Pedigree Collections!!

[lou_fine]

I don't know about that. The "Lost Valley" pedigree is just as good, or better, than Church for many pre-1940 books, and that was just found last year.

 

I also don't know about that. I consider the Lost Valley to be a "niche" pedigree collection. I went through the catalogue and was not overly impressed since the majority of books were only in the mid-grade range. I guess its real claim to fame is that it certainly does contain some of the extremely tough to find books from the late 1930's time period which is absent from pretty well all of the other GA pedigrees.

 

Similarly, I also consider the Vancouver Collection to be a niche collection in that it is basically limited to books from the mid 1940's. It's real claim to fame is that the books are of extremely high condition. Unfortunately, no real key books in the collection to make it a true standout.

 

From the GA point of view, strongly doubt that we will find anything as comprehensive and condition-wise as the Church and San Francisco pedigrees being unearth in the future. From a SA standpoint, however, it would not really surprised me if another Curator or Pacific Coast equivalent collection was discovered in the coming years. Comic collecting began around this time period and I would be surprised if there are not more raw collections sitting out there waiting to be discovered or conveniently left in storage for future investment holding purposes.

 

With respect to the second-tier SA and BA pedigrees, there are just so many out there that I can't even name them all. Without a doubt, there'll be a lot more pedigrees coming out equivalent to the Boston, Northland, Winnipeg, Mass, Oakland, Green River, or what have you.

[lou_fine]

The question is:

 

How many will CGC consider pedigrees.

 

Explain to me why this is the question?

 

With CGC creating "named" collections, I guess there will be a growing confusion between some of these new collections from the true pedigree collection. Unfortunately, CGC seems to have gotten into the game of issuing name collections based upon the fame of the submittor or the size of the submission.

 

As a result, we now have the Cage collection, the Stan Lee collection, the Don & Maggie collection, the Dallas Stephens collection, and almost seemingly whoever else wants their name to be placed on a large submission. This is also not helped by the fact there there are a ton of second tier SA and BA pedigrees out there making it hard to differentiate between all these so-called pedigree named collections, all in the hopes of prying more dollars out of your wallet.

[sfilosa]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The question is:

 

How many will CGC consider pedigrees.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Explain to me why this is the question?

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

With CGC creating "named" collections, I guess there will be a growing confusion between some of these new collections from the true pedigree collection. Unfortunately, CGC seems to have gotten into the game of issuing name collections based upon the fame of the submittor or the size of the submission.

 

As a result, we now have the Cage collection, the Stan Lee collection, the Don & Maggie collection, the Dallas Stephens collection, and almost seemingly whoever else wants their name to be placed on a large submission. This is also not helped by the fact there there are a ton of second tier SA and BA pedigrees out there making it hard to differentiate between all these so-called pedigree named collections, all in the hopes of prying more dollars out of your wallet.

 

There are plenty of "what some would consider" SA/BA pedigrees that CGC does not. Basically, these books have no identifying marks, or were discovered / sold to long ago to be able to indentify. For CGC to give the pedigree designation to group of SA books, they will have to probably be in:

 

1) Extremely High-Grade (early issues in 9.2, and many issues in 9.6)

2) Contain at least a half a dozen major keys in 9.0 or better

3) And have full runs of many mainsteam titles.

4) And of course be an original owner collection (not a collectors collection).

 

So while I see the possiblity of a dozen or more very high grade SA collections being discovered, my guess is most (if any) won't qualify for at least one of those reasons.

 

Regarding GA pedigree, one thing to remember is that PAPER AGES.

 

Therefore, the longer it takes for someone to find a great stash of books in the attic or cellar of their grandparents, the more likely the books will have aged (i.e. lower page quality and great aging defects like tanning, foxing, etc). So the books could be structurally NM, but might have the aging qualities of many FILE COPIES (or worse).

[PedigreeMan]

I agree with you Punyhuman that there will never, ever be another find like the Church collection. I keep believing there are several more (less than 10) significant Golden Age collections yet discovered. I have to believe that because I haven't stumbled across the one meant for ME yet. I keep hoping.

 

There are probably around 100 high grade silver age accumulations yet to be discovered.

 

 

I don't know about that. The "Lost Valley" pedigree is just as good, or better, than Church for many pre-1940 books, and that was just found last year.

 

 

Geez, Dan, sometimes it seems like you're sharing your forum account with Al Stoltz.

 

Sure, the Mid-Grade Valley Lost Valley find has a number of books not present in the Edgar Church pedigree, but does it really aproach it in quantity of pre-1940 issues? I haven't compared master lists, but if I had to bet I'd say, "Nope."

 

And even if it did, the Edgar Church pedigree blows it away on condition with regard to books from this period. How many New Funs are 9.4 in both? Or New Adventures? Or Detectives? Come on!

 

And how about comparing the value of these books? The Church Detective #27 in all its double-slashed, VF glory surpasses the combined worth of 90% of the pre-1940 Lost Valley books! Throw in the NM Amazing Man #5, and Lost Valley becomes the "Lost in the Edgar Church's Dust" pedigree. (You'll notice I haven't mentioned the Church Marvel #1. Or the All American #16. Or the granddaddy of 'em all, the Action #1. All of these are pre-1940 and NM or better. One of those alone blows away the entirety of Stoltz's little find.)

 

[Aman619]

smackdown!!!!!!!!!!!

[PedigreeMan]

As for how many other "pedigree" collections will surface over the coming decades? A lot less, now that CGC seems to be the final determiner of new pedigrees. Back in the Wild West days of the 20th century, the term "pedigree" was bandied about quite haphazardly. As a result, you had varying degrees of quality -- everything from Edgar Church on down to Allentown and Okajima. Some were accepted by collectors more than others, which is why we still argue about exactly what makes a "pedigree" to this day. Now that that argument has ostensibly been delegated to one final authority, CGC needs to be very careful what they label as a pedigree for fear of hearing cries of foul play. They've done an ... okay job thus far.

 

Now, if we're talking original owner collections? That's a different story. There are still a ton of OO Silver Age collections mouldering away in basements and closets and filing cabinets all over the country. Comic collecting came into its own during the early '60s, and even though a bunch of those pioneers have since sold off their holdings to pay for various other toys, there remain an obscene number of pre-retirement age Baby Boomers who either have no clue as to the value of their childhood collections or who are financially secure at this point in their lives that they don't need to sell off their holdings. In fact, I'd wager that there are more than a few who do know the value of their collections but are holding onto them until some time in the future. (Can someone fill me in on Burntboy's status prior to his coming to these forums? Did he know he had four and five figure books stashed away?)

 

As for original owner Golden Age collections still out there? Try playing around on the US census page for a bit. To start, check out this simple breakdown. There are 16.5 million people aged 75 years and older still living in the US. That's over 16 million people that would have been of prime collecting age during the thirties and that would have been old enough to take care of their stuff. Six year olds destroyed their comics, but thirteen year olds? Of course, this figure needs to be considerably pared down. Perhaps an exercise for another day...? But is there another Edgar Church-like collection waiting out there to be discovered? I'd say the odds are better than hitting the lottery but not quite as good as getting struck by lightning.

 

More research needs to be done here .....

 

Alan

[namisgr]

In the recent Silver Age market, it has been many years (nearly six) since a significant OO pedigree collection has been identified that combines breadth, quality, and good representation of the earliest keys. Much more common of late seem to be the "secondary owner" collections. These relatively numerous collections, many of which have early Silver Age runs of terrific quality, were compiled by collectors starting in the late sixties or early seventies, but lack the provenance and uniformity of the best OO collections.

 

So, while I believe there is still alot of high grade early Silver Age out there, I think very little of it will be found in OO collections worthy of the top-tier pedigree status of the Curator, Western PA, Pacific Coast, and White Mountain collections.