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

[AlexanderM]

The question is why should we care where the information comes from?

 

Right.

A computer program that collects data from a tiny FRACTION of the market sales of a particular brand of comic that makes up a TINY fraction of comic sales (slabs) vs a book that collects data from MULTIPLE sources of Raw Sales (which make up the VAST majority of comic sales) and has been doing so for 44 years....ok.

 

That's why you should care.

 

OPG is notoriously imprecise.

 

Oh god, the irony.

 

Yes, the OSPG isn't perfect.

 

But you're helping prove WHY GPA isn't perfect either.

 

Trying to show a pricing TREND, using two points of sales data in three years is notoriously imprecise.

 

It is an antiquated approach (I must say I like OPG for the articles and nostalgia..but have no illusions that the prices are at all precise) to pricing comics.

 

What are you talking about. This isn't about you.

 

The majority of all comic book dealers use OSPG daily to assist in pricing comics. DAILY.

 

Regardless of what you or I THINK, it's STILL used DAILY by the vast majority of comic book dealers.

 

And GPA isn't precise either.

Just because it says a book sold for 'x' amount, it doesn't mean it's going to sell for 'x' amount next time.

 

It's a guide... a tool to be used to accumulate information.

 

The MORE information that it has, the more accurately you can determine how you want to use that information.

 

Sort of like... OSPG!

 

It's a GUIDE... a tool that accumulates information.

 

But it accumulates information from a much LARGER pool than GPA does.

 

 

 

 

 

Some may be a bit offended if someone dares say that OPG is not as precise as GPA... because Overstreet has relations with many dealers and for nostalgic reasons etc.

 

But I think the truth should still be ok?

 

Let's try a simple question. Which is more precise - GPA or OPG?

 

All I'm saying is that I find GPA more precise. What do you think?

Edited September 3, 2014 by AlexanderM

[AlexanderM]

Surely we don't really think anecdotes and stories from 'respected medicine men..ups. . dealers) are a better proof of sales prices?

 

Wow...

 

Don't take everything too seriously on here

Edited September 3, 2014 by AlexanderM

[Garlanda]

Some may be a bit offended if someone dares say that OPG is not as precise as GPA... because Overstreet has relations with many dealers and for nostalgic reasons etc.

 

But I think the truth should still be ok?

 

Let's try a simple question. Which is more precise - GPA or OPG?

 

All I'm saying is that I find GPA more precise. What do you think?

 

some definitions of PRECISE from Merriam-Webster:

 

1 : exactly or sharply defined or stated

2 : minutely exact

3 : strictly conforming to a pattern, standard, or convention

4 : distinguished from every other

 

some definitions of ACCURATE from Merriam-Webster:

 

1 : free from error especially as the result of care

2 : conforming exactly to truth or to a standard : exact

3 : able to give an accurate result

 

I say this not to be pedantic but because words and their meanings are important if multiple people want to communicate effectively. To my mind, GPA is more precise but OPG is more accurate.

 

GPA is one data source that has rock-solid input for what it has. OPG has a multitude of data sources that can be a bit fuzzy sometimes, if for no other reason than that we don't exactly know how they come to their conclusions. Do prominent, public sales get weighted more heavily than dealer reports, for example? I don't know, but I bet all those factors are included somehow. Please remember that OPG is an annual report of nationwide trends, not a continually updated stream of selected data points. GPA doesn't include ComicLink, for example, because they do not allow their data to be shared.

[HighStakesComics]

Just for the record, I did some research and when the DC 100 Page #5 9.2 sold in 2006 for $1500+ at the time it was the highest graded copy. A couple 9.4's have popped up since, which make this sale less relevant. Maybe there are dealers out there moving this book in 9.2-9.4 regularly and maybe it commands a higher price than the data points that we have access too, but then again maybe it doesn't. I don't think this is a $1000 book in 9.2 (non-pedigree)and I don't think it's a top 10 book of the BA based on value.

Topnotch, the only OPG advisor I'm aware of to comment here mentioned an additional four variants he felt would command a higher price. Anyone with 30 seconds to kill and a GPA account can see IM 55 and MP 7 go for $1000+ right now. Yes, I realize the OPG top 10 is trailing indicator. Maybe next years edition is ripe for a change.

 

 

 

[bronze johnny]

Some may be a bit offended if someone dares say that OPG is not as precise as GPA... because Overstreet has relations with many dealers and for nostalgic reasons etc.

 

But I think the truth should still be ok?

 

Let's try a simple question. Which is more precise - GPA or OPG?

 

All I'm saying is that I find GPA more precise. What do you think?

 

some definitions of PRECISE from Merriam-Webster:

 

1 : exactly or sharply defined or stated

2 : minutely exact

3 : strictly conforming to a pattern, standard, or convention

4 : distinguished from every other

 

some definitions of ACCURATE from Merriam-Webster:

 

1 : free from error especially as the result of care

2 : conforming exactly to truth or to a standard : exact

3 : able to give an accurate result

 

I say this not to be pedantic but because words and their meanings are important if multiple people want to communicate effectively. To my mind, GPA is more precise but OPG is more accurate.

 

GPA is one data source that has rock-solid input for what it has. OPG has a multitude of data sources that can be a bit fuzzy sometimes, if for no other reason than that we don't exactly know how they come to their conclusions. Do prominent, public sales get weighted more heavily than dealer reports, for example? I don't know, but I bet all those factors are included somehow. Please remember that OPG is an annual report of nationwide trends, not a continually updated stream of selected data points. GPA doesn't include ComicLink, for example, because they do not allow their data to be shared.

 

Good point. If I might add to this that Overstreet is a "guide" and not the final word. I don't have a dictionary but the word "guide" does give a collector and seller some form of flexibility. Bob sholud also has a certain amount of discretion when it comes to final say. After all, it is his book. It also gives us room to debate the merits as this thread shows.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Btw. You keep repeating the words logical and illogical as if you feel superior in terms of logical thinking. I cannot see any reason why you should think so? Is it that a few people clap when you say stuff that is in their best interest that made you think that? Or maybe you have any more objective credentials? A PhD? Member of Mensa?

 

The real issue is that YOU feel as if I "feel superior in terms of logical thinking." As a result, you are offended when I point out that a position isn't rational or logical. I, however, think nothing of the sort. You see no reason why I should think so, because there is none, and, more importantly, I don't.

 

Logic is, reason is, they are not subject to feelings and emotions. Frequently, they are at complete loggerheads with feelings and emotions.

 

For example...it is not logical or reasonable to call people here "hardcore Cerebus fans", simply because they defend the fact that Cerebus #1 in 9.2 and above is worth more money than Hulk #181. This is a reaction borne out of emotion, not reason, because no evidence exists which demonstrates otherwise (that they are "hardcore Cerebus fans"), and much evidence to the contrary exists.

 

To those making such a claim, it is, of course, completely logical to do so, because that's how they feel about Hulk #181, so they project that motive onto those they are debating, despite the lack of evidence, even direct testimony to the contrary.

 

On top of that, you attribute an ulterior motive to others, that they are only arguing to protect their "best interests", not because it is a conclusion they have reached based on the evidence.

 

On top of THAT, you attribute MY motives simply to a desire for attention.

 

And to you and others, someone pointing out that such comments and responses are borne of emotion, rather than reason, even though everyone reading this can see the evidence before their own eyes, is offensive...and thus, the claim that "oh, you just think you're so superior!"

 

It's the vicious cycle that emotionalism inflicts on any debate.

 

It doesn't matter what any of us feels. If one disagrees, one should lay out why, logically, rationally, and without resorting to personal statements about the other people in the discussion, as you have done here. Making personal statements about others is sure proof that such a person is resorting to emotion, rather than reason...precisely what you have done here.

 

And you wonder why your statements are questioned on their logical merit...?

 

[AlexanderM]

Btw. You keep repeating the words logical and illogical as if you feel superior in terms of logical thinking. I cannot see any reason why you should think so? Is it that a few people clap when you say stuff that is in their best interest that made you think that? Or maybe you have any more objective credentials? A PhD? Member of Mensa?

 

The real issue is that YOU feel as if I "feel superior in terms of logical thinking." As a result, you are offended when I point out that a position isn't rational or logical. I, however, think nothing of the sort. You see no reason why I should think so, because there is none, and, more importantly, I don't.

 

Logic is, reason is, they are not subject to feelings and emotions. Frequently, they are at complete loggerheads with feelings and emotions.

 

For example...it is not logical or reasonable to call people here "hardcore Cerebus fans", simply because they defend the fact that Cerebus #1 in 9.2 and above is worth more money than Hulk #181. This is a reaction borne out of emotion, not reason, because no evidence exists which demonstrates otherwise, and much evidence to the contrary exists.

 

To those making such a claim, it is, of course, completely logical to do so, because that's how they feel about Hulk #181, so they project that motive onto those they are debating, despite the lack of evidence, even direct testimony to the contrary.

 

And to people like that, someone pointing out that such responses are borne of emotion, rather than reason, even though everyone reading this can see the evidence before their own eyes, is offensive...and thus, the claim that "oh, you just think you're so superior!"

 

It's the vicious cycle that emotionalism inflicts on any debate.

 

It doesn't matter what any of us feels. If one disagrees, one should lay out why, logically, rationally, and without resorting to personal statements about the other people in the discussion, as you have done here. Making personal statements about others is sure proof that such a person is resorting to emotion, rather than reason...precisely what you have done here.

 

And you wonder why your statements are questioned on their logical merit...?

 

 

Let me assure you, no offense, that I feel Jay's posts have generally been more logical than yours. And I obviously don't think you are more logical than me.

 

You keep mentioning 'logical' I don't know how many times in this thread...so I'm guessing you think you are more logical, I certainly don't.

 

PS. However, just so you don't think I am being unreasonable, I do think you can be quite satisfied with your level of intelligence and logical ability.

Edited September 3, 2014 by AlexanderM

[Prince Namor]

Some may be a bit offended if someone dares say that OPG is not as precise as GPA... because Overstreet has relations with many dealers and for nostalgic reasons etc.

 

But I think the truth should still be ok?

 

Let's try a simple question. Which is more precise - GPA or OPG?

 

All I'm saying is that I find GPA more precise. What do you think?

 

some definitions of PRECISE from Merriam-Webster:

 

1 : exactly or sharply defined or stated

2 : minutely exact

3 : strictly conforming to a pattern, standard, or convention

4 : distinguished from every other

 

some definitions of ACCURATE from Merriam-Webster:

 

1 : free from error especially as the result of care

2 : conforming exactly to truth or to a standard : exact

3 : able to give an accurate result

 

I say this not to be pedantic but because words and their meanings are important if multiple people want to communicate effectively. To my mind, GPA is more precise but OPG is more accurate.

 

GPA is one data source that has rock-solid input for what it has. OPG has a multitude of data sources that can be a bit fuzzy sometimes, if for no other reason than that we don't exactly know how they come to their conclusions. Do prominent, public sales get weighted more heavily than dealer reports, for example? I don't know, but I bet all those factors are included somehow. Please remember that OPG is an annual report of nationwide trends, not a continually updated stream of selected data points. GPA doesn't include ComicLink, for example, because they do not allow their data to be shared.

 

Good point. If I might add to this that Overstreet is a "guide" and not the final word. I don't have a dictionary but the word "guide" does give a collector and seller some form of flexibility. Bob sholud also has a certain amount of discretion when it comes to final say. After all, it is his book. It also gives us room to debate the merits as this thread shows.

 

Doesn't GPA pick and choose who they report data from? Just as OSPG does?

The difference being that people are own their own with GPA to interpret the information (which as we see over and over on this forum, they incorrectly interpret).

 

BOTH sources are a guide.

One just gives an interpretation of the data compiled and the other just let's you make your own judgement.

 

STILL...when choosing information, would you rather have it from

A) a combination of 4 sources pooling from 5% of the market or

B) a combination of 100 sources pooling from 50% of the market?

 

[Garlanda]

Good point. If I might add to this that Overstreet is a "guide" and not the final word. I don't have a dictionary but the word "guide" does give a collector and seller some form of flexibility. Bob sholud also has a certain amount of discretion when it comes to final say. After all, it is his book. It also gives us room to debate the merits as this thread shows.

 

I definitely think that the word "guide" should be interpreted this way, as one factor to be considered when buying and selling. We've all encountered books that sell briskly "above guide" and books that languish even "below guide." There are so many other factors, such as "highest graded copy" or scarcity (real or perceived).

 

In this one instance (aggregate of 2013 data), and this one grade (NM-), the math project that is OPG indicates Cerebus #1 is more valuable than Hulk #181.

 

Does that mean Cerebus #1 is a better investment? No.

Does that mean Cerebus #1 is more valuable in all grades? No.

Does that mean Cerebus #1 will be above IH181, MP7, IM55, etc next year? No.

 

It just means that at that moment in time, in that particular grade, the consensus of Bob and his advisors was that Cerebus #1 cost more than Hulk #181.

 

Discussions about which is "more important," or "king of the Bronze Age," or which would sell for higher in 9.9, are not questions that can be determined factually because they are personal preference or because the copies are not known to exist. The way I see it, Cerebus #1 is "cooler" because it has such a limited print run and represents an incredible accomplishment in comics: an independently-published 300 issue limited series. That being said, I'd rather have a Hulk #181 because I think the lack of new Cerebus material will allow the fanbase to dwindle while the corporate juggernauts behind Wolverine will keep him in circulation.

[bronze johnny]

Some may be a bit offended if someone dares say that OPG is not as precise as GPA... because Overstreet has relations with many dealers and for nostalgic reasons etc.

 

But I think the truth should still be ok?

 

Let's try a simple question. Which is more precise - GPA or OPG?

 

All I'm saying is that I find GPA more precise. What do you think?

 

some definitions of PRECISE from Merriam-Webster:

 

1 : exactly or sharply defined or stated

2 : minutely exact

3 : strictly conforming to a pattern, standard, or convention

4 : distinguished from every other

 

some definitions of ACCURATE from Merriam-Webster:

 

1 : free from error especially as the result of care

2 : conforming exactly to truth or to a standard : exact

3 : able to give an accurate result

 

I say this not to be pedantic but because words and their meanings are important if multiple people want to communicate effectively. To my mind, GPA is more precise but OPG is more accurate.

 

GPA is one data source that has rock-solid input for what it has. OPG has a multitude of data sources that can be a bit fuzzy sometimes, if for no other reason than that we don't exactly know how they come to their conclusions. Do prominent, public sales get weighted more heavily than dealer reports, for example? I don't know, but I bet all those factors are included somehow. Please remember that OPG is an annual report of nationwide trends, not a continually updated stream of selected data points. GPA doesn't include ComicLink, for example, because they do not allow their data to be shared.

 

Good point. If I might add to this that Overstreet is a "guide" and not the final word. I don't have a dictionary but the word "guide" does give a collector and seller some form of flexibility. Bob sholud also has a certain amount of discretion when it comes to final say. After all, it is his book. It also gives us room to debate the merits as this thread shows.

 

Doesn't GPA pick and choose who they report data from? Just as OSPG does?

The difference being that people are own their own with GPA to interpret the information (which as we see over and over on this forum, they incorrectly interpret).

 

BOTH sources are a guide.

One just gives an interpretation of the data compiled and the other just let's you make your own judgement.

 

STILL...when choosing information, would you rather have it from

A) a combination of 4 sources pooling from 5% of the market or

B) a combination of 100 sources pooling from 50% of the market?

 

I rely on Overstreet more than GPA. Have and always will.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Let me assure you, no offense, that I feel Jay's posts have generally been more logical than yours. And I obviously don't think you are more logical than me.

 

That you believe that, I have no doubt. You both reason from emotion, and like attracts like. Many of Jay's posts are classic examples of "arguing from emotion", yet you feel (note that word, there) that they have been "more logical."

 

But be assured: logic and reason are not subject to personal opinion. They simply are. Your very words give you away: I don't need to say, as you have done here, that I think so and so is more logical than you, and you are not as logical as me, because logic stands on its own. And why would I be offended? Offense is the very calling card of emotionalism.

 

No one is inherently "more logical" than another, because logic is not an attribute, like intelligence or talent or height, etc. It is a tool. And just like any other tool, it can be used, and misused, but it is not a part of the person using (or misusing) it. A person must be TRAINED to use any tool correctly, and logic and reason are no different.

 

You keep mentioning 'logical' I don't know how many times in this thread...so I'm guessing you think you are more logical, I certainly don't.

 

That is, again, because you reason by emotion, rather than by logic.

 

If you made multiple spelling and grammar errors, and I corrected those errors, would that lead you to think that I feel I am "more grammatical" than you? Despite the evidence in front of everyone's eyes that you had misspelled and misused grammar...?

 

Logically, no. Emotionally, yes.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

PS. However, just so you don't think I am being unreasonable, I do think you can be quite satisfied with your level of intelligence and logical ability.

 

 

That's a fascinating postscript, right there. Damned by faint praise, indeed!

 

 

I DO think you're being unreasonable, and have said so, many times, but not in the way you think of the word "unreasonable."

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

RMA is the voice of reason. Who'da thunk?

 

I would say, just about anyone who has given me a fair hearing over the last 7-8 years.

 

To those who can't be bothered with things like fair hearings, but instead get "just the gist" from friends and the like, I can definitely appear otherwise.

 

 

You should try it, Dale...giving people a fair hearing, that is. You might be very surprised at what you actually see when you look for yourself.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

So the slab replaced the function of the pedigree? So the history of the pedigree becomes irrelevant? What world do you live in?

 

1. Yes.

 

2. No.

 

3. And this one.

 

My question for you is: when will you be able to disagree about things, and discuss things, without being insulting? If you disagree with me, clearly and reasonably state why, without the snide commentary. Is that really that hard?

 

Sorry if you took my answer as insulting. Not meant that way.

 

"What world do you live in?" was not meant to be insulting....?

 

Really....?

 

 

One question I would ask is would you buy an 8.0 Church Copy or a 9.2 copy of the same book? I know which one I would buy.

 

It depends entirely on the books being discussed.

 

If it was an 8.0 Church and an 8.0 non-Ped, for the same price, I would, of course, take the Church. If it was for a slight premium, I would take the Church (say, 10%-20%.) If it was any more than that, I'd take the non-Ped.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

The ad at the bottom of the page has a Star Wars #1 35 cent variant in 6.0 at the moment.

 

[AlexanderM]

Let me assure you, no offense, that I feel Jay's posts have generally been more logical than yours. And I obviously don't think you are more logical than me.

 

That you believe that, I have no doubt. You both reason from emotion, and like attracts like. Many of Jay's posts are classic examples of "arguing from emotion", yet you feel (note that word, there) that they have been "more logical."

 

But be assured: logic and reason are not subject to personal opinion. They simply are. Your very words give you away: I don't need to say, as you have done here, that I think so and so is more logical than you, and you are not as logical as me, because logic stands on its own. And why would I be offended? Offense is the very calling card of emotionalism.

 

No one is inherently "more logical" than another, because logic is not an attribute, like intelligence or talent or height, etc. It is a tool. And just like any other tool, it can be used, and misused, but it is not a part of the person using (or misusing) it. A person must be TRAINED to use any tool correctly, and logic and reason are no different.

 

You keep mentioning 'logical' I don't know how many times in this thread...so I'm guessing you think you are more logical, I certainly don't.

 

That is, again, because you reason by emotion, rather than by logic.

 

If you made multiple spelling and grammar errors, and I corrected those errors, would that lead you to think that I feel I am "more grammatical" than you? Despite the evidence in front of everyone's eyes that you had misspelled and misused grammar...?

 

Logically, no. Emotionally, yes.

 

That you repeat I argue using emotion doesn't make it so. In fact, it is so far out I didn't think it worthy of a reply. But just so you have no illusions that I agree with you I'll let you know that I don't.

 

And you little grammar example is far off the mark and irrelevant. I did not feel or think you were being logical... I merely noticed you use the word 'logical' a lot despite not being very logical. So it stood out.

[bronze johnny]

 

So the slab replaced the function of the pedigree? So the history of the pedigree becomes irrelevant? What world do you live in?

 

1. Yes.

 

2. No.

 

3. And this one.

 

My question for you is: when will you be able to disagree about things, and discuss things, without being insulting? If you disagree with me, clearly and reasonably state why, without the snide commentary. Is that really that hard?

 

Sorry if you took my answer as insulting. Not meant that way.

 

"What world do you live in?" was not meant to be insulting....?

 

Really....?

 

 

One question I would ask is would you buy an 8.0 Church Copy or a 9.2 copy of the same book? I know which one I would buy.

 

It depends entirely on the books being discussed.

 

If it was an 8.0 Church and an 8.0 non-Ped, for the same price, I would, of course, take the Church. If it was for a slight premium, I would take the Church (say, 10%-20%.) If it was any more than that, I'd take the non-Ped.

 

Really. Not meant to be insulting but if you want to take it personally, that's your choice. And don't change my original comparison- the same book that's not an 8.0 Church to an 8.0 non Ped. Again, try not to take it personally (thumbs u

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Some may be a bit offended if someone dares say that OPG is not as precise as GPA... because Overstreet has relations with many dealers and for nostalgic reasons etc.

 

What does "precise" mean, in this context? Does GPA record every sale that occurs? No, and it cannot. Does OPG compile every sale that occurs, to come up with an "average"? No, and it cannot, either.

 

So, while some may be offended when you say that, but that is because those people neither understand the actual natures of both the OPG and GPA, nor are they able to separate their emotions from reason.

 

But not everyone argues from an ulterior motive.

 

But I think the truth should still be ok?

 

Let's try a simple question. Which is more precise - GPA or OPG?

 

All I'm saying is that I find GPA more precise. What do you think?

 

You're trying to compare that which cannot be compared. One is a data compiler. The other is a guide.

 

Garlanda makes this point excellently above.

[seanfingh]

 

What a circle jerk.

[bronze johnny]

What a circle jerk.

 

You lost me?