San Francisco Pedigree?

[Red Hook]

One day, three hours to go. What's happening? Just curious.

[PedigreeMan]

One day, three hours to go. What's happening? Just curious.

 

CGC: Sensation #54 == SAN FRANCISCO!

Bob Beerbohm:

CGC: Green Lantern #3 == WINDY CITY!

Gary Colabuano:

Me:

CGC:

Beerbohm:

Everyone:

(Heritage: ) ?

 

And the band plays on....

[BLBcomics-migration]

i have done all i can to convince the world of self-described experts who were not "there" of the parameters of the Tom Reilly collection

 

- there ain't no way in hell that Sensation 54 is a "Frisco" copy, much less a "Tom Reilly" copy

 

- dunno what more i can add, pedigreeman pretty well summed it all up

 

t-minus and counting

 

credibility is riding a thin wire right about now

 

not mine, BTW

 

robert beerbohm

[tb]

On a related note, I've always been wondering what happened to the Adventure 82 VF+ that was first labeled as a Church copy but later had the pedigree removed on the resub (got the same grade). The book was offered by Heritage both before (the Nic Cage auction, as far as I remember) and after the change. Was this a case where CGC acknowledged their mistake and corrected it?

 

It's hardly that surprising to me that CGC makes an error once in a while. A couple of years back, I did a fairly extensive survey of CGC pedigrees offered at auction and did not discover a single mistake like those described in this thread.

 

As someone who has submitted a bunch of books that I bought as pedigrees, the important thing to me is that the hit/miss rate is acceptable. My own humble opinion is that CGC's standard is very high for the $40-70 fee that I have typically paid. For some of these books, it could take many hours of research to do a complete check (outside experts/consultants would have to be compensated) and I'd rather pay $70 and live with a 0.1% ratio of false positives than $140 to cut that error in half.

 

Having said that, CGC should correct the errors when they occur. I am personally confident that they will if given a fair chance.

 

---

 

Edit: I fully agree with Mark's comments below: if Heritage does not pull this book after such ample evidence (especially if they have been approached by CGC), it is unethical. I was planning to spend a few thousand dollars at this week's auction myself but will wait and see what happens.

 

[esquirecomics]

I have been in contact with Ed Jaster at Heritage about this book. For the moment, given that I presume my discourse with Mr. Jaster remains a continuing dialogue, out of courtesy I will refrain from revealing the specific details of our communications.

 

Nevertheless, suffice it to say at this time I am not persuaded by Heritage's initial response, nor their claim that this book is, in fact, from Tom Reilly's collection. In my law practice I highly value honesty, openness and integrity, and I fully intend to apply the same values to my comic book dealings.

 

Notwithstanding the fact that I spent a multiple six figure sum on Heritage purchases in 2004, I have notified Heritage that I cannot in good conscience bid on any item in this week's auction until I feel I can appropriately trust the authenticity of the books they are offering. There is a principle at stake here that no one should overlook, no matter how much any of us may desire the books that will be bid upon later this week.

 

I will keep the community updated on the results of my conversations with Heritage and, if it appears appropriate, I will make available the text of my communications at a later date. If those of us in this community do not make our voices and positions known to entities such as CGC and Heritage, then nothing will ever change.

 

Mark S. Zaid

Esquirecomics.com

[lou_fine]

In my law practice I highly value honesty, openness and integrity, and I fully intend to apply the same values to my comic book dealings.

 

I have notified Heritage that I cannot in good conscience bid on any item in this week's auction until I feel I can appropriately trust the authenticity of the books they are offering. There is a principle at stake here that no one should overlook, no matter how much any of us may desire the books that will be bid upon later this week.

 

If those of us in this community do not make our voices and positions known to entities such as CGC and Heritage, then nothing will ever change.

 

Mark S. Zaid

Esquirecomics.com

 

 

Mark;

 

Well Said!

[RareHighGrade]

On a related note, I've always been wondering what happened to the Adventure 82 VF+ that was first labeled as a Church copy but later had the pedigree removed on the resub (got the same grade). The book was offered by Heritage both before (the Nic Cage auction, as far as I remember) and after the change. Was this a case where CGC acknowledged their mistake and corrected it?

 

 

The Nicholas Cage auction is an example of an occasion on which Heritage did make appropriate corrections. The Adventure 82 was advertised as the Mile High, but during the floor bidding, the correction was made and prior bidders were allowed to withdraw their bids on it. Likewise, the Adventure 90 was advertised as the Mile High, but it was determined before the floor bidding that it was actually the San Francisco (Tom Reilly) copy and the correction was made before internet bidding closed.

[nearmint]

There's been an update to the CGC census since Heritage wrote the item descriptions for this week's auction. My America's Best #7 9.0 is listed in that update, yet Heritage continues to list the 8.0 in their auction as the highest graded copy. It makes me wonder how many other books in the auction, advertised as the highest graded, no longer are.

[Moondog]

I've been assured by Heritage that the Windy City Green Lantern 3 mistake will be rectified by CGC. I am pleased that both companies have made the effort to get things right.

 

I have nothing but the highest regard for both companies and will continue to place my trust in them.

 

--Gary

[BLBcomics-migration]

Hi Gary,

I wonder out loud what they are going to be doing regarding that Sensation 54?

 

And i also like all the players i have met at both organizations

- and consider many of them friends.

 

That said, integrity is at stake here.

 

I wonder who owns the Sensation 54? Steve B told me that they have a "documentation paper trail" linking this back to Tom Reilly. But all that purported info is secret client info.

 

And i also want to stress i have zero financial interest in Tom Reilly books at this stage of my life. I do not own any presently. the last time some passed thru my hands were three Star Spangleds in the #20-30 range about 3 years ago.

 

I think pedigree connotations are ultimately silly. The final arbiter of desirability is the grade.

 

It is impossible for the Sensation 54 to be a Tom Reilly (Frisco) copy.

 

period - end of discussion.

 

bob beerbohm

[sborock]

Bob-

 

I never said that we have a "documentation paper trail" linking this back to Tom Reilly." I said we have paperwork that trails to other owners.

 

And yes, all paperwork and submissions are for the client to know and not for public record unless, the client/submitter wants to make it so.

 

Yes, CGC's and my integrity is at stake here, as it is every day. I am under the largest microscope this hobby has ever seen. Unlike some (not all) people who make money in our hobby, I have always been available when problems arise and if the problem is mine or CGC's fault (even though we try everyday to be, we are never going to be 100% correct 100% of the time), we take care of it and admit to it.

 

At this point, AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE, we are working on this. I am not saying that it is the Reilly copy, I am just crossing T's and dotting I's like everyone wants. Let this alone for now until it is resolved. If it is not resolved or not resolved to your liking, within the next 10 days or so, please feel free to let the boards know.

 

BTW Bob- I believe you will be happy with the final outcome even if it's not as quick as you would like it to be

[the blob]

well, if there isn't some evidence indicating that the book belongs in the pedigree, why would CGC stick it on a lable?

 

otherwise we can all make stuff up and have it in the lable.

[the blob]

sborock -- too many lawyers in this hobby who will be quick to scream "fraud", need to fix problem quick!

 

(not being one who thinks much of pedigrees, this one, with the deceased WW II soldier and all that behind it, sounds like an interesting one. reminds me of a story from a friend who was at an elderly woman's home in the early 70s.... her son had died in WW II and she had kept all his comics (and he apparently had a lot of them) and other things 30 years later in his room, perfectly maintained. Sadly, I'll bet it all got tossed in the trash when she died. I wonder how many of these finds could have been unearthed in the 70s as parents of WW II age children were dying off but never were?)

[Mephisto]

If they don't pull the book bid and then sue them.

[BLBcomics-migration]

Bob-

 

I never said that we have a "documentation paper trail" linking this back to Tom Reilly." I said we have paperwork that trails to other owners.

 

And yes, all paperwork and submissions are for the client to know and not for public record unless, the client/submitter wants to make it so.

 

Yes, CGC's and my integrity is at stake here, as it is every day. I am under the largest microscope this hobby has ever seen. Unlike some (not all) people who make money in our hobby, I have always been available when problems arise and if the problem is mine or CGC's fault (even though we try everyday to be, we are never going to be 100% correct 100% of the time), we take care of it and admit to it.

 

At this point, AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE, we are working on this. I am not saying that it is the Reilly copy, I am just crossing T's and dotting I's like everyone wants. Let this alone for now until it is resolved. If it is not resolved or not resolved to your liking, within the next 10 days or so, please feel free to let the boards know.

 

BTW Bob- I believe you will be happy with the final outcome even if it's not as quick as you would like it to be

 

Hi Steve,

 

My mistake - i might have extrapolated the present owner claims a link back to Reilly, at least to at least me, or Dave Belmont, or Bob Selvig - could not be Nick Marcus or Mike Manyak, as they only got the Timelys from the first portion which showed up at the Berkeleycon 1973

 

I have every bit of respect for client secrecy - as i have every bit of respect for your integrity - i was refering to my own integrity regarding my innate personal "lived with the books"knowledge of the history behind this collection.

 

But, i got brought into this mix with zero pesonal axes to grind regarding the concept of "pedigree", and to me it is a no-brainer smal dunk.

 

1946 equals nada Tom Reilly - simple

 

ANYTHING from 1946 onwards is not a contender. Plus most all late 1945 books as well, but 1946 is surely not possible.

 

Sounds like it will all roll down hill as buyer back to seller back to buyer back to seller etc will maybe want to contact who they bought it from, etc - but this does not matter one whit.

 

But, bottom line is, some one some where (over the rainbow) sold a bill of goods they were, at a minimum, sadly mistaken on the concept.

 

And i am true blue sure this will be resolved - and it should be before some one not in the present "know" maybe buys some thing they will surely find out later is not what the description claims.

 

I tried to get the Relly List out into the public almost decade ago, before CGC came along. The first editor of CBM deemed not to run it and i got off into other comics research dating our hobby back to 1842. That history is well enough covered now to demonstrate that most of our comics history books were wrong - many did not do proper home work.

 

My brain is firmly planted into newer comics research lately - as i have begun to explore the 20th century again.

 

The two Reilly threads (plus the Tom Reilly Collection Master List thread i posted also in the GOLD comics section on these boards has broguth back a world of good memories - and while i jog my memory about the collection and its aftermath in the hobby, i am having some fun thinking back to the days when i was in my early 20s and we were trying to conqueor the comics world in the Bay Area (and succeeded, too), but the last thing i am attempting to do is [#@$%!!!] any one off.

 

cuz i know i am correct

 

see ya out in Wondercon, good friend,

- living in a glass house is rough. been there, got the t-shirt

 

best

 

bob beerbohm

[esquirecomics]

I have been in contact with Ed Jaster at Heritage about this book. For the moment, given that I presume my discourse with Mr. Jaster remains a continuing dialogue, out of courtesy I will refrain from revealing the specific details of our communications.

 

Nevertheless, suffice it to say at this time I am not persuaded by Heritage's initial response, nor their claim that this book is, in fact, from Tom Reilly's collection. In my law practice I highly value honesty, openness and integrity, and I fully intend to apply the same values to my comic book dealings.

 

Notwithstanding the fact that I spent a multiple six figure sum on Heritage purchases in 2004, I have notified Heritage that I cannot in good conscience bid on any item in this week's auction until I feel I can appropriately trust the authenticity of the books they are offering. There is a principle at stake here that no one should overlook, no matter how much any of us may desire the books that will be bid upon later this week.

 

I will keep the community updated on the results of my conversations with Heritage and, if it appears appropriate, I will make available the text of my communications at a later date. If those of us in this community do not make our voices and positions known to entities such as CGC and Heritage, then nothing will ever change.

 

Mark S. Zaid

Esquirecomics.com

 

Both Ed Jaster and Jim Halperin called me today to further discuss this specific issue. As with all my prior conversations and dealings with Heritage, the discussions today were professional and friendly. I thank both of them for their prompt outreach and expenditure of valuable time. As a result of my conversations, I am sufficiently satisified with how Heritage is dealing with the controversy.

 

Of course, that is not to say I am completely satisified nor that were it up to me something different would not be done. However, I understood the explanations they provided for their chosen course of conduct and I am content in my knowledge that the concerns we have raised are definitely not falling on deaf ears and are being addressed.

 

Ed and I do continue to disagree on the underlying substantive issue of whether this book is, in fact, from the Reilly collection. My primary reason for doubting the pedigree designation is plain and simple - the date of the book. If Reilly died in the Summer of 1945, how does a book that was published in the Fall of 1946 become part of his collection? Apparently, some doubt the assertion that Reilly actually died when he did. Therefore, I intend to use my "Inside the Beltway" contacts and experience to research the, as it were, life and death of Reilly (was that not a tv show or something?). I will shortly start a new thread asking for all known biographical information on Tom Reilly and any family members, and I encourage everyone to either post their knowledge, PM me or e-mail me at Esquirecomics@aol.com.

 

Nevertheless, with respect to Heritage, the authenticity of the pedigree was never the true issue that prompted my comments. That responsibility lies with CGC. Steve B. has already made it clear that CGC is also addressing the issue and I have no doubt this is the case. I look forward to hearing further from Steve about this matter.

 

As this is not the only "pedigree" book for which the designation has been challenged, it is my personal opinion that this controversy is serious enough to deserve public comment from CGC to explain the evidentiary basis it uses for designating pedigrees. It is my hope that Steve B., or the appropriate person, will address, at a minimum, these several questions.

 

* What type of documentary evidence is useful/necessary standing alone to justify a designation?

 

* To what extent is a demonstrated chain of possession utilized for the decision?

 

* Is an oral statement alone ever sufficient, or would a submitter always need to secure additional documentation setting forth the different transactions?

 

* If little or no documentation exists, to what degree would a visual inspection alone be sufficient to permit a pedigree designation?

 

* What level of independent investigation does CGC undertake to verify submitted evidence?

 

* Does CGC permanently maintain copies of any submitted evidence, as well as its stated reasoning for declaring a book to be a pedigree?

 

I do not wish to deter CGC from assigning pedigree determinations. Indeed, I encourage CGC to continue to do so. And while human errors can and will occur, I would hope there exists a process that applies consistent evidentiary standards before designating a book as originating from a particular collection. On that note, I am not implying that these standards do not already exist within CGC, but as I am unaware of them and given the importance of this particular issue, I raise the questions in a public forum rather than simply call CGC for a private response.

 

Mark

Esquirecomics.com

[the blob]

well, if the guy doesn't die in WW II, that sort of throws off the whole story behind this pedigree, doesn't it? weren't no kamikazees in 1946.

 

sounds like maybe someone should have called blb first about this, huh? since he's the one that unearthed this whole thing 30+ years ago.

 

one more reason why my millions won't be going into pedigree books.

[FFB]

That sounds like some interesting research that would be valuable in its own right, Mark, but I'm not sure that it's (a) necessary, or (b) dispositive on the issue of whether the book is a Reilly book or not. The fact that Reilly died in 1945 does not mean that his mom and dad didn't buy the odd book here and there after 1945 and toss it in the room along with the others. I'm not suggesting that this is what actually happened -- my point is that Reilly's death does not preclude a given book from being in his collection, since he wasn't the one buying the books anyway.

 

What IS dispositive in my mind is the fact that Bob Beerbohm is here saying "I was one of the people who found the collection, I remember the date range of the books, and there was nothing from 1946 in the collection." To me, that is far more conclusive than pinning down the date of Tom Reilly's death.

 

But like I said initially, there may be inherent value (having nothing to do with this particular book) in doing this research you mention. Any additional information about Tom Reilly would be a positive thing for people who care about the backstory on the collection. And while you're having your friends in the Beltway do research on Tom Reilly, maybe they could help me track down an ebay seller who ripped me off and then disappeared?

[Rip]

A great and difficult topic, I know lots of times back in the early 90's I got MH, Ohio, and other pedigrees with little to no documentation. Tracking down the owners isn't always an easy task.

I remember one selling point was to open the Gerber Photo Journal and say, "See it's the same exact copy!" Of course if it was a MH John V.(Comic Heaven) smells em.

Not exactly scientific was it?

[tb]

You can probably get the answer from the US Census or Military

records. A quick search at www.ancestry.com under "military" found

3 Tom Reillys involved in WWII who died in 1945. You need to pay

for the service to get more details.