amount of industry data reported on GPA, because I'm not completely sure the possibility of your 'response bias' is getting in the way of what you're telling me."

 

Pretty sure they might view that as you think they're lying.

 

I don't think so. I give them the benefit of the doubt. If they know anything about data quality and data collection.. then they surely wouldn't.

 

It's not "lying" because it's not intended to deceive, just may not turn out to be correct once the theory is put into practice. The problem with this debate is that we can see copies of Hulk 181 9.2/9.4 sell every few weeks or so and have not seen Cerebus 1 9.2/9.4 sell often at all. Every dealer may have 100% intention of selling Cerebus 1 9.4 for $3500+, but until they actually have one to sell at that price we don't know for sure.

[Jaydogrules]

I keep repeating the same. And it is still true.

 

Hulk IS the most valuable book my most standards (total market value, the value in most grades).

 

However, by one specific standard it might be said that Cerebus is more valuable.

 

Therefore, if the question is "which is the most valuable BA book of the two", it by most standards would be H181. However, if the question is "which book would be most valuable (in terms of price) as a single copy in the particular grade of 9.2", then the answer may be Cerebus.

 

 

There... that is the bottom line.

 

Yes! That's exactly it! That's what the original comment was all about! Overstreet published a list which was a comparison of the selling price in US$ of a single copy of several Bronze Age comics, including a single copy of Hulk 181 vs a single copy of Cerebus 1 in NM-/9.2 condition. That is the topic of the thread in which we are debating. Everything else has been obfuscation.

 

Is Hulk 181 more popular? Yes.

Does Hulk 181 sell more copies daily? Yes.

Does the highest-graded copy of Hulk 181 sell for more than the highest-graded copy of Cerebus 1? Yes.

Is Hulk 181 more of an "iconic key?" Yes.

Have recent sales shown Hulk 181 to be continuing to increase in price? Yes.

Is Hulk 181 likely to outpace Cerebus 1 and become clearly more valuable in the near future? I think it will.

Would one discrete copy of Hulk 181 in NM- sell for more than one discrete copy of Cerebus 1 in NM- in the year 2013? The people who made the list say "No," and many of us agree with them.

 

To continue to assert otherwise indicates that either: one does not actually want to talk about the topic, or one fundamentally disagrees with Overstreet's valuation process (in which case one should probably just disregard the whole list).

 

If I pay $80,000 for a Ford Fiesta...is that a reasonable price?

 

Come on now...

 

I'm not sure what point this is trying to make. New GPA highs are set for books all the time. That's how/why they go up in value.

 

-J.

 

Jaydog, why are you so willing to concede that the upward spiral of Hulk 181 prices is normal, but the thought of Cerebus 1 increasing in value is so laughable? Yes, I know that a new GPA high has not been recently set by Cerebus 1, but that could change in the blink of an eye. We simply don't have the information to accurately gauge the true interest in Cerebus 1, but a lot of dealers have said they would price a Cerebus 1 (9.2 or 9.4) higher than a Hulk 181 in the same grade.

 

Garlanda, I agree with the vast bulk of your post and I am willing to concede that anything is possible. If someone were to announce a Cerebus cartoon, with the way the hobby seems to be now, I have no doubt that would immediately cause all of the existing high grade copies available right now to garner attention. However that has not happened, and there isn't any indication that will be happening anytime soon, or ever.

 

I have actually cited and linked to some very recent publicly available sales data that in fact shows the following about cerebus 1:

 

-That an 8.5 sold for just $850 a few weeks ago;

 

-That there has been a 15% decline in value for a cerebus 1 in its top grade (9.4) over the last ten years;

 

-That there are multiple similarly higher grade and mid grade copies sitting at multiple auction house sites and ebay for months (years?) with little to no buying interest.

 

All of this publicly available data does much to show what can only be described as a very real and palpable disconnect between what the apparent enthusiasm and glee a dealer would greet the opportunity to acquire and sell a high grade copy of cerebus 1, versus actual buyer interest in the book. A point similar to what Alexander has been making.

 

That is why their statements on what they "would" price a cerebus 1 at a 9.2 if they got one in carries little weight, as it is nothing but speculation and conjecture that belies the reality of the actual level of interest amongst the general buying public when it comes to this book. Yes the book still has some juice in its very, very top grade (9.4). But if the book had any "real" juice and any "real" collector interest, there would not be such a precipitous drop off in prices as you go down in grades. The fact that it trades at what it does in only its highest one or two grades indicates merely a niche collector interest from those who are willing to pay a premium for "highest graded copies" of books that they are a fan of (see also Hulk 181, 9.9 for $150k, or even 9.8 for $10K+). There is simply no publicly available sales data going back 15 years to suggest that a 9.2 copy of cerebus 1 would go for anywhere near $3000 in today's market.

 

So again, while anything is possible, I simply dispute Overstreet's contentions about the book, and I have attempted to explain why I do by linking to actual sales figures and listings. This is nothing against Cerebus. Books fade and then surge all the time. It happened to hulk 181 even. It just so happens that this is hulk 181's year, no so much for cerebus 1. A fact that Overstreet could not have predicted when he was compiling his "2014 values" back in 2013.

 

@Blaze: Thank you for the ups on my FF 36. She's definitely a keeper.

 

-J.

 

 

[wardevil0]

That makes sense to me. Unless something new happens to Cerebus, it is unlikely that there will be any new fans made who would be willing to lay out that kind of money for the first issue. But, because this is speculation on my part, I won't make any assertions based on it to counter the opinions of others who have studied it more.

 

Cerebus 1 is clearly a niche book, which appeals to a tiny fraction of as many people as Hulk 181 does. However, all we need is an auction where two Cerebus devotees want to upgrade the 8.5s they already own to drive a 9.2/9.4 up to a new GPA high. I don't think we currently have any reason to believe that this won't happen. The lack of Cerebus 1 in 9.2+ on the market could well be working up a fervor among those who do want it.

[HighStakesComics]

I can't speak for Dale or Donut, but if you went up to them and said, "Hey, I respect you're opinion and all, but I just don't value it as much as the comparatively minuscule amount of industry data reported on GPA, because I'm not completely sure the possibility of your 'response bias' is getting in the way of what you're telling me."

 

Pretty sure they might view that as you think they're lying.

 

I don't think so. I give them the benefit of the doubt. If they know anything about data quality and data collection.. then they surely wouldn't.

 

It's not "lying" because it's not intended to deceive, just may not turn out to be correct once the theory is put into practice. The problem with this debate is that we can see copies of Hulk 181 9.2/9.4 sell every few weeks or so and have not seen Cerebus 1 9.2/9.4 sell often at all. Every dealer may have 100% intention of selling Cerebus 1 9.4 for $3500+, but until they actually have one to sell at that price we don't know for sure.

 

Uh, Sir, if a 9.4 comes to market for $3500 there isn't a single poster here, jaydog probably included, that wouldn't pay full ask immediately. Easy easy double. Nothing like making 2 weeks salary for 5 minutes of work. Hit the buy button and then ship it out to CCS, then CGC for a miracle bump, then straight to the auction house.

 

That's an 8-10k book in 9.4, sir. Probably 12-15k in 9.6.

[AlexanderM]

I can't speak for Dale or Donut, but if you went up to them and said, "Hey, I respect you're opinion and all, but I just don't value it as much as the comparatively minuscule amount of industry data reported on GPA, because I'm not completely sure the possibility of your 'response bias' is getting in the way of what you're telling me."

 

Pretty sure they might view that as you think they're lying.

 

I don't think so. I give them the benefit of the doubt. If they know anything about data quality and data collection.. then they surely wouldn't.

 

It's not "lying" because it's not intended to deceive, just may not turn out to be correct once the theory is put into practice. The problem with this debate is that we can see copies of Hulk 181 9.2/9.4 sell every few weeks or so and have not seen Cerebus 1 9.2/9.4 sell often at all. Every dealer may have 100% intention of selling Cerebus 1 9.4 for $3500+, but until they actually have one to sell at that price we don't know for sure.

 

Uh, Sir, if a 9.4 comes to market for $3500 there isn't a single poster here, jaydog probably included, that wouldn't pay full ask immediately. Easy easy double. Nothing like making 2 weeks salary for 5 minutes of work. Hit the buy button and then ship it out to CCS, then CGC for a miracle bump, then straight to the auction house.

 

That's an 8-10k book in 9.4, sir. Probably 12-15k in 9.6.

 

I don't think that was his point. The numbers are only examples.

[HighStakesComics]

If we are going to talk numbers, on a thread specifically about the aforementioned numbers, then the numbers we are discussing should at least not be 60% off even if they are hypothetical.

 

FYI-Arguing 181 has a higher market cap might be the most poorly cited argument Ive read in my short history of analyzing online comic debates. Especially, when the premise is what an individual copy of either book would sell for in a specific grade. If I were you Id put that one under a rock for eternity.

[wardevil0]

I can't speak for Dale or Donut, but if you went up to them and said, "Hey, I respect you're opinion and all, but I just don't value it as much as the comparatively minuscule amount of industry data reported on GPA, because I'm not completely sure the possibility of your 'response bias' is getting in the way of what you're telling me."

 

Pretty sure they might view that as you think they're lying.

 

I don't think so. I give them the benefit of the doubt. If they know anything about data quality and data collection.. then they surely wouldn't.

 

It's not "lying" because it's not intended to deceive, just may not turn out to be correct once the theory is put into practice. The problem with this debate is that we can see copies of Hulk 181 9.2/9.4 sell every few weeks or so and have not seen Cerebus 1 9.2/9.4 sell often at all. Every dealer may have 100% intention of selling Cerebus 1 9.4 for $3500+, but until they actually have one to sell at that price we don't know for sure.

 

Uh, Sir, if a 9.4 comes to market for $3500 there isn't a single poster here, jaydog probably included, that wouldn't pay full ask immediately. Easy easy double. Nothing like making 2 weeks salary for 5 minutes of work. Hit the buy button and then ship it out to CCS, then CGC for a miracle bump, then straight to the auction house.

 

That's an 8-10k book in 9.4, sir. Probably 12-15k in 9.6.

 

I don't think that was his point. The numbers are only examples.

 

I used $3500 specifically because that is the amount of the most recent sale of Hulk 181 CGC 9.4 on GPA, but it was essentially a placeholder to represent perceived value vs the amount a buyer will actually show up to give you.

 

You assert that Cerebus #1 is an $8-10k book in 9.4, which is probably making some peoples' heads spin, since they would counter with a downward trend visible in GPA showing the book lost 25% of its value from 2004 to 2009, which would extrapolate to a value of about $5800 today. Not that I agree with that extrapolation, but that is still much higher than Hulk 181 sells for in 9.4, so I'm getting to the point that I don't understand this debate either.

 

I'm glad I'll be busy with Baltimore Comic Con all weekend; maybe this thread will dry up and blow away while I'm gone.