Valiant first appearances (quick version for beginners) Now with pictures! 2 2

[RockMyAmadeus]

Or...the number of 9.8s on the census will double, through a combination of new submissions and pressing, now that the book is worth nearly 3x what it was 3 weeks ago and a whole new generation of collectors who haven't even thought about Valiant in 20 years now decide to submit the books they haven't looked at since 1995.

.

 

The census will not double on this book any time soon.

 

It has taken 7 years to get from 12 to 135. Harbinger #1 selling for $2500 was a watershed. Everyone and their grandmother slabbed whatever copies they could find.

 

In that same time period, starting in Jan of 2008, Batman Adventures went from 1 9.8 to 280 9.8s.

 

New Mutants #98 went from 128 to 1597 9.8s.

 

There will be no "census doubling", just like with ASM #301 (which, since the discussion last August has added NINE 9.8s to the census, despite selling for $1000 several times.)

 

Some people may believe that there are endless copies of every single 1980-up book out there in raw 9.8, just waiting for attention to be paid to it so it will go in that slab. That isn't the case.

 

Will there be a few here, a few there? Sure. But will there be a large jump in the census? Of course not. The book hasn't sold for less than $300 in 9.8 since 2002; it is a easy money.

 

So where was the flood...?

 

You're looking at it. 135 copies. That's the flood.

 

The book had a relatively low print run, a good chunk were manufactured with spine splits and bindery tears, and another good chunk had the coupons cut out.

 

If...and granted, this is a colossal if...but if Harbinger were to ever gain any sort of mainstream, widespread buzz....the book will have no problem being a $2,000 book again.

 

And this time, there will be no flood to mitigate prices....

 

 

Rebuttal:

 

Iron Man 55.

 

 

These two books are so radically different, trying to compare them is quite beyond reasonable.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Nah -- because then you're back at the "what % of AF 15s are still raw" conversation going on over in the Silver Age thread. With a small minority believing there's no way anyone would keep an AF 15 raw, so 90%+ of the copies must be already slabbed.

 

Aside from the explosion in census #s in 9.8 Harbinger 1s since 2008, the % of slabbed copies hitting 9.8 rose as well.

 

It used to be considered "rare in 9.8" because of a bindery production flaw -- back when less than 6% of submitted copies hit 9.8. Now that % hit rate has tripled. That matters. A lot.

 

Only in a sample size that's large enough to make such percentage differences to matter.

 

135 is not a large enough sample size to extrapolate.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Nah -- because then you're back at the "what % of AF 15s are still raw" conversation going on over in the Silver Age thread. With a small minority believing there's no way anyone would keep an AF 15 raw, so 90%+ of the copies must be already slabbed.

 

Aside from the explosion in census #s in 9.8 Harbinger 1s since 2008, the % of slabbed copies hitting 9.8 rose as well.

 

It used to be considered "rare in 9.8" because of a bindery production flaw -- back when less than 6% of submitted copies hit 9.8. Now that % hit rate has tripled. That matters. A lot.

It takes several examples in the data, but I believe that I can prove that CGC got VERY relaxed in what they gave CGC 9.8 during the 2009 timeframe.

 

Across pretty much every major modern book, across all publishers, there is a sharp increase in the % receiving CGC 9.8 around 2009.

 

Sure... it could be prescreening, and it could be pressing, but I believe it was literally a relaxation of the standard.

 

Or, it could be that people got into CGC who consistently acquired very high grade raw books, maybe even brand new, who weren't in that market before.

 

Prior to about 2007, it made no sense to slab 1980-up books, because they didn't sell for much. The GPA data is littered with examples of books that sold for peanuts in 9.8. A&A #0 Gold is a good example. The first 9.8 sold for $28 back in 2002. Why would anyone submit books, to sell them at a loss when all is said and done?

 

It's just too soon to tell.

 

We're only just now getting to the point, nearly 30 years on, when good, reliable statistical data can be mined from coin slabbing. With only the one company, and only 15 years on, the picture is still much too fuzzy to draw any really meaningful conclusions.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

The "first major impact" to the Harbinger #1 census numbers was in 2008... and they went from 12 to 24 in one year.

 

The "second major impact" to the Harbinger #1 census numbers was in 2012, when Valiant announced Harbinger relaunching... and the CGC 9.8 census went from 80 to 135 over the course of 3 years.

 

The question is whether the "third major impact" to the Harbinger #1 census numbers in 2015 (due to the investment announcement) will result in ANOTHER 135 copies being graded CGC 9.8... and how quickly it will happen.

 

No, because of the numbers you post here. Look at the slowdown.

 

2008, the numbers doubled (12 to 24) in a single year.

 

In 2012, the numbers only went up 60%, 80 to 135, and it took 3 years.

 

You can see the rush happen before our very eyes, and it peaked in 2009. You had a leap of 6, and then 7 the next month, back to back. 13 copies in two cycles. You don't ever see that again. That was the rush. Since then you see 3s, 4s, but nothing more until Sept of 2013, when you get a strange leap of 8....then the same dribs and drabs. One or two copies every 3-4 months.

 

There will undoubtedly be more...I have more raws, and I suspect others do, as well.

 

But the "doubling of the census" for this book is essentially over, unless we're looking at several years down the road.

[Gatsby77]

 

These two books are so radically different, trying to compare them is quite beyond reasonable.

 

You're not wrong. They're vastly different.

 

IM 55 is far older, more expensive, more key, and orders of magnitude harder to find in 9.8 (in both absolute [48 vs. 135] and relative [3.3% of submissions vs. 18.3% of submissions] than Harbinger 1. It sold for $1,800 at its nadir, so there was every incentive to slab it prior to the Avengers film.

 

And yet the 9.8 population's still doubled in 35 months.

 

Put another way -- Harbinger 1's print run was low for the time, but it would have made the top 30 of last month's Diamond list.

 

Even assuming that half of its print run has been literally destroyed in the last 25 years, that still leaves tens of thousands (say...20,000) raw copies out there.

 

To believe that the 9.8 population won't double to 270 in say...the next 4-5 years, is to bet that fewer than 0.7% of the remaining copies would hit CGC 9.8 if submitted.

 

Yet the census shows that 18.3% of submitted copies that are submitted do. (Granted, not a direct comparison because of high self-selection bias, but still).

 

So let's say out of 20,000 copies only 5% are submission-worthy. That's 1,000 copies. Then 18% hit 9.8 & boom -- your census has doubled.

 

Proof this isn't an ASM 301 situation?

 

2 new 9.8 Harbinger 1s have appeared in the last 30 days alone, 50% of those submitted. And that's before the movie announcement.

 

You're right -- it's beyond reasonable to compare IM 55 to Harbinger 1. The latter is far more common, common in high grade & has been a collected, cared-for key since year one.

[Bosco685]

We're only just now getting to the point, nearly 30 years on, when good, reliable statistical data can be mined from coin slabbing. With only the one company, and only 15 years on, the picture is still much too fuzzy to draw any really meaningful conclusions.

 

In this case, I trust in Valiantman's expert analytical skills and his application of descriptive statistics to make an assumption about CGC results over time. That doesn't require decades of data when it comes to such sampling. But it does require defining the population (graded books), sampling frame (9.8's of all graded books), an appropriate sample size that can accurately represent the characteristics of the overall population, and validation there is no bias or error in the data pulled.

 

If Valiantman's hypothesis in this case is CGC changed its standards over time, and through the sampling of all 9.8's delivered can validate there was a shift in results, then the assumption is there may have been a shift due to the increase in 9.8 counts compared to all other grades.

 

But I think an interesting chart to validate the hypothesis further is a comparison of all grades to see if they also experienced any shift in results.

[manetteska]

What are some of these common defects on H 1 to look out for -- apart from the usual things to look for on any book to sub?

 

We don't usually look for spine splits on modern books, but the cover stock on H1 was bad enough that they are common. Top, bottom, center, at each staple, you name it I've seen it.

 

Pressing can "cause" this defect as well. Meaning it can split an otherwise intact spine because the paper is so bad.

 

Page/coupon browning is other one. Again, bad paper, it can get toasty.

 

Staple placement... and bad staples. There are 2 and 3 staple versions of the book. Many have the staples shifted to the front and are not closed properly, so the staple seems longer than it should. It can detract from appearance.

 

Thanks for the info. I'll check my copies -- pretty sure they all have coupons -- and take another look at the spines. The pressing-may-break-it is a little scary, too.

[___]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

[valiantman]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

Trial and error.

[RockMyAmadeus]

We're only just now getting to the point, nearly 30 years on, when good, reliable statistical data can be mined from coin slabbing. With only the one company, and only 15 years on, the picture is still much too fuzzy to draw any really meaningful conclusions.

 

In this case, I trust in Valiantman's expert analytical skills and his application of descriptive statistics to make an assumption about CGC results over time. That doesn't require decades of data when it comes to such sampling. But it does require defining the population (graded books), sampling frame (9.8's of all graded books), an appropriate sample size that can accurately represent the characteristics of the overall population, and validation there is no bias or error in the data pulled.

 

If Valiantman's hypothesis in this case is CGC changed its standards over time, and through the sampling of all 9.8's delivered can validate there was a shift in results, then the assumption is there may have been a shift due to the increase in 9.8 counts compared to all other grades.

 

But I think an interesting chart to validate the hypothesis further is a comparison of all grades to see if they also experienced any shift in results.

 

It has nothing to do with anyone's ability, talent, or skills at gathering and interpreting data.

 

It has to do with having enough data to form accurate analyses.

 

And, as I said, coins have just started to blossom in that area, and they have 15 years head start on comics, AND there were two A-Class grading companies from the start, rather than one.

 

"Results not known; not enough data" will be the story for the next decade, at least.

 

And, as I explained in detail in the other thread, trying to figure out if CGC's grading standards have shifted over time is not possible with that graph and data alone.

[RockMyAmadeus]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

 

Here's the dirty little secret of pressing: every book is at risk of damage in the process. You're exposing decades old paper that was never intended to be "high quality" to heat, pressure, and in many cases, humidity/moisture.

 

It's like racing a car...to get the best results, you have to take the risk...but sometimes, you crash. It happens.

 

 

[Lonzilla]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

 

Here's the dirty little secret of pressing: every book is at risk of damage in the process. You're exposing decades old paper that was never intended to be "high quality" to heat, pressure, and in many cases, humidity/moisture.

 

It's like racing a car...to get the best results, you have to take the risk...but sometimes, you crash. It happens.

 

So if you have a $1K book and CCS ruins it you're basically skrewed?

[Bosco685]

It has nothing to do with anyone's ability, talent, or skills at gathering and interpreting data.

 

It has to do with having enough data to form accurate analyses.

 

And, as I said, coins have just started to blossom in that area, and they have 15 years head start on comics, AND there were two A-Class grading companies from the start, rather than one.

 

"Results not known; not enough data" will be the story for the next decade, at least.

 

And, as I explained in detail in the other thread, trying to figure out if CGC's grading standards have shifted over time is not possible with that graph and data alone.

 

We are in agreement on your last statement. There are details not available to the public that would impact the final grades of books submitted.

 

1) How much was pre-screening utilized so only 9.8 candidates made it through?

 

2) How many books went through a preparation service that previously was not so readily available to the general public?

 

But as far as determining a high-level shift in grades at the 9.8 level, the basic data will at least allow for this that then would lead to more detailed analysis IF that data was available. Too bad we couldn't get details such as how many of those books came from the more recognized preparation services.

[RockMyAmadeus]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

 

Here's the dirty little secret of pressing: every book is at risk of damage in the process. You're exposing decades old paper that was never intended to be "high quality" to heat, pressure, and in many cases, humidity/moisture.

 

It's like racing a car...to get the best results, you have to take the risk...but sometimes, you crash. It happens.

 

So if you have a $1K book and CCS ruins it you're basically skrewed?

 

I do not know, and will not speculate on this, the message board of the company that owns CCS.

 

But I DO know that other pressers have damaged books, and not stepped up to the plate to address the issue satisfactorily with their customers, if they even mentioned it at all.

[manetteska]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

 

Here's the dirty little secret of pressing: every book is at risk of damage in the process. You're exposing decades old paper that was never intended to be "high quality" to heat, pressure, and in many cases, humidity/moisture.

 

It's like racing a car...to get the best results, you have to take the risk...but sometimes, you crash. It happens.

 

So if you have a $1K book and CCS ruins it you're basically skrewed?

 

I do not know, and will not speculate on this, the message board of the company that owns CCS.

 

But I DO know that other pressers have damaged books, and not stepped up to the plate to address the issue satisfactorily with their customers, if they even mentioned it at all.

 

Are you speaking specifically to Harbinger 1 or books damaged in general?

[RockMyAmadeus]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

 

Here's the dirty little secret of pressing: every book is at risk of damage in the process. You're exposing decades old paper that was never intended to be "high quality" to heat, pressure, and in many cases, humidity/moisture.

 

It's like racing a car...to get the best results, you have to take the risk...but sometimes, you crash. It happens.

 

So if you have a $1K book and CCS ruins it you're basically skrewed?

 

I do not know, and will not speculate on this, the message board of the company that owns CCS.

 

But I DO know that other pressers have damaged books, and not stepped up to the plate to address the issue satisfactorily with their customers, if they even mentioned it at all.

 

Are you speaking specifically to Harbinger 1 or books damaged in general?

 

In general.

[divad]

Rebuttal:

 

Iron Man 55.

 

 

These two books are so radically different, trying to compare them is quite beyond reasonable.

 

Is there an echo in here?

[divad]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

 

To satisfy their clients' hunger for the almighty dollar?

[valiantman]

that is s scary note on the pressing. Why would any presser companies press the books than if it would damage them?

To satisfy their clients' hunger for the almighty dollar?

The dollar isn't almighty. If it wasn't you wouldn't need more than one of them.

[Broke as a Joke]

Somewhere along the line CGC eased up on grading Harbinger #1 and 9.8's started popping up a lot more. At the same time this happened the price of Harbinger #1 was sinking drastically, which made slabbing all the high grade copies sitting in collections not a priority anymore. It's not like this book was thrown away back in 1992. This was a huge book within the first year it came out. The copies are out there regardless of the print run.

 

I feel there will be an influx of high grade copies available of all the early Valiant keys shortly, especially once they give us details on just what exact properties will be coming to the big screen.