Chuck explains his Mile High pricing

[RockMyAmadeus]

Your welcome to disagree, but it has nothing to do with how he found it or what he did with it afterward, nor the timeframe in which he found it. Its simply deals with not properly notifying the people that the collection was FAR more valuable than either party realized. In my opinion, the right thing to do would have been to tell them and work out something where the family got more money. Instead he drove off like a thief in the night. And again, your entitled to disagree. this is simply my opinion. I find the entire event completely disgusting and immoral.

 

I very much appreciate your tone and your comments. You are right, he should have mentioned something to the heirs about the comics in the closet. I wonder what the FMV of those comics was at that time (also considering that Chuck was not able to check all the comics, but only few of them) and what the heirs would have said. I recall that Chuck showed them the value of other comics on the Overstreet guide, but the heirs were not interested to those numbers and they just wanted to get rid of the comics.

 

Without considering Chuck's behavior at that time, the discovery of the collection was an incredible finding for the industry and it is still nowadays a fascinating story. I wonder if we will ever hear about other discoveries like this one. Is it possible that Mr. Chuch had been the only guy in the U.S. buying those comics and storing them so carefully?

 

If he showed them the OPG, and they declined a more detailed appraisal, then no harm no foul...... and over half of the collection, despite it's condition, was absolute drek and was unsellable for years. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

Yes.

 

Yes, yes, yes.

 

"Best preserved copy" means nothing if no one wants ANY copy.

[RockMyAmadeus]

As long as we have the sense of touch, people will want to touch things, to hold things, to connect to things...especially disposable things that can be treated carelessly, and not be destroyed in the process (unlike digital devices.)

I agree with you if we are talking desktop computers and laptops, but if we start talking about Ipads,smart phones or tablets,than the touch and connect part is there.

 

No, it's not.

 

It's not the same thing at all.

 

Touching an Ipad, smart phone, or tablet for the sake of it being an Ipad, smart phone, or tablet is NOT the same thing as touching it for the sake of it displaying a comic. Touching a DEVICE that displays a page is not the same thing as touching the printed page.

 

Not the same.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

On the one hand he was only twenty, no one knew if the hobby would go up or down, he had to borrow the money for the purchase and he had to go into rural Colorado in a van when no one else really wanted to.

 

On the other hand the Churches wouldn't have done much worse if he had stolen the comics.

 

This is hyperbole, and completely unfair to Chuck. Let me say this again: according to Chuck (and maybe he's lying, but maybe he's not), these people were actively throwing this stuff away..

 

Much worse? The people got around $2,000....about half the value of a brand new car...two months pre-tax income....or, in other words, a significant chunk of change for stuff they were actively throwing away.

 

They couldn't have done much worse...? Really?

 

Perhaps he could have created a scholarship fund in their name giving the first scholarship to the children of the family. He could have paid much, much more for his purchases on succeeding trips.

 

How do you know? Were you helping him with the purchase?

 

He seems to write about everything in his business but not the morality of what he did. Does he sleep at night?

 

I remember an old Scrooge comic where Scrooge is ready to buy a valley of golden feathers for $2 but Huey, Dewey and Louie make him pay a million dollars. Chuck McRozanski.

 

I don't know what went on in the Church house and if there was anything illegal no one is talking about it. But what Chuck Rozanski does talk about is just the sort of thing that you don't want your children to know. It is a bad example for them.

 

"And then I visited this old lady. Her husband was in the hospital. I bought his comic collection worth over a hundred thousand even back then, for $1800."

 

"Gee whiz, Dad, you the man!"

 

Someone back a little ways in the thread suggested that to be anti-Chuck was tantamount to being anti-capitalist. I looked for the exact quote but sorry, I can't find it. Is there such a thing as excesses of capitalism? Can capitalism go too far? For that matter can there be excesses of free speech (maybe when Nazis march through Skokie)?

 

No. Limits in free speech have to do with safety, not differences in ideology. Every ideology should have the right to be heard. All of them. And, the burden of free speech is answering those ideologies which we think are detrimental.

 

Silencing those ideologies only means someone will eventually come along and silence yours.

 

How about excesses of freedom of religion when a cult leader takes the flock for every nickel they have?

 

Again, no. If a "flock" wants to give every nickel they have, they should, and must, have the right and the freedom to do just that. Removing that freedom only means that someone will come along and force you to do what you disagree with, because it's "for your own good."

 

We can't always make laws against things we don't like but it is OK to not like things, even when they are legal.

 

Yes, and that's why freedom of speech is so important.

 

For Shadrock, what if that $9,000 book was not worth $23,000 but $230,000? What if was worth $2,300,000? Does there come a point where people will say, "That may be legal but it was wrong". Are gutless shill and greedy pig the only options?

 

Moral relativism. "It's ok when it's only X, but not ok if it's XXX." That is the classic slippery slope, whereby something becomes wrong only at a certain point. Something is either wrong, or it's not. The amount doesn't matter.

 

It is not as though I have the answers to my own questions, but I believe the Church deal to have been morally repugnant. I am not a comic dealer, big time or otherwise. I have been a humble unionized school teacher for the past 38 years. My union negotiates for me. But every time I benefit from a deal, I think of Chuck and the moral yardstick of that deal.

 

Yes, it's easy to look at the situation from 2015-colored glasses, no...?

 

 

[porcupine48]

From what i understand,Chuck pretty much paid these folks not to destroy, throw away these books.he paid for time to get the collection out.the family viewed Church as a hoarder and after throwing out bins of stuff basically paid him to take away the rest of the trash in their eyes.if he didn't get it out soon...what would we have lost?

Imagine what was?

Now my understanding is nth hand story...but really,he did the comic world a great turn in the end...

[ttfitz]

I just finished reading the final pages of the Church collection from Chuck and I am was just blown away when I came across this part:

 

"Another question I am frequently asked, is whether I have had any further contact with the Church heirs. My last visit to Edgar Church's house was in late April of 1977, three months after the comics deal was concluded. Despite their earlier haste, the Church heirs had not succeeded in selling the house by that time, and kept calling me with more collectibles to buy. In total, I believe I made six, or seven, additional trips to the house. During the last trip, I purchased a few dozen posters they had found in the attic. To help (in a small way) compensate them for the incredible bargain I received in buying the comics, I paid them about double for the posters what I would have paid anyone else."

 

Wow, just wow. I take back everything I said about this deal being underhanded and immoral. He got over 18,000 near mint golden age comics for dirt cheap and his way of repaying the heirs was to pay 2x the value on a couple dozen posters. Wow, what a guy!! Just a class act all the way around. I'm legitimately inspired by this act of kindness of selflessness.

 

 

 

I may have read the account years ago so I don't remember the details - do I remember correctly that the books would have ended up in the trash if Chuck hadn't shown up to look at them?

 

Did the family set a price or did Chuck make an offer?

 

Has anyone ever documented what the collection would have been worth at the time that Chuck purchased the collection?

 

If so, what would have been a 'fair' price to pay for the collection?

 

I haven t done the math, (tho I think someone once posted a total value ?) but jeeez, he bought them at cover price -- ten cents a piece! Even at $2 a piece the total would have been 20x what he paid! 40 grand was pretty close to what the house must have sold for back then.

 

and regardless of whether the heirs just wanted the comics gone from the house. Chuck knew he was ripping them off. He could have made a decent pile of dough and STILL have cut them a much better deal.

 

 

Not if he didn't have the money in the first place.

 

$2,000 (or whatever it was) might as well have been $2 trillion if one didn't have it.

 

Ripping them off...?

 

$2 each? When new comics were 30 cents? Really? And you think Chuck had, or could have possibly gotten, $36,000 to buy this collection? Any bank would have laughed him out the door, down the street, and around the corner. And if he didn't have it all, do you think the Church heirs would have waited while he tried to secure that kind of money?

 

 

Don Rosa used to say a back issue comic shouldn't cost more than half of cover price, and he wasn't that far off for those days. I know that a good chunk of my collection was bought at just those sort of prices, from the Paperback Exchange in Roanoke, VA.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

I just finished reading the final pages of the Church collection from Chuck and I am was just blown away when I came across this part:

 

"Another question I am frequently asked, is whether I have had any further contact with the Church heirs. My last visit to Edgar Church's house was in late April of 1977, three months after the comics deal was concluded. Despite their earlier haste, the Church heirs had not succeeded in selling the house by that time, and kept calling me with more collectibles to buy. In total, I believe I made six, or seven, additional trips to the house. During the last trip, I purchased a few dozen posters they had found in the attic. To help (in a small way) compensate them for the incredible bargain I received in buying the comics, I paid them about double for the posters what I would have paid anyone else."

 

Wow, just wow. I take back everything I said about this deal being underhanded and immoral. He got over 18,000 near mint golden age comics for dirt cheap and his way of repaying the heirs was to pay 2x the value on a couple dozen posters. Wow, what a guy!! Just a class act all the way around. I'm legitimately inspired by this act of kindness of selflessness.

 

 

 

I may have read the account years ago so I don't remember the details - do I remember correctly that the books would have ended up in the trash if Chuck hadn't shown up to look at them?

 

Did the family set a price or did Chuck make an offer?

 

Has anyone ever documented what the collection would have been worth at the time that Chuck purchased the collection?

 

If so, what would have been a 'fair' price to pay for the collection?

 

I haven t done the math, (tho I think someone once posted a total value ?) but jeeez, he bought them at cover price -- ten cents a piece! Even at $2 a piece the total would have been 20x what he paid! 40 grand was pretty close to what the house must have sold for back then.

 

and regardless of whether the heirs just wanted the comics gone from the house. Chuck knew he was ripping them off. He could have made a decent pile of dough and STILL have cut them a much better deal.

 

 

Not if he didn't have the money in the first place.

 

$2,000 (or whatever it was) might as well have been $2 trillion if one didn't have it.

 

Ripping them off...?

 

$2 each? When new comics were 30 cents? Really? And you think Chuck had, or could have possibly gotten, $36,000 to buy this collection? Any bank would have laughed him out the door, down the street, and around the corner. And if he didn't have it all, do you think the Church heirs would have waited while he tried to secure that kind of money?

 

 

Don Rosa used to say a back issue comic shouldn't cost more than half of cover price, and he wasn't that far off for those days. I know that a good chunk of my collection was bought at just those sort of prices, from the Paperback Exchange in Roanoke, VA.

 

There was a time, not so long ago, when you would have been considered insane if you paid cover price for a back issue..

 

It was a back issue.

 

Cover price was the cost of new entertainment, not old.

 

After all....NEW movies cost 25 cents...old movies could be seen for a dime or even a nickel.

 

That "every back issue is automatically worth MORE money" is a peculiarity to the comics market, and even then, only within the last 25 years or so. That some stores add 50 cents OR MORE to back issues that didn't sell when new is as bizarre to the publishing industry as it gets.

 

No one adds $10 to an unsold copy of Stephen King's "The Stand", unless it's a first edition, first printing hardcover.

 

No one adds $1 to an unsold copy of Newsweek.

 

No one adds 50 cents to an unsold copy of the New York Times..

 

Only in comics.

[porcupine48]

As long as we have the sense of touch, people will want to touch things, to hold things, to connect to things...especially disposable things that can be treated carelessly, and not be destroyed in the process (unlike digital devices.)

I agree with you if we are talking desktop computers and laptops, but if we start talking about Ipads,smart phones or tablets,than the touch and connect part is there.

 

No, it's not.

 

It's not the same thing at all.

 

Touching an Ipad, smart phone, or tablet for the sake of it being an Ipad, smart phone, or tablet is NOT the same thing as touching it for the sake of it displaying a comic. Touching a DEVICE that displays a page is not the same thing as touching the printed page.

 

Not the same.

Yes,yes,yes !YES.

I agree with RMA.not at all the same.Is getting a text,or a facebook message,email,ect even close to making a phone call,leaving a voicemail,gosh forbid,sitting down for a coffee or pot of tea?

Totally different but just the same.

What's the difference between getting a PM here or a friendly phone call?....emotionally,and comic lovers collect emotionally over all,it is massive.

And im emotional right now!

[ComicConnoisseur]

As long as we have the sense of touch, people will want to touch things, to hold things, to connect to things...especially disposable things that can be treated carelessly, and not be destroyed in the process (unlike digital devices.)

I agree with you if we are talking desktop computers and laptops, but if we start talking about Ipads,smart phones or tablets,than the touch and connect part is there.

 

No, it's not.

 

It's not the same thing at all.

 

Touching an Ipad, smart phone, or tablet for the sake of it being an Ipad, smart phone, or tablet is NOT the same thing as touching it for the sake of it displaying a comic. Touching a DEVICE that displays a page is not the same thing as touching the printed page.

 

Not the same.

Yes,yes,yes !YES.

I agree with RMA.not at all the same.Is getting a text,or a facebook message,email,ect even close to making a phone call,leaving a voicemail,gosh forbid,sitting down for a coffee or pot of tea?

Totally different but just the same.

What's the difference between getting a PM here or a friendly phone call?....emotionally,and comic lovers collect emotionally over all,it is massive.

And im emotional right now!

 

The best example I can use is comics= iPad,while music= iPod.

I know people who literally would go into emotional distress if they lost their iPod with all their rock and roll collections on it.

I can see the same with people who collects comics on their iPads.

 

 

So if the fans of music/vinyl got attached to their iPods, why wouldn`t comic book fans not experience that same attachment to their iPads?

 

Ask a music fan in 1999 if he/she thought that the theory of collecting digital music on a device would someday be the most popular way of collecting music, and he/she would probably answer cds and vinyl records will always be the main way because you can hold them.

 

[That Ron Dude]

The lesson here is to NEVER tell anyone what you paid for ANYTHING.

 

...especially around here.

 

I think there are a lot of stories about the Mile High Deal that are not accurate. I may be adding to that huge mound of misinformation but here goes... I don't think Chuck ever spilled the beans on what he paid. I think the person who loaned him the money spilled the beans. Word gets out.

[ComicConnoisseur]

The lesson here is to NEVER tell anyone what you paid for ANYTHING.

 

...especially around here.

 

I think there are a lot of stories about the Mile High Deal that are not accurate. I may be adding to that huge mound of misinformation but here goes... I don't think Chuck ever spilled the beans on what he paid. I think the person who loaned him the money spilled the beans. Word gets out.

If a Mile High deal like this came about today it would be much more scrutinized. From an outsider who wasn`t involved in comics from that era I see terrible documentation from the comic book historians from that era about this Mile High deal. It seems like everybody just went on word of mouth.

I could be mistaken, but that`s how it looks.

 

[That Ron Dude]

One friend used to tell me a story about taking his lifetime collection of comics down to the local comic store and selling the lot for $35. A few days later he saw a single comic from that collection up on the wall for $35.

 

A dealer from Montreal came on these boards and bragged about a conversation with a collector where word got out that the collector was going to buy a collection the next day. The dealer got on a plane, went to the home of the lady with the collection and bought it that same day. His trick in the purchase was to show the lady the guide and buy all the books at 1/2 the good value no matter what their condition was. The dealer from Montreal, I suppose, was trying to tell us that the early bird got the worm. He may have also been telling us that he didn't really care what anyone thought of him.

 

Another friend who is legally blind sold part of his collection for far less than he knew it was worth to two associates who went to his home and pitched him deals for four hours. One second after agreeing to the deal he knew he had made a mistake. Two seconds after agreeing the deal the two associates were gone.

 

As a child I asked Captain George Henderson what he would pay for my Sgt. Fury #1. Without a word he put thirty-five cents in my hand and the deal was done.

 

One friend bought a fairly large quantity of late silver age Marvels for $3000. An hour later he regretted his actions and returned them but received only $2000.

 

My point? You have to expect the people on the short end of these deals to be unhappy or even angry.

 

Then I think of Harry Kremer. He may have done some fancy dealing too. But, mostly, he gave good deals and paid people fairly. I think of him as the man who bought 500 Cerebus #1s from Dave Sim when it first came out. If not for Harry we would have not had Cerebus. Harry has an award named after him. He still died with what people estimated as a collection worth between $2 and $10 million dollars. People generally liked Harry.

 

 

[shadroch]

When I moved to Long Island in 1974, New comics cost 20 cents. There were two second hand shops that sold comics.Both priced super hero books at 20 cents, and Tarzan type books at 50 cents. Regardless of condition, even if it was coverless. I have no idea where they got them, but they both had huge turnover. I saw two adults almost come to blows over a few new additions one day.

Then one week, there was a new development. One shop got a copy of the third edition of Overstreet and started charging Guide prices for everything. Mint guide prices.

That Thanksgiving,I attended my first comic convention, was given a sample of The Buyers Guide and subscribed.

By 1977, there were about a dozen shops selling old comics in easy distance. Some had even started selling new books.

[VintageComics]

 

Wow, just wow. I take back everything I said about this deal being underhanded and immoral. He got over 18,000 near mint golden age comics for dirt cheap and his way of repaying the heirs was to pay 2x the value on a couple dozen posters. Wow, what a guy!! Just a class act all the way around. I'm legitimately inspired by this act of kindness of selflessness.

 

You, and many others, look at this deal through 21st century-tinted glasses.

 

The comics world in 1977 was nothing...absolutely nothing...like what it would become.

 

 

Yes, he got an amazing deal. No one, not even Chuck, has denied that. However...he paid the heirs far, far more than they expected, or would have reasonably deserved, considering they were planning on, and in the process of, throwing it away.

 

"But Action Comics #1 was a $5,000-$7,500 book at this time!" Yeah, so?

 

How many Action Comics #1s were in the collection?

 

1.

 

What about Action Comics #108? Green Lama #7? Tarzan #31? Plastic Man #31?

 

YES, it was an incredible deal, and YES, Chuck made his money back and moreso...but you folks have GOT to remember that in 1977, comics collecting was so niche, you could probably number the collectors (as opposed to readers or accumulators) to still less than 1,000 or so nationwide. Certainly not too much more than that. This was a time when people still THREW AWAY comic books, which these heirs were in the process of doing themselves.

 

That they got whatever it was that Chuck eventually paid is far more than they had a right to expect.

 

So, what happens if you have a lot of people who WANT to buy these, but don't have the money? That was a real concern, as Chuck himself explained, in those early days. Desire didn't come up with the cash, and buyers with money were few and far between. Yes, there were willing buyers...but willing buyers with the cash on hand? What are we down to in 1977, 100 people nationwide for the major keys?

 

It's not like throwing it up on eBay at 99 cents and letting it fly was an option.

 

It's so easy to apply hindsight to this collection....but in 1977? How was Chuck to know what would happen?

 

Look at OPGs from the 70's and 80's....the phrase "Prices vary widely on this book" were printed all over the place...because it was TRUE.

 

I agree that people are judging with 21st century rose colored glasses.

 

Most people see the profit and don't weigh in the risk involved, the work involved or what it takes to complete the deal front to back.

 

I remember when the 1st FF #112 CGC 9.8 sold for $20K years ago and the discussion ensued on this forum (I believe a forum member sold the book as a lower grade CGC copy that upgraded) and everyone could only talk about what a big win it was. Nobody discussed how many losses a person might take before they get to a win but it happens.

 

The risk is on the person spending the money.

 

And I'm not well versed enough in the Church collection story to pick a side here but I do know that people mostly hear about the wins and rarely hear about the losses and they just assume that people only win.

 

A dealer who has been around a long time factors in his losses when buying. It's not all win.

[VintageComics]

One friend used to tell me a story about taking his lifetime collection of comics down to the local comic store and selling the lot for $35. A few days later he saw a single comic from that collection up on the wall for $35.

 

A dealer from Montreal came on these boards and bragged about a conversation with a collector where word got out that the collector was going to buy a collection the next day. The dealer got on a plane, went to the home of the lady with the collection and bought it that same day. His trick in the purchase was to show the lady the guide and buy all the books at 1/2 the good value no matter what their condition was. The dealer from Montreal, I suppose, was trying to tell us that the early bird got the worm. He may have also been telling us that he didn't really care what anyone thought of him.

 

Another friend who is legally blind sold part of his collection for far less than he knew it was worth to two associates who went to his home and pitched him deals for four hours. One second after agreeing to the deal he knew he had made a mistake. Two seconds after agreeing the deal the two associates were gone.

 

As a child I asked Captain George Henderson what he would pay for my Sgt. Fury #1. Without a word he put thirty-five cents in my hand and the deal was done.

 

One friend bought a fairly large quantity of late silver age Marvels for $3000. An hour later he regretted his actions and returned them but received only $2000.

 

My point? You have to expect the people on the short end of these deals to be unhappy or even angry.

 

Then I think of Harry Kremer. He may have done some fancy dealing too. But, mostly, he gave good deals and paid people fairly. I think of him as the man who bought 500 Cerebus #1s from Dave Sim when it first came out. If not for Harry we would have not had Cerebus. Harry has an award named after him. He still died with what people estimated as a collection worth between $2 and $10 million dollars. People generally liked Harry.

 

 

 

But it really comes down to how the fine details of the deal goes down. I've seen very different ways of a deal going down.

 

If some guy has an ask price and you pay his ask, are you obligated to give more?

 

I've seen people say "I want this much" and someone might reply "well, I can offer you more" and they'd just respond with "no, that's fine I just want my price".

 

Now if they asked for an assessment and the dealer lies, that's an entirely different can of worms.

 

The devil is in the details and I don't know enough of them to comment with any convincing argument. I only know that it's easy to judge someone incorrectly when you either don't know the whole story or have a first hand account.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

If someone has a Detective Comics #31 in a stack of old books, and is asking $2 for it, I'm going to pay that $2, and be very happy.

 

I do not owe anyone beyond their asking price. No one does. If you feel it's "worth more", then you offer more. If that's what makes you happy, other than possibly mucking up the deal, then knock yourself out. As others have said, once people sniff money, they get weird. In fact, I have even had people refuse to sell something that they would have been happy to sell 10 minutes earlier, because now they have to "look it up", and you're suddenly regarded with suspicion, because YOU told them the item might be "worth more."

 

If the seller says "I don't know how much it's worth, what do you think?", then that's the line. That's where I say "well, I think it's worth around such and such, so what would you like for it?"

 

And even that is more than I'm obligated to do, because the knowledge I possess came at a cost. I earned that knowledge, and the seller did not.

 

But if it's got a $2 price on it, $2 is what I pay. I'm happy, seller is happy, no need for guilt.

 

These aren't stocks. They aren't commodities. They are collectibles. There is no guarantee that what I pay $10,000 for today will be worth $1,000 tomorrow.

[That Ron Dude]

One friend used to tell me a story about taking his lifetime collection of comics down to the local comic store and selling the lot for $35. A few days later he saw a single comic from that collection up on the wall for $35.

 

A dealer from Montreal came on these boards and bragged about a conversation with a collector where word got out that the collector was going to buy a collection the next day. The dealer got on a plane, went to the home of the lady with the collection and bought it that same day. His trick in the purchase was to show the lady the guide and buy all the books at 1/2 the good value no matter what their condition was. The dealer from Montreal, I suppose, was trying to tell us that the early bird got the worm. He may have also been telling us that he didn't really care what anyone thought of him.

 

Another friend who is legally blind sold part of his collection for far less than he knew it was worth to two associates who went to his home and pitched him deals for four hours. One second after agreeing to the deal he knew he had made a mistake. Two seconds after agreeing the deal the two associates were gone.

 

As a child I asked Captain George Henderson what he would pay for my Sgt. Fury #1. Without a word he put thirty-five cents in my hand and the deal was done.

 

One friend bought a fairly large quantity of late silver age Marvels for $3000. An hour later he regretted his actions and returned them but received only $2000.

 

My point? You have to expect the people on the short end of these deals to be unhappy or even angry.

 

Then I think of Harry Kremer. He may have done some fancy dealing too. But, mostly, he gave good deals and paid people fairly. I think of him as the man who bought 500 Cerebus #1s from Dave Sim when it first came out. If not for Harry we would have not had Cerebus. Harry has an award named after him. He still died with what people estimated as a collection worth between $2 and $10 million dollars. People generally liked Harry.

 

 

 

But it really comes down to how the fine details of the deal goes down. I've seen very different ways of a deal going down.

 

If some guy has an ask price and you pay his ask, are you obligated to give more?

 

I've seen people say "I want this much" and someone might reply "well, I can offer you more" and they'd just respond with "no, that's fine I just want my price".

 

Now if they asked for an assessment and the dealer lies, that's an entirely different can of worms.

 

The devil is in the details and I don't know enough of them to comment with any convincing argument. I only know that it's easy to judge someone incorrectly when you either don't know the whole story or have a first hand account.

 

 

Some people spend their lives negotiating small deals. Over time, and with help, you can learn certain psychological tricks. There is a book by Les Dane called, "Big League Sales Closing Techniques". That is the one the Scientologists use when selling their services. If you want the techniques with a mixture of morality try, "How to sell anything to anybody," by Joe Gerard, but really you don't need to consider the moral parts in the book. It will work just as well without the justifications. Books like these, and just being around other people that are into it, help.

 

The smallest of those tricks is saying, "What do you want for it, anyway". Once the person has set his price you negotiate down. Chuck Rozanski must have wet his pants when the Church family, according to the story I heard which may not be true, said, "Duh, we just want what Dad paid for these, a dime a piece".

 

The first convention I attended was in 1970. I went to the New York Seuling convention in 1971. I am not looking at this assuming that what comic collecting is now is what it always was. From what I saw back then, and what I remember, a golden age book went for $8 to $12 unless it was something special. Yes, I am sure they could be had for less. Even if all the books were unimportant books, he was still paying 1%.

 

Someone is going to scan a page from RBCC and prove me wrong. Go ahead. What if it was 1.5% or even 2% on unimportant books? The point remains the same.

[RockMyAmadeus]

One friend used to tell me a story about taking his lifetime collection of comics down to the local comic store and selling the lot for $35. A few days later he saw a single comic from that collection up on the wall for $35.

 

A dealer from Montreal came on these boards and bragged about a conversation with a collector where word got out that the collector was going to buy a collection the next day. The dealer got on a plane, went to the home of the lady with the collection and bought it that same day. His trick in the purchase was to show the lady the guide and buy all the books at 1/2 the good value no matter what their condition was. The dealer from Montreal, I suppose, was trying to tell us that the early bird got the worm. He may have also been telling us that he didn't really care what anyone thought of him.

 

Another friend who is legally blind sold part of his collection for far less than he knew it was worth to two associates who went to his home and pitched him deals for four hours. One second after agreeing to the deal he knew he had made a mistake. Two seconds after agreeing the deal the two associates were gone.

 

As a child I asked Captain George Henderson what he would pay for my Sgt. Fury #1. Without a word he put thirty-five cents in my hand and the deal was done.

 

One friend bought a fairly large quantity of late silver age Marvels for $3000. An hour later he regretted his actions and returned them but received only $2000.

 

My point? You have to expect the people on the short end of these deals to be unhappy or even angry.

 

That's the short end of the deal from your perspective, in hindsight.

 

Those two associates of that legally blind man...did they force him to sell? Why did he take four hours to negotiate the deal, and then feel remorse two seconds after it was done? He clearly knew what he had.

 

Time and experience and knowledge have value. They are worth something. Consultants to Fortune 500 companies make hundreds of thousands of dollars just by analyzing the situation. Appraisers charge $XXX per hour to give their opinions. Lawyers charge $XXX per hour to give their opinions. Is that fair? Is it fair for an actor to be paid $20 million for 6 weeks worth of their time? What about politicians who charge $300,000 for an hour long speech? Is that fair?

 

So, why should someone who isn't willing and/or able to do the work to maximize their work feel bad because there's someone else who will? If someone is unhappy because they feel they got the "short end of the deal", the answer is always the same: do it yourself, then you will have no one to blame but yourself...and conversely, you will have no one to congratulate but yourself.

 

After all...what is "fair"? I bought a Star Wars #4 35 cent variant in about F/VF for $1 last year. The dealer could, without blinking, have gotten $200 for it.

 

But he didn't know what he had. I did. Was that fair of me to pay his asking price? Should I have offered him more? Would I even have the book if I offered more? What if I offered $50? Would he have taken it and said "it's not for sale now", thinking it might be worth $500?

 

Who knows. I paid the ask, the dealer was happy, I'm happy, win all the way around.

 

And for every one of those stories, I have 50 where I was on the losing end of the bargain, and not through any fault of my own.

 

Then I think of Harry Kremer. He may have done some fancy dealing too. But, mostly, he gave good deals and paid people fairly. I think of him as the man who bought 500 Cerebus #1s from Dave Sim when it first came out. If not for Harry we would have not had Cerebus. Harry has an award named after him. He still died with what people estimated as a collection worth between $2 and $10 million dollars. People generally liked Harry.

 

 

Harry Kremer, by all accounts, was a wonderful guy.

 

But if Harry Kremer bought 500 Cerebus #1s from Dave Sim, he took a risk. Those could have been 500 Star Reach #1s.

 

And, if he did that, and kept most or all of them, the book was $300-$500 by 1982 (an unheard of amount of money. That was AF #15 in mid-grade money.)

 

As long as no one is being coerced, and no one is being lied to, then each person has to do what they think is fair, and not be subject to the varying standards of others. And fraud and coercion are almost always clear lines to be seen.

[RockMyAmadeus]

One friend used to tell me a story about taking his lifetime collection of comics down to the local comic store and selling the lot for $35. A few days later he saw a single comic from that collection up on the wall for $35.

 

A dealer from Montreal came on these boards and bragged about a conversation with a collector where word got out that the collector was going to buy a collection the next day. The dealer got on a plane, went to the home of the lady with the collection and bought it that same day. His trick in the purchase was to show the lady the guide and buy all the books at 1/2 the good value no matter what their condition was. The dealer from Montreal, I suppose, was trying to tell us that the early bird got the worm. He may have also been telling us that he didn't really care what anyone thought of him.

 

Another friend who is legally blind sold part of his collection for far less than he knew it was worth to two associates who went to his home and pitched him deals for four hours. One second after agreeing to the deal he knew he had made a mistake. Two seconds after agreeing the deal the two associates were gone.

 

As a child I asked Captain George Henderson what he would pay for my Sgt. Fury #1. Without a word he put thirty-five cents in my hand and the deal was done.

 

One friend bought a fairly large quantity of late silver age Marvels for $3000. An hour later he regretted his actions and returned them but received only $2000.

 

My point? You have to expect the people on the short end of these deals to be unhappy or even angry.

 

Then I think of Harry Kremer. He may have done some fancy dealing too. But, mostly, he gave good deals and paid people fairly. I think of him as the man who bought 500 Cerebus #1s from Dave Sim when it first came out. If not for Harry we would have not had Cerebus. Harry has an award named after him. He still died with what people estimated as a collection worth between $2 and $10 million dollars. People generally liked Harry.

 

 

 

But it really comes down to how the fine details of the deal goes down. I've seen very different ways of a deal going down.

 

If some guy has an ask price and you pay his ask, are you obligated to give more?

 

I've seen people say "I want this much" and someone might reply "well, I can offer you more" and they'd just respond with "no, that's fine I just want my price".

 

Now if they asked for an assessment and the dealer lies, that's an entirely different can of worms.

 

The devil is in the details and I don't know enough of them to comment with any convincing argument. I only know that it's easy to judge someone incorrectly when you either don't know the whole story or have a first hand account.

 

 

Some people spend their lives negotiating small deals. Over time, and with help, you can learn certain psychological tricks. There is a book by Les Dane called, "Big League Sales Closing Techniques". That is the one the Scientologists use when selling their services. If you want the techniques with a mixture of morality try, "How to sell anything to anybody," by Joe Gerard, but really you don't need to consider the moral parts in the book. It will work just as well without the justifications. Books like these, and just being around other people that are into it, help.

 

The smallest of those tricks is saying, "What do you want for it, anyway". Once the person has set his price you negotiate down. Chuck Rozanski must have wet his pants when the Church family, according to the story I heard which may not be true, said, "Duh, we just want what Dad paid for these, a dime a piece".

 

The first convention I attended was in 1970. I went to the New York Seuling convention in 1971. I am not looking at this assuming that what comic collecting is now is what it always was. From what I saw back then, and what I remember, a golden age book went for $8 to $12 unless it was something special. Yes, I am sure they could be had for less. Even if all the books were unimportant books, he was still paying 1%.

 

Someone is going to scan a page from RBCC and prove me wrong. Go ahead. What if it was 1.5% or even 2% on unimportant books? The point remains the same.

 

But, you see, those are your personal standards, and it's unfair of you to apply those standards retroactively to other people. Where do you separate "fair" from "unfair"? "This percent is fair, but that one's not"..? Did Chuck lie? Did he coerce? Chances are, neither of those happened. If he did, then yes, that would be over the line. But if he didn't, then whatever he negotiated with whomever, so long as both parties came to a meeting of the minds, is what is fair.

 

Like I said before...there was tremendous risk involved, even if the average GA comic was selling for $8-$12. As I said before...that the family got full cover price (if that's what they got) for back issues of old comic books in 1977 is pretty astonishing. 2015, different story. 1990, different story. But 1977...?

 

There's an article in the 90's that talked about fandom in the 60's, and someone...I forget who, but someone with a fanzine...someone relatively well known....bought a gigantic lot of books...10,000 or so...in 1960, all "mint" books, for 5 cents each. Obviously, this was before fandom really existed, but that anyone would pay half cover price for those books in 1960 was astonishing. At that point, comics were like newspapers: you read them, then throw them out, and that's that. But even in 1960, Action #1 was, if you could find it, a $25-$50 book. Buddy Saunders sold a brand new FF #1 in 1961 for 25 cents, double+ cover.

 

What IS clear is that, even at cover price, Chuck did not have the money to buy them all outright and was forced to involve other people to help finance the endeavor. And if you don't have the money, it doesn't matter how good the deal is...it may as well be a billion dollars.

 

If someone was to offer me a Tec #27 in CGC 7.0 for $50,000, I couldn't do it. I don't have it. I would, at best, have to call in other people to help. Would that be unfair to the seller? Knowing that that is probably a $600,000+ book?

 

[shadroch]

In 1976, I bought a box of GA books at a flea market for about 50 cents each. Daredevil Comics, Real Life, Classics, and a bunch of funny animal books. Thinking back, I'd say they were mostly in the Good range. Pulled the Classics and a few Daredevils and bought the rest to the Thanksgiving show, looking to trade or sell them. Dealer after dealer passed on them at $1 each. finally found a guy who traded me a couple of early SA Marvel Tales for them.

There was very little market back then for low grade non-hero books, just like today there isn't much call for low grade Copper or even most Bronze Age books.

Its speculation on my part but I think if Chuck had been offered the chance to cherry pick the books , he'd have left quite a few behind, even if they were only ten cents each.

[VintageComics]

It's human nature to look into the past, pick out details that catch the reader's eye and then rewrite history or assume you'd have done it differently (or whatever the case is).

 

The truth of the matter is that what actually happened is only known by the individuals directly involved in the matter unless someone documented it as it was happening.

 

Today, everyone would be happy to have bought those books at multiples of what Chuck paid for them but back then multiple dealers were called and not a single person went to see the books except for Chuck.

 

That alone speaks volumes to me about how desirable the books were.

 

Compare that today to today's craigslist warriors who bend over backwards to follow up on every lead they lay their eyes on.

 

If you really want to understand something in it's historical context it takes a lot of homework to

 

a) get the actual story from the horse's mouth (all parties involved, not just one)

b) understand what the historical backdrop was actually like

c) make sense of it altogether in a fair way.

 

There are constant threads / posts on this forum about journalists getting their stories straight when publishing something but on the flip side, most of the armchair internet gossip doesn't put half the effort into their own investigations.