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

[Ryan.]

This is not kinder garten where the one who hits hardest, shouts loudest, or has most friends is right.

 

Nor who has the highest word count per post. Less is more, my friends.

[OliverS-migration]

This thread is awesome.

 

At various points, you have

 

- called both the 2014 9.4 and 2013 9.0 sales "outliers" that should be discarded,

- missed, misinterpreted or ignored the (albeit slight) upward trend among 8.5 copies,

- argued that no Comiclink sales should be included because of the quirk of the "Sales Pending" language that they report for _all_ sold books,

- and used a blanket "lack of demand for lower grade copies" argument to support your incorrect assumptions regarding demand for high grade (i.e., 9.0+) copies.

 

And, to review, the count is now five folks who have posted _in this thread_ that they'd take a 9.2 Cerebus over a 9.2 Hulk, in addition to the >2:1 margin in favor of Cerebus among the 32 folks who've weighed in on the poll.

 

Keep on trucking, man!

 

This is not kinder garten where the one who hits hardest, shouts loudest, or has most friends is right.

 

Jay couldn't care less how many says the moon is made of cheese if he is not convinced that it is.

 

And he deserves respect for that when at the same time his arguments (at least for the most part) are solid.

But as has been pointed out again and again he isn't making reasonable arguments -he is, you could say, the childish one, the one pushing, hitting the hardest, shouting the loudest.

Edited September 9, 2014 by OliverS

[Gatsby77]

It's the Cerebus folks who are "shouting loudest"?

 

Jaydog's the one who has posted more than 90x in the thread, singlehandedly keeping it alive for the last 20+ pages. Word counts-per-post lose relevancy when you simply outpost everyone else.

[Jaydogrules]

Its not unreasonable to say that non signed copies will likely sell for more than SS copies based on the sales data.

A 9.0 Blue sold for $2500 last year. A 9.2 yellow sold for $1,434 in 2012 and a signed file copy sold for $1725 in 2010.

A lot less buyers and sellers make the book a more questionable investment but, I'd take the Cerebus 1 for 9.0 and above in a Blue Label. And if a Cerebus 1 got a 9.2, it would be the only one, so yes I believe it would go for more than a Hulk 181 in 9.0-9.4, at least in blue.

 

 

It was your post quoted above, bother.

 

Although, ironically, it does not actually affect the analysis or conclusions in the least about the book's lackluster performance over the last ten years. *sorry*

 

-J.

 

Actually that part is true I made the error first then caught it.

 

Despite that it would most certainly effect the performance and analysis.

 

Define lackluster performance?

 

It wouldn't, because as I said the outlier sale of the blue label 9.0 cerebus 1 is the only bright spot that you have been hanging your hat on the entire time. The 8.0 and 8.5 sales this year kill you, the book does not triple in value from an 8.5-9.0, there has been no 9.2 sale recorded in years, and in its highest grade (9.4), there has been price deflation. This is not a book where there is any evidence that a blue label would command a premium over an SS file copy. That is merely speculation on your part. SS copies routinely sell for more than blue (right or wrong), take for example the Hulk 181 9.2 SS copy going for $3700 in march.

 

Lackluster performance means a book that has seen either stagnant and/or declining sales figures over a ten year period from its top grade down, with waning collector interest, in a book that was already niche to begin with.

 

Granted you may still have some old school collectors who want one of the handful of copies of it available in its top one or two grades, but the book obviously has its best days behind it, and barring some mainstream media push caused by a cartoon or something, that is unlikely change. And while I don't necessarily disagree with Overstreet's value of it placed at $2100, I do vehemently disagree with the value placed on an IH 181 of $2,000, because the book cannot be had for that price in a 9.2. Overstreet got it wrong, hence the original point of this thread.

 

-J.

 

I've already addressed your claims regarding the 9.0 being the only bright spot numerous times. Please do not keep stating this.

The 9.4 sale is not a price drop, its a price raise from the 2010 sale.

Why are we to only count the high sale of 2004, and why not address the 2009, and 2010 sales for 7.7K And its a blue not a yellow. A 2014 sale is a more current sale which better establishes its current value. So even if its a price drop from 2004, the point is moot regarding current values.

 

I've already addressed your circular statement regarding the 8.5 sales as well.

Third time posting this, I'll just cut and paste.

"But how could the recent 8.5 price drag the price down if the 8.5 went up from last year when the 8.5 sold for $820 and the 9.0 sold for $2500 within a two month time period?

Can we agree this statement is false where you claim:

"Going to have to respectfully disagree with you on that. I would argue that the 8.5 sale of cerebus 1 that just sold for $850 a few weeks ago drags down the current value of that 9.0 to more in the $1500 range. "

 

Also if we add the Comiclink sale, then there was also a $1050 sale this year. Does that not count, even after the sale is no longer on the site?

 

I have already addressed the blue label staements as well.

There are fewer HG Blue labels so its not unheard of to have Blues go for more than Yellow when this happens. In this case the Blues have seemed outperformed the Yellows.

The last Yellow sale was 2012 9.0 at $1434. The following year it was $2500 in Blue and in 2005 it was $1750. Now I can say these are the reasons the book has been going up. But there seems to be more than one sale that seems to suggest that the blue label may have something to do with this.

 

Lackluster according to you? But what if the book has gone down then up in between your arbitrary timeline of 10 years, then what? At what point does it not become lackluster?

 

I make no claims of Overstreet values and how he comes to his conclusions.

I have already addressed all of your claims ad nauseum. You consider a $33 increase in price over a year's period in an 8.5 is something other than "flat", "stagnant", "menial", or "meaningless"? Good for you, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.

 

False claim regarding "addressed all of your claims ad nauseum".

You believe that a book that sold for $10.6K in 2004 and then $9k in 2014, with some zig zags in between that still left the book with a net loss of about 15% from 10 years ago is a book that's hot, in demand, and on the move? Good for you, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.

Never made any claims of hot, But I did state you were incorrect regarding a drop in value. So indeed your claims regarding only a 9.0 sale to support claims was incorrect.

You want to use an unverified "pending sale" on Comic Link as a "comp", and pretend the other 5 books or so in similar grades haven't been languishing on there for months with nothing but low ball offers that are in line with last year's prices or below? Good for you, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.

 

I have already shown why pending is meaningless on Comiclink, and by the way, it is no longer pending. Similar grades is a moot point. Low ball offers, moot. Glad I don't need to quote myself another time (thumbs u

You want to believe that a blue label book is more valuable than a file copy SS signed by the creator of the book? Good for you, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.

That's fine. You can disagree here. Clearly since there are limited sales.

Basically, you can go right on ahead believing whatever you need to believe, and studying that lone sale of 9.0 so you can feel good about a book that the market at large forgot about a long time ago. Because without that random, outlier 9.0 sale there would be a very insignificant price change in even that grade from 2005-2012. Which, again, is why I say that 9.0 is the one and only sale that even remotely helps you. (thumbs u

 

-J.

But its wrong everytime you state that only the 9.0 sale helps. The 9.4 at 9K in addition of a recent 9.0 sales helps determine the price of a high grade copy. If I only had the recent 9.0, then I would have a harder time making claims regarding current values.

 

A) You don't know if that sale on comic link ever closed or consummated either way. Further, (and regardless) it would not be a publicly available sale and will never be reported by GPA, even if it happened. And oh yeah, current offers on the same book in grade do kinda matter, as they are suggestive and representative of market trends and where the book is actually headed, don't-cha think?

 

B) The 9.0 is obviously an outlier since the book never showed an annual appreciation of more than about 2.5% the ten years prior in that grade. Take out that one outlier sale and the book is a complete dud for the last decade in pretty much all grades, top down.

 

C) I have never actually disputed Overstreet's value of 2100 in a 9.2. That is probably correct and what one would go for now. But a Hulk 181 in the same grade goes for more. So overstreet got that part wrong.

 

D) You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I for one certainly would not suggest investing your money into a short box of cerebus 1's anytime soon. As there seems to be very few interested buyers for the inordinately large amount of copies that are already available on the market. (thumbs u

 

-J.

A. Moving the goal posts. Your claim earlier "the sale is consummated when it no longer appears as "pending" on the site and the listing poofs." But we also know this is incorrect as well as sales are finished far before. Why are we now to add yet another extra scrutiny on this sale? So only GPA sales now? Do I have to call Comiclink now?

Ever sell a book before?

JDog, meet Comiclink.

http://www.comiclink.com/ You'll find low ball offers are common.

But since you begged the question the current offer is $850.

 

B. But if we look at the 9.4 sale then it seems to fall in line nicely.

 

C. Don't care what Overstreet claims.

 

D. Lots of rare books are on the MKT.

 

"Moving the goal posts"? Come on. I have always referred to "publicly available sales data". And again, even if the 8.5 sale happened, it would be bookended by TWO other sales in 8.5 that are $850 (assuming the next one ever actually happens as well), highlighting what I have been saying once again...that the book has been either stagnant or declining in value for the better part of a decade. *On a side note....It sure is coincidental how that sale on comic link suddenly vanished after my original points, and how you seem to have such an intimate knowledge of the inner working of the goings on with the copies of cerebus 1 on there. Perhaps you're the one who has some of his copies on the market right now. Along with the other guy on the boards who couldn't even unload his early back issues for more than 25% of OPG.

 

And I never referred to the 9.4 sale as an outlier, only the 9.0 sale. If a book isn't even keeping up with inflation for nearly a 10 year period in grade, and then suddenly gets a random increase in price, in just that one single book, in that one single grade, that would be considered an "outlier". The 9.4 sale is actually 15% below the peak price paid for the grade ten years ago, and if you look at all the sales in between, the needle hasn't moved in that grade since GPA started keeping records. Like I said, your one high outlier 9.0 sale does not save your book, and it obviously has not reversed the downward/sluggish price trends or revived demand/collector interest, as subsequent sales have demonstrated.

 

So let's recap all the facts that the pro-cerebus 1 folks have either forgotten or ignored:

 

1) The original point of the thread: To dispute/mock Overstreet for ranking the book above Hulk 181 in like grade;

 

2) The highest price ever paid for a Cerebus 1, 9.2 SS is $2132 (approximately the value assigned to it in OPG), and I have gone on the record as saying I concur with this value estimation;

 

3) The highest price paid for a Hulk 181 9.2 is $3200....$1200 more than OPG, and I have gone on the record calling that demonstrably low;

 

4) The highest price paid for a Hulk 181 9.2 SS is $3700.....also a whole lot more than OPG (and only cited here for the purposes of comparing the books in value SS to SS);

 

5) Hulk 181's 9.2, 90 day average ($2507) is more than anything paid for a Cerebus 1 9.2 SS, and higher than OPG;

 

6) Hulk 181's 9.2, 12 month average ($2310) is more than anything paid for a Cerebus 1 9.2 SS, and higher than OPG;

 

7) Hulk 181's 9.2, 21 last year average ($2054) is only about $80 less than the highest price ever publicly realized for a Cerebus 1, 9.2, and still higher than OPG;

 

This is what makes OPG so very, very wrong with its list. Somehow, someway, the cerebus 1 fans have turned this into a relentless defense and justification for the book's lone positive sale in the last ten years. The have tried to use that one, lone sale to extrapolate a fantastically high, purely hypothetical "what if" price for a 9.2, even as the grade in the other direction (8.5) in fact drags it down, and there has been a 15% net drop in value in its highest grade over the same 10 year period. Yet they have then turned around and stated that the "one" recent 9.2 Hulk 181 sale of $3200 should be ignored, because.....well because I guess it's just a little "too high" for them, and essentially steamrolls anything ever paid for a Cerebus 1 and is inconvenient to their position..... while failing to acknowledge that even the 90 day and 12 month averages on the book are still about 15-20% higher than anything a cerebus 1 has sold for in a 9.2, even at its peak when people cared more about it.

 

There is clearly some denial going on here when it comes to this book. I am not trying to change anyone's minds here, but seriously, take off the rose coloured glasses already, if OPG has ever gotten something wrong (and he has), this would certainly qualify as a prime example.

 

And PS ....I only post in this thread when someone mis-states, perverts my position, or deliberately cites me out of context. I present my arguments with data and context, unlike most have been posting nothing more on here than "you're wrong", or "that is incorrect", and then disappearing back into cyberspace.

 

-J.

 

 

[Ryan.]

I am not trying to change anyone's minds here

 

[HighStakesComics]

Comiclink is pretty transparent, but they are in the business of comic book sales. They will give you whatever data you need, but you have to call them up and ask them for it. They want to get you on the phone, which is smart business, so they can ask if you would like to consign anything in the next auction.

As far as the Cerebus back issues, it was 25% of OPG, not .25%.

If you saw two raw copies of 181 and Cerebus #1, and they both looked 9.2/9.4, and you had $2200 and had to buy one you have to choose the Cerebus. If you chose the Hulk, and the Cerebus 1 came in 9.4 after a press, you would have just left 3-5k on the table.

[Jaydogrules]

Comiclink is pretty transparent, but they are in the business of comic book sales. They will give you whatever data you need, but you have to call them up and ask them for it. They want to get you on the phone, which is smart business, so they can ask if you would like to consign anything in the next auction.

As far as the Cerebus back issues, it was 25% of OPG, not .25%.

If you saw two raw copies of 181 and Cerebus #1, and they both looked 9.2/9.4, and you had $2200 and had to buy one you have to choose the Cerebus. If you chose the Hulk, and the Cerebus 1 came in 9.4 after a press, you would have just left 3-5k on the table.

 

Thank you Blaze I have made that correction in my post regarding the 25% of OPG. (thumbs u

 

I feel this has been the problem more or less with a lot of the responses in this thread... seizing upon the minutiae of a post and glossing over the main points of a post.

 

And I'm not a dealer, I don't look at comics that way. I understand that you are and you do, and I understand that is why a lot of DEALERS would take the cerebus.

 

I, on the other hand (like the vast majority of buyers) am a collector, not a dealer. If I was a dealer that looked for flipping potential in a book after much effort (ie pressing), and I had time to wait for an interested buyer to eventually show up I would probably pick the cerebus 1. If I found a hulk 181 9.2 for a song, that looked pressable and I needed money quickly, I would take the 181. I might make less money in the long run, but at least I know I would have a quick turnaround on my investment. Time is money.

 

But this isn't about what a dealer would do. Again, this thread is about the real world values of a hulk 181/cerebus 1, 9.2 versus what OPG reported in the 2014 guide, and how it skewed his BA rankings.

 

-J.

[Rip]

"Moving the goal posts"? Come on. I have always referred to "publicly available sales data". And again, even if the 8.5 sale happened, it would be bookended by TWO other sales in 8.5 that are $850 (assuming the next one ever actually happens as well), highlighting what I have been saying once again...that the book has been either stagnant or declining in value for the better part of a decade. *On a side note....It sure is coincidental how that sale on comic link suddenly vanished after my original points, and how you seem to have such an intimate knowledge of the inner working of the goings on with the copies of cerebus 1 on there. Perhaps you're the one who has some of his copies on the market right now. Along with the other guy on the boards who couldn't even unload his early back issues for more than 000.25% of OPG.

Yes, moving the goals posts, as its been clearly shown in the post above.

 

The 8.5 has been slowly on the rise, $820 last year, $850 and $1050 this year.

No its not monumental but showing that the book is certainly not dropping.

Intimate knowledge by simply looking at Comiclink.

Nope I have no copies nor have ever owned a copy. I simply look at the site.

 

And I never referred to the 9.4 sale as an outlier, only the 9.0 sale. If a book isn't even keeping up with inflation for nearly a 10 year period in grade, and then suddenly gets a random increase in price, in just that one single book, in that one single grade, that would be considered an "outlier". The 9.4 sale is actually 15% below the peak price paid for the grade ten years ago, and if you look at all the sales in between, the needle hasn't moved in that grade since GPA started keeping records. Like I said, your one high outlier 9.0 sale does not save your book, and it obviously has not reversed the downward/sluggish price trends or revived demand/collector interest, as subsequent sales have demonstrated.

 

We are talking about values of Hulk 181 vs Cerebus, not inflation. The needle hasn't changed because its a blue label, and the only sale.

But if we combine sales of blue and yellow, then the "needle" drops and rises.

So an analysis based on only the peak price in incorrect.

 

 

So let's recap all the facts that the pro-cerebus 1 folks have either forgotten or ignored:

 

1) The original point of the thread: To dispute/mock Overstreet for ranking the book above Hulk 181 in like grade;

 

2) The highest price ever paid for a Cerebus 1, 9.2 SS is $2132 (approximately the value assigned to it in OPG), and I have gone on the record as saying I concur with this value estimation;

 

3) The highest price paid for a Hulk 181 9.2 is $3200....$1200 more than OPG, and I have gone on the record calling that demonstrably low;

 

4) The highest price paid for a Hulk 181 9.2 SS is $3700.....also a whole lot more than OPG (and only cited here for the purposes of comparing the books in value SS to SS);

 

5) Hulk 181's 9.2, 90 day average ($2507) is more than anything paid for a Cerebus 1 9.2 SS, and higher than OPG;

 

6) Hulk 181's 9.2, 12 month average ($2310) is more than anything paid for a Cerebus 1 9.2 SS, and higher than OPG;

 

7) Hulk 181's 9.2, 21 last year average ($2054) is only about $80 less than the highest price ever publicly realized for a Cerebus 1, 9.2, and still higher than OPG;

 

This is what makes OPG so very, very wrong with its list. Somehow, someway, the cerebus 1 fans have turned this into a relentless defense and justification for the book's lone positive sale in the last ten years. The have tried to use that one, lone sale to extrapolate a fantastically high, purely hypothetical "what if" price for a 9.2, even as the grade in the other direction (8.5) in fact drags it down, and there has been a 15% net drop in value in its highest grade over the same 10 year period. Yet they have then turned around and stated that the "one" recent 9.2 Hulk 181 sale of $3200 should be ignored, because.....well because I guess it's just a little "too high" for them, and essentially steamrolls anything ever paid for a Cerebus 1 and is inconvenient to their position..... while failing to acknowledge that even the 90 day and 12 month averages on the book are still about 15-20% higher than anything a cerebus 1 has sold for in a 9.2, even at its peak when people cared more about it.

 

There is clearly some denial going on here when it comes to this book. I am not trying to change anyone's minds here, but seriously, take off the rose coloured glasses already, if OPG has ever gotten something wrong (and he has), this would certainly qualify as a prime example.

 

And PS ....I only post in this thread when someone mis-states, perverts my position, or deliberately quotes me out of context.

 

-J.

 

The problem is when you compare the recent 9.4 prices and recent 9.0 price you get a center point that is above what the Hulk 181 9.2 has sold for. So yes using only the 9.0 sale is a flawed method everytime you mention it.

Using the 10 year peak sale (cherry pick) stance is also clearly flawed everytime you repeat it as shown in posts above. Repeating the claim doesn't support it.

 

The 8.5 sales shows no effect to drop the value of the 9.0 or the 9.4 copies.

Who is "they" I have made no clams regarding the $3200 sale.

 

Your comments are often shown to be incorrect. And when shown your errors, you often retreat to incorrect claims, side step, repeat a failed premise, cherry pick and move goal posts. All clearly shown. (I am also glad to point out my own error regarding the incorrect 9.0-9.2 sales point)

 

(Small edit and clean up)

 

 

Edited September 9, 2014 by Rip

[Jaydogrules]

Its not unreasonable to say that non signed copies will likely sell for more than SS copies based on the sales data.

A 9.0 Blue sold for $2500 last year. A 9.2 yellow sold for $1,434 in 2012 and a signed file copy sold for $1725 in 2010.

A lot less buyers and sellers make the book a more questionable investment but, I'd take the Cerebus 1 for 9.0 and above in a Blue Label. And if a Cerebus 1 got a 9.2, it would be the only one, so yes I believe it would go for more than a Hulk 181 in 9.0-9.4, at least in blue.

 

 

It was your post quoted above, bother.

 

Although, ironically, it does not actually affect the analysis or conclusions in the least about the book's lackluster performance over the last ten years. *sorry*

 

-J.

 

Actually that part is true I made the error first then caught it.

 

Despite that it would most certainly effect the performance and analysis.

 

Define lackluster performance?

 

It wouldn't, because as I said the outlier sale of the blue label 9.0 cerebus 1 is the only bright spot that you have been hanging your hat on the entire time. The 8.0 and 8.5 sales this year kill you, the book does not triple in value from an 8.5-9.0, there has been no 9.2 sale recorded in years, and in its highest grade (9.4), there has been price deflation. This is not a book where there is any evidence that a blue label would command a premium over an SS file copy. That is merely speculation on your part. SS copies routinely sell for more than blue (right or wrong), take for example the Hulk 181 9.2 SS copy going for $3700 in march.

 

Lackluster performance means a book that has seen either stagnant and/or declining sales figures over a ten year period from its top grade down, with waning collector interest, in a book that was already niche to begin with.

 

Granted you may still have some old school collectors who want one of the handful of copies of it available in its top one or two grades, but the book obviously has its best days behind it, and barring some mainstream media push caused by a cartoon or something, that is unlikely change. And while I don't necessarily disagree with Overstreet's value of it placed at $2100, I do vehemently disagree with the value placed on an IH 181 of $2,000, because the book cannot be had for that price in a 9.2. Overstreet got it wrong, hence the original point of this thread.

 

-J.

 

I've already addressed your claims regarding the 9.0 being the only bright spot numerous times. Please do not keep stating this.

The 9.4 sale is not a price drop, its a price raise from the 2010 sale.

Why are we to only count the high sale of 2004, and why not address the 2009, and 2010 sales for 7.7K And its a blue not a yellow. A 2014 sale is a more current sale which better establishes its current value. So even if its a price drop from 2004, the point is moot regarding current values.

 

I've already addressed your circular statement regarding the 8.5 sales as well.

Third time posting this, I'll just cut and paste.

"But how could the recent 8.5 price drag the price down if the 8.5 went up from last year when the 8.5 sold for $820 and the 9.0 sold for $2500 within a two month time period?

Can we agree this statement is false where you claim:

"Going to have to respectfully disagree with you on that. I would argue that the 8.5 sale of cerebus 1 that just sold for $850 a few weeks ago drags down the current value of that 9.0 to more in the $1500 range. "

 

Also if we add the Comiclink sale, then there was also a $1050 sale this year. Does that not count, even after the sale is no longer on the site?

 

I have already addressed the blue label staements as well.

There are fewer HG Blue labels so its not unheard of to have Blues go for more than Yellow when this happens. In this case the Blues have seemed outperformed the Yellows.

The last Yellow sale was 2012 9.0 at $1434. The following year it was $2500 in Blue and in 2005 it was $1750. Now I can say these are the reasons the book has been going up. But there seems to be more than one sale that seems to suggest that the blue label may have something to do with this.

 

Lackluster according to you? But what if the book has gone down then up in between your arbitrary timeline of 10 years, then what? At what point does it not become lackluster?

 

I make no claims of Overstreet values and how he comes to his conclusions.

I have already addressed all of your claims ad nauseum. You consider a $33 increase in price over a year's period in an 8.5 is something other than "flat", "stagnant", "menial", or "meaningless"? Good for you, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.

 

False claim regarding "addressed all of your claims ad nauseum".

You believe that a book that sold for $10.6K in 2004 and then $9k in 2014, with some zig zags in between that still left the book with a net loss of about 15% from 10 years ago is a book that's hot, in demand, and on the move? Good for you, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.

Never made any claims of hot, But I did state you were incorrect regarding a drop in value. So indeed your claims regarding only a 9.0 sale to support claims was incorrect.

You want to use an unverified "pending sale" on Comic Link as a "comp", and pretend the other 5 books or so in similar grades haven't been languishing on there for months with nothing but low ball offers that are in line with last year's prices or below? Good for you, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.

 

I have already shown why pending is meaningless on Comiclink, and by the way, it is no longer pending. Similar grades is a moot point. Low ball offers, moot. Glad I don't need to quote myself another time (thumbs u

You want to believe that a blue label book is more valuable than a file copy SS signed by the creator of the book? Good for you, you're entitled to your opinion. But I disagree.

That's fine. You can disagree here. Clearly since there are limited sales.

Basically, you can go right on ahead believing whatever you need to believe, and studying that lone sale of 9.0 so you can feel good about a book that the market at large forgot about a long time ago. Because without that random, outlier 9.0 sale there would be a very insignificant price change in even that grade from 2005-2012. Which, again, is why I say that 9.0 is the one and only sale that even remotely helps you. (thumbs u

 

-J.

But its wrong everytime you state that only the 9.0 sale helps. The 9.4 at 9K in addition of a recent 9.0 sales helps determine the price of a high grade copy. If I only had the recent 9.0, then I would have a harder time making claims regarding current values.

 

A) You don't know if that sale on comic link ever closed or consummated either way. Further, (and regardless) it would not be a publicly available sale and will never be reported by GPA, even if it happened. And oh yeah, current offers on the same book in grade do kinda matter, as they are suggestive and representative of market trends and where the book is actually headed, don't-cha think?

 

B) The 9.0 is obviously an outlier since the book never showed an annual appreciation of more than about 2.5% the ten years prior in that grade. Take out that one outlier sale and the book is a complete dud for the last decade in pretty much all grades, top down.

 

C) I have never actually disputed Overstreet's value of 2100 in a 9.2. That is probably correct and what one would go for now. But a Hulk 181 in the same grade goes for more. So overstreet got that part wrong.

 

D) You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I for one certainly would not suggest investing your money into a short box of cerebus 1's anytime soon. As there seems to be very few interested buyers for the inordinately large amount of copies that are already available on the market. (thumbs u

 

-J.

A. Moving the goal posts. Your claim earlier "the sale is consummated when it no longer appears as "pending" on the site and the listing poofs." But we also know this is incorrect as well as sales are finished far before. Why are we now to add yet another extra scrutiny on this sale? So only GPA sales now? Do I have to call Comiclink now?

Ever sell a book before?

JDog, meet Comiclink.

http://www.comiclink.com/ You'll find low ball offers are common.

But since you begged the question the current offer is $850.

 

B. But if we look at the 9.4 sale then it seems to fall in line nicely.

 

C. Don't care what Overstreet claims.

 

D. Lots of rare books are on the MKT.

"Moving the goal posts"? Come on. I have always referred to "publicly available sales data". And again, even if the 8.5 sale happened, it would be bookended by TWO other sales in 8.5 that are $850 (assuming the next one ever actually happens as well), highlighting what I have been saying once again...that the book has been either stagnant or declining in value for the better part of a decade. *On a side note....It sure is coincidental how that sale on comic link suddenly vanished after my original points, and how you seem to have such an intimate knowledge of the inner working of the goings on with the copies of cerebus 1 on there. Perhaps you're the one who has some of his copies on the market right now. Along with the other guy on the boards who couldn't even unload his early back issues for more than 000.25% of OPG.

Yes, moving the goals posts, as its been clearly shown in the post above.

 

The 8.5 has been slowly on the rise, $820 last year, $850 and $1050 this year.

No its not monumental but showing that the book is certainly not dropping.

Intimate knowledge by simply looking at Comiclink.

Nope I have no copies nor have ever owned a copy. I simply look at the site.

 

And I never referred to the 9.4 sale as an outlier, only the 9.0 sale. If a book isn't even keeping up with inflation for nearly a 10 year period in grade, and then suddenly gets a random increase in price, in just that one single book, in that one single grade, that would be considered an "outlier". The 9.4 sale is actually 15% below the peak price paid for the grade ten years ago, and if you look at all the sales in between, the needle hasn't moved in that grade since GPA started keeping records. Like I said, your one high outlier 9.0 sale does not save your book, and it obviously has not reversed the downward/sluggish price trends or revived demand/collector interest, as subsequent sales have demonstrated.

 

We are talking about values of Hulk 181 vs Cerebus, not inflation. The needle hasn't changed because its a blue label, and the only sale.

But if we combine sales of blue and yellow, then the "needle" drops and rises.

So an analysis based on only the peak price in incorrect.

 

 

So let's recap all the facts that the pro-cerebus 1 folks have either forgotten or ignored:

 

1) The original point of the thread: To dispute/mock Overstreet for ranking the book above Hulk 181 in like grade;

 

2) The highest price ever paid for a Cerebus 1, 9.2 SS is $2132 (approximately the value assigned to it in OPG), and I have gone on the record as saying I concur with this value estimation;

 

3) The highest price paid for a Hulk 181 9.2 is $3200....$1200 more than OPG, and I have gone on the record calling that demonstrably low;

 

4) The highest price paid for a Hulk 181 9.2 SS is $3700.....also a whole lot more than OPG (and only cited here for the purposes of comparing the books in value SS to SS);

 

5) Hulk 181's 9.2, 90 day average ($2507) is more than anything paid for a Cerebus 1 9.2 SS, and higher than OPG;

 

6) Hulk 181's 9.2, 12 month average ($2310) is more than anything paid for a Cerebus 1 9.2 SS, and higher than OPG;

 

7) Hulk 181's 9.2, 21 last year average ($2054) is only about $80 less than the highest price ever publicly realized for a Cerebus 1, 9.2, and still higher than OPG;

 

This is what makes OPG so very, very wrong with its list. Somehow, someway, the cerebus 1 fans have turned this into a relentless defense and justification for the book's lone positive sale in the last ten years. The have tried to use that one, lone sale to extrapolate a fantastically high, purely hypothetical "what if" price for a 9.2, even as the grade in the other direction (8.5) in fact drags it down, and there has been a 15% net drop in value in its highest grade over the same 10 year period. Yet they have then turned around and stated that the "one" recent 9.2 Hulk 181 sale of $3200 should be ignored, because.....well because I guess it's just a little "too high" for them, and essentially steamrolls anything ever paid for a Cerebus 1 and is inconvenient to their position..... while failing to acknowledge that even the 90 day and 12 month averages on the book are still about 15-20% higher than anything a cerebus 1 has sold for in a 9.2, even at its peak when people cared more about it.

 

There is clearly some denial going on here when it comes to this book. I am not trying to change anyone's minds here, but seriously, take off the rose coloured glasses already, if OPG has ever gotten something wrong (and he has), this would certainly qualify as a prime example.

 

And PS ....I only post in this thread when someone mis-states, perverts my position, or deliberately quotes me out of context.

 

-J.

 

The problem is when you compare the recent 9.4 prices and recent 9.0 price you get an center point that is above what the Hulk 181 as sold for. So yes using only the 9.0 sale is a flawed method everytime you mention it.

Using the 10 year peak sale (cherry pick) stance is also clearly flawed everytime you repeat it as shown in posts above. Repeating the claim doesn't support it.

 

The 8.5 sales shows no effect to drop the value of the 9.0 or the 9.4 copies.

Who is "they" I have made no clams regarding the $3200 sale.

 

Your comments are clearly shown to be incorrect. And when shown your errors, you often retreat to incorrect claims, side step, repeat a failed premise, cherry pick and move goal posts. All clearly shown. (I am also glad to point out my own error regarding the incorrect 9.0-9.2 sales point)

 

 

Again with the "you are incorrect" pronouncements without actually showing how or what I am "incorrect" about.

 

No, the 8.5 isn't "increasing" in value in any significant amount. At best you have one $1050 sale sandwiched between two $850 sales (or lower). That doesn't help you.

 

No, I am not "cherry picking" the high sale of a 9.4. The sale is there and it is there when the book was obviously peaking, at least in the GPA era. I understand that this sale does not help you either when compared to the more recent sales, but the fact remains, the book is down in top grade in the GPA era.

 

Yes, a 9.0 cerebus 1, 9.0 suddenly going for $2500, after years of the book increasing in value no more than 2.5% on average over the prior 7 year period, is an obvious outlier. As such, it does not help you.

 

Yes, you have continued to ignore the substantive points of all my posts that are inconvenient to the myth that you evidently wish to promulgate that this book is somehow "on the move", and deserves to be ranked higher than one of (if not the) most significant creations and hottest books of the BA (in ALL grades, top down)--- Hulk 181.

 

-J.

[HighStakesComics]

Comiclink is pretty transparent, but they are in the business of comic book sales. They will give you whatever data you need, but you have to call them up and ask them for it. They want to get you on the phone, which is smart business, so they can ask if you would like to consign anything in the next auction.

As far as the Cerebus back issues, it was 25% of OPG, not .25%.

If you saw two raw copies of 181 and Cerebus #1, and they both looked 9.2/9.4, and you had $2200 and had to buy one you have to choose the Cerebus. If you chose the Hulk, and the Cerebus 1 came in 9.4 after a press, you would have just left 3-5k on the table.

 

Thank you Blaze I have made that correction in my post regarding the 25% of OPG. (thumbs u

 

I feel this has been the problem more or less with a lot of the responses in this thread... seizing upon the minutiae of a post and glossing over the main points of a post.

 

And I'm not a dealer, I don't look at comics that way. I understand that you are and you do, and I understand that is why a lot of DEALERS would take the cerebus.

 

I, on the other hand (like the vast majority of buyers) am a collector, not a dealer. If I was a dealer that looked for flipping potential in a book after much effort (ie pressing), and I had time to wait for an interested buyer to eventually show up I would probably pick the cerebus 1. If I found a hulk 181 9.2 for a song, that looked pressable and I needed money quickly, I would take the 181. I might make less money in the long run, but at least I know I would have a quick turnaround on my investment. Time is money.

 

But this isn't about what a dealer would do. Again, this thread is about the real world values of a hulk 181/cerebus 1, 9.2 versus what OPG reported in the 2014 guide, and how it skewed his BA rankings.

 

-J.

 

I'm not so much a dealer as an investor. I try to use arbitrage to upgrade my collection. If I need cash for stuff like taxes or medical deductibles then I will take some money off the table. I don't work shows and stuff so I have to rely on guys like Dale, Donut and TopNotch for non Internet related sales info.

I've stated before this is a close call. The recent strong sales of 181 weren't accessible when the 2014 OPG was released. I don't think anyone knew the Hulk keys, #'s 1, 181, 271, would perform so well. Next year these two might flip again. I, however, do feel the upside of the Cerebus #1 and the facts associated such as no recent sales in high grade=pent up demand, 5 digit sales in 9.4, no copies in 9.6, equate to it being the more desirable book for a dealer/investor in the market right now this very second.

If you have not watched the comiclink auctions before there are some great books in the one ending tonight. Sometimes some sell at blow out gpa prices, and other times you can score some deals. They usually have some real nice FF's you could add to that awfully nice sig line you've got already.

[Jaydogrules]

Comiclink is pretty transparent, but they are in the business of comic book sales. They will give you whatever data you need, but you have to call them up and ask them for it. They want to get you on the phone, which is smart business, so they can ask if you would like to consign anything in the next auction.

As far as the Cerebus back issues, it was 25% of OPG, not .25%.

If you saw two raw copies of 181 and Cerebus #1, and they both looked 9.2/9.4, and you had $2200 and had to buy one you have to choose the Cerebus. If you chose the Hulk, and the Cerebus 1 came in 9.4 after a press, you would have just left 3-5k on the table.

 

Thank you Blaze I have made that correction in my post regarding the 25% of OPG. (thumbs u

 

I feel this has been the problem more or less with a lot of the responses in this thread... seizing upon the minutiae of a post and glossing over the main points of a post.

 

And I'm not a dealer, I don't look at comics that way. I understand that you are and you do, and I understand that is why a lot of DEALERS would take the cerebus.

 

I, on the other hand (like the vast majority of buyers) am a collector, not a dealer. If I was a dealer that looked for flipping potential in a book after much effort (ie pressing), and I had time to wait for an interested buyer to eventually show up I would probably pick the cerebus 1. If I found a hulk 181 9.2 for a song, that looked pressable and I needed money quickly, I would take the 181. I might make less money in the long run, but at least I know I would have a quick turnaround on my investment. Time is money.

 

But this isn't about what a dealer would do. Again, this thread is about the real world values of a hulk 181/cerebus 1, 9.2 versus what OPG reported in the 2014 guide, and how it skewed his BA rankings.

 

-J.

 

I'm not so much a dealer as an investor. I try to use arbitrage to upgrade my collection. If I need cash for stuff like taxes or medical deductibles then I will take some money off the table. I don't work shows and stuff so I have to rely on guys like Dale, Donut and TopNotch for non Internet related sales info.

I've stated before this is a close call. The recent strong sales of 181 weren't accessible when the 2014 OPG was released. I don't think anyone knew the Hulk keys, #'s 1, 181, 271, would perform so well. Next year these two might flip again. I, however, do feel the upside of the Cerebus #1 and the facts associated such as no recent sales in high grade=pent up demand, 5 digit sales in 9.4, no copies in 9.6, equate to it being the more desirable book for a dealer/investor in the market right now this very second.

If you have not watched the comiclink auctions before there are some great books in the one ending tonight. Sometimes some sell at blow out gpa prices, and other times you can score some deals. They usually have some real nice FF's you could add to that awfully nice sig line you've got already.

 

Thank you Blaze. I am definitely lurking in the weeds in a few lots in that C-Link auction.

 

I am agreeing with your points 100% as a matter of fact. And yes your points expose a flaw in OPG's now out dated methodology. No, he could not have known what a hulk 181 would do this year. Yet his guide cites "2014" values. If the guide reported on 2013 values, in his 2014 edition, I personally would have no gripe, and I doubt the OP would have started the thread.

 

But yes, I would imagine that, after the year the 181 has had, the 2015 OPG will have it handily over the Cerebus. Time will tell...

 

-J.

[Rip]

Again with the "you are incorrect" pronouncements without actually showing how or what I am "incorrect" about.

 

No, the 8.5 isn't "increasing" in value in any significant amount. At best you have one $1050 sale sandwiched between two $850 sales (or lower). That doesn't help you.

 

No, I am not "cherry picking" the high sale of a 9.4. The sale is there and it is there when the book was obviously peaking, at least in the GPA era. I understand that this sale does not help you either when compared to the more recent sales, but the fact remains, the book is down in top grade in the GPA era.

 

Yes, a 9.0 cerebus 1, 9.0 suddenly going for $2500, after years of the book increasing in value no more than 2.5% on average over the prior 7 year period, is an obvious outlier. As such, it does not help you.

 

Yes, you have continued to ignore the substantive points of all of posts that are inconvenient to the myth that you evidently wish to promulgate that this book is somehow still relevant and on the move, and deserves to be ranked higher than one of (if not the) most significant creations and hottest books of the BA (in ALL grades, top down)--- Hulk 181.

 

-J.

 

False. I supported my statements. See above. And below for that matter.

The 8.5 sales don't hurt me as you claim either.

Yes its called a cherry pick. If you do not show the changes in value between 2004 and 2014 you are removing the data to support a drop in price. So yes its clearly a cherry pick of the data.

Now that's said, I can agree that the book is down from the top grade sale in 2004, but so what.

Stating the 9.0 doesn't help me, is another false statement. The 9.4 also went for 9K? Is that also an "outlier"?

 

Please show what you feel I have ignored most and I will gladly address.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Rip

[Rip]

Yes, you have continued to ignore the substantive points of all my posts that are inconvenient to the myth that you evidently wish to promulgate that this book is somehow "on the move", and deserves to be ranked higher than one of (if not the) most significant creations and hottest books of the BA (in ALL grades, top down)--- Hulk 181.

 

-J.

All grades was never part of my discussion.

In some grades Hulk 181 wins in value no doubt.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Rip

[Jaydogrules]

Again with the "you are incorrect" pronouncements without actually showing how or what I am "incorrect" about.

 

No, the 8.5 isn't "increasing" in value in any significant amount. At best you have one $1050 sale sandwiched between two $850 sales (or lower). That doesn't help you.

 

No, I am not "cherry picking" the high sale of a 9.4. The sale is there and it is there when the book was obviously peaking, at least in the GPA era. I understand that this sale does not help you either when compared to the more recent sales, but the fact remains, the book is down in top grade in the GPA era.

 

Yes, a 9.0 cerebus 1, 9.0 suddenly going for $2500, after years of the book increasing in value no more than 2.5% on average over the prior 7 year period, is an obvious outlier. As such, it does not help you.

 

Yes, you have continued to ignore the substantive points of all of posts that are inconvenient to the myth that you evidently wish to promulgate that this book is somehow still relevant and on the move, and deserves to be ranked higher than one of (if not the) most significant creations and hottest books of the BA (in ALL grades, top down)--- Hulk 181.

 

-J.

 

False. I supported my statements. See above. And below for that matter.

The 8.5 sales don't hurt me as you claim either.

Yes its called a cherry pick. If you do not show the changes in value between 2004 and 2014 you are removing the data to support a drop in price. So yes its clearly a cherry pick of the data.

Now that's said, I can agree that the book is down from the top grade sale in 2004, but so what.

Stating the 9.0 doesn't help me, is another false statement. The 9.4 also went for 9K? Is that also an "outlier"?

 

Please show what you feel I have ignored most and I will gladly address.

 

Your interpretation of the data is your opinion. I do not share it. Yet the irony is that, even if I did accept your opinion (which I don't), the fact that no cerebus 1 9.2 (the grade OPG supposedly relies on) has ever sold publicly for more than even Hulk 181, 9.2's 12 month average (which is $300+ above OPG) is an inconvenient truth that remains. Which is why I repeatedly state that those other sales do not help you. Should I start talking again about what a Hulk 181 goes for in a 9.8 ($10-$12K)? Or a 9.9 ($150K)? Its top two grades? But like I said yesterday, like minds are free to disagree. (thumbs u

 

-J.

[Gatsby77]

Apologies, JayDog. You never characterized the $9k 9.4 Cerebus sale as an outlier.

 

I just checked, and that was Rcheli, way back in the thread on Aug. 28, when he tried to equate it to the Hulk 181 9.9.

[Rip]

Again with the "you are incorrect" pronouncements without actually showing how or what I am "incorrect" about.

 

No, the 8.5 isn't "increasing" in value in any significant amount. At best you have one $1050 sale sandwiched between two $850 sales (or lower). That doesn't help you.

 

No, I am not "cherry picking" the high sale of a 9.4. The sale is there and it is there when the book was obviously peaking, at least in the GPA era. I understand that this sale does not help you either when compared to the more recent sales, but the fact remains, the book is down in top grade in the GPA era.

 

Yes, a 9.0 cerebus 1, 9.0 suddenly going for $2500, after years of the book increasing in value no more than 2.5% on average over the prior 7 year period, is an obvious outlier. As such, it does not help you.

 

Yes, you have continued to ignore the substantive points of all of posts that are inconvenient to the myth that you evidently wish to promulgate that this book is somehow still relevant and on the move, and deserves to be ranked higher than one of (if not the) most significant creations and hottest books of the BA (in ALL grades, top down)--- Hulk 181.

 

-J.

 

False. I supported my statements. See above. And below for that matter.

The 8.5 sales don't hurt me as you claim either.

Yes its called a cherry pick. If you do not show the changes in value between 2004 and 2014 you are removing the data to support a drop in price. So yes its clearly a cherry pick of the data.

Now that's said, I can agree that the book is down from the top grade sale in 2004, but so what.

Stating the 9.0 doesn't help me, is another false statement. The 9.4 also went for 9K? Is that also an "outlier"?

 

Please show what you feel I have ignored most and I will gladly address.

 

Your interpretation of the data is your opinion. I do not share it. Yet the irony is that, even if I did accept your opinion (which I don't), the fact that no cerebus 1 9.2 (the grade OPG supposedly relies on) has ever sold publicly for more than even Hulk 181, 9.2's 12 month average (which is $300+ above OPG) is an inconvenient truth that remains. Which is why I repeatedly state that those sales do not help you. But like I said yesterday, like minds are free to disagree. (thumbs u

 

-J.

 

I'm more than happy to agree that no yellow has ever sold higher than the Hulk 181 AVG. $2,310 vs $2,136

I'm also happy to point there are zero 9.2 blue labels 2 9.4's and 4 9.0's.

Both recent sales (9.4 and 9.2) were blue labels. So it's clearly something to consider when determining value.

 

(Edit to show prices)

Edited September 9, 2014 by Rip

[Jaydogrules]

Again with the "you are incorrect" pronouncements without actually showing how or what I am "incorrect" about.

 

No, the 8.5 isn't "increasing" in value in any significant amount. At best you have one $1050 sale sandwiched between two $850 sales (or lower). That doesn't help you.

 

No, I am not "cherry picking" the high sale of a 9.4. The sale is there and it is there when the book was obviously peaking, at least in the GPA era. I understand that this sale does not help you either when compared to the more recent sales, but the fact remains, the book is down in top grade in the GPA era.

 

Yes, a 9.0 cerebus 1, 9.0 suddenly going for $2500, after years of the book increasing in value no more than 2.5% on average over the prior 7 year period, is an obvious outlier. As such, it does not help you.

 

Yes, you have continued to ignore the substantive points of all of posts that are inconvenient to the myth that you evidently wish to promulgate that this book is somehow still relevant and on the move, and deserves to be ranked higher than one of (if not the) most significant creations and hottest books of the BA (in ALL grades, top down)--- Hulk 181.

 

-J.

 

False. I supported my statements. See above. And below for that matter.

The 8.5 sales don't hurt me as you claim either.

Yes its called a cherry pick. If you do not show the changes in value between 2004 and 2014 you are removing the data to support a drop in price. So yes its clearly a cherry pick of the data.

Now that's said, I can agree that the book is down from the top grade sale in 2004, but so what.

Stating the 9.0 doesn't help me, is another false statement. The 9.4 also went for 9K? Is that also an "outlier"?

 

Please show what you feel I have ignored most and I will gladly address.

 

Your interpretation of the data is your opinion. I do not share it. Yet the irony is that, even if I did accept your opinion (which I don't), the fact that no cerebus 1 9.2 (the grade OPG supposedly relies on) has ever sold publicly for more than even Hulk 181, 9.2's 12 month average (which is $300+ above OPG) is an inconvenient truth that remains. Which is why I repeatedly state that those sales do not help you. But like I said yesterday, like minds are free to disagree. (thumbs u

 

-J.

 

I'm more than happy to agree that no yellow has ever sold higher than the Hulk 181 AVG. $2,310 vs $2,136

I'm also happy to point there are zero 9.2 blue labels 2 9.4's and 4 9.0's.

Both recent sales (9.4 and 9.2) were blue labels. So it's clearly something to consider when determining value.

 

(Edit to show prices)

 

...and I disagree that ONE outlier sale of a 9.0, and ONE other 9.4 sale that's 15% off from a peak price 10 years ago (from the same time frame the last 9.2 also sold) are helpful or tell us anything relevant about what a 9.2 "might" go for now. Those two sales (one of which actually represents the book's absolute top grade, for which multiples are routinely paid for in most desirable books) are not more persuasive than the 40+ publicly available sales for hulk 181 in its respective 9.2 grade over a 20-some odd month period.

 

-J.

[Rip]

Again with the "you are incorrect" pronouncements without actually showing how or what I am "incorrect" about.

 

No, the 8.5 isn't "increasing" in value in any significant amount. At best you have one $1050 sale sandwiched between two $850 sales (or lower). That doesn't help you.

 

No, I am not "cherry picking" the high sale of a 9.4. The sale is there and it is there when the book was obviously peaking, at least in the GPA era. I understand that this sale does not help you either when compared to the more recent sales, but the fact remains, the book is down in top grade in the GPA era.

 

Yes, a 9.0 cerebus 1, 9.0 suddenly going for $2500, after years of the book increasing in value no more than 2.5% on average over the prior 7 year period, is an obvious outlier. As such, it does not help you.

 

Yes, you have continued to ignore the substantive points of all of posts that are inconvenient to the myth that you evidently wish to promulgate that this book is somehow still relevant and on the move, and deserves to be ranked higher than one of (if not the) most significant creations and hottest books of the BA (in ALL grades, top down)--- Hulk 181.

 

-J.

 

False. I supported my statements. See above. And below for that matter.

The 8.5 sales don't hurt me as you claim either.

Yes its called a cherry pick. If you do not show the changes in value between 2004 and 2014 you are removing the data to support a drop in price. So yes its clearly a cherry pick of the data.

Now that's said, I can agree that the book is down from the top grade sale in 2004, but so what.

Stating the 9.0 doesn't help me, is another false statement. The 9.4 also went for 9K? Is that also an "outlier"?

 

Please show what you feel I have ignored most and I will gladly address.

 

Your interpretation of the data is your opinion. I do not share it. Yet the irony is that, even if I did accept your opinion (which I don't), the fact that no cerebus 1 9.2 (the grade OPG supposedly relies on) has ever sold publicly for more than even Hulk 181, 9.2's 12 month average (which is $300+ above OPG) is an inconvenient truth that remains. Which is why I repeatedly state that those sales do not help you. But like I said yesterday, like minds are free to disagree. (thumbs u

 

-J.

 

I'm more than happy to agree that no yellow has ever sold higher than the Hulk 181 AVG. $2,310 vs $2,136

I'm also happy to point there are zero 9.2 blue labels 2 9.4's and 4 9.0's.

Both recent sales (9.4 and 9.2) were blue labels. So it's clearly something to consider when determining value.

 

(Edit to show prices)

 

...and I disagree that ONE outlier sale of a 9.0, and ONE other 9.4 sale that's 15% off from a peak price 10 years ago (from the same time frame the last 9.2 sold) are helpful or tell us anything relevant about what a 9.2 "might" go for now. Those two sales (one of which actually represents the book's absolute top grade, for which multiples are routinely paid for in most desirable books) are not more persuasive than the 40+ publicly available sales for hulk 181 in its respective 9.2 grade over a 20-some odd month period.

 

-J.

And an increase from the 2009 and 2010 sales

So 2 recent blue prices (in 9.0-9.4) aren't helpful to figure out the values of a very rare book where only 6 exist in blue and 11 in yellow?

 

How is one to figure things out?

 

Edited September 9, 2014 by Rip

[Prince Namor]

To a HG collector, the gap between 8.5 and 9.0 is much larger than 0.5

ESPECIALLY in a book with so few 9.0 and up copies.

Anyone trying to determine numbers from GPA, SHOULD know and understand this.

 

Also, for a book with so few 9.0 and up copies in blue label, it's appeal in that blue label increases for HG collector.

 

IT becomes the white whale. The pretty girl who is unavailable.

It's enchantment will draw a bigger game hunter.

 

Overstreet certainly understands this and it's what he is basing some of his information on.

[RockMyAmadeus]

This thread is awesome.

 

At various points, you have

 

- called both the 2014 9.4 and 2013 9.0 sales "outliers" that should be discarded,

- missed, misinterpreted or ignored the (albeit slight) upward trend among 8.5 copies,

- argued that no Comiclink sales should be included because of the quirk of the "Sales Pending" language that they report for _all_ sold books,

- and used a blanket "lack of demand for lower grade copies" argument to support your incorrect assumptions regarding demand for high grade (i.e., 9.0+) copies.

 

And, to review, the count is now five folks who have posted _in this thread_ that they'd take a 9.2 Cerebus over a 9.2 Hulk, in addition to the >2:1 margin in favor of Cerebus among the 32 folks who've weighed in on the poll.

 

Keep on trucking, man!

 

This is not kinder garten where the one who hits hardest, shouts loudest, or has most friends is right.

 

You are correct, Alexander, it is not.

 

The one who is right is the one who is right.

 

Jay has made contradictory, conflicting arguments, ignored facts that don't suit him, repeated statements that are factually incorrect multiple times, despite being corrected multiple times, and drawn conclusions that are not within reason to draw based on the scant data available.

 

He has steadfastly and stubbornly resisted correction, and you have completely supported his arguments the entire time. You have, in opposition to reason, claimed that Jay is "making the most sense", even though he keeps doing what I just described.

 

These arguments are simply not within reason to make.

 

This is nothing personal. I don't dislike any of you. This has nothing to do with "winning", or "shouting the loudest", or anything like that, despite your repeated attempts to make it that, and despite your repeated attempts to make it personal with others (including myself) by discussing the people, rather than the topic.

 

These arguments are simply not within reason to make.

 

And yet...here we are.

 

Jay couldn't care less how many says the moon is made of cheese if he is not convinced that it is.

 

You are correct: popularity of a position is not evidence of its soundness. That is fundamental.

 

However...that is precisely what Jay is doing: saying the moon is made of cheese. It's not within reason to say the moon is made of cheese.

 

And he deserves respect for that when at the same time his arguments (at least for the most part) are solid.

 

No, they are not. And no, stubborn resistance to reason, "standing your ground", when you make contradictory, conflicting statements, ignore facts that don't suit you, draw unreasonable conclusions, and make factually incorrect statements over and over and over and over, despite being corrected, is NOT "deserving of respect."

 

It's a complete and utter unwillingness to admit one is wrong.