ComicConnect auction starts tomorrow

[goldust40]

Anyone have the prices for the high grade Marvel Mysterys?

[Mr. 10%]

What did the TEC 31 cgc 1.0 go for last time?

 

Nevermind, looked it up TEC 31 cgc 1.0 sold for 43k in June...sold for 26k tonight...strange series of auctions.

 

Thought the TEC 1 Price was interesting too

 

Ouch!

 

As is obvious, this is not the same copy of 'Tec 31 that had sold for $43K a couple of months ago.

 

From my point of view, it's quite possible that the $43K result from June was probably more of an outlier, as it certainly jumped the trend line that the 'Tec 31 books were on going back to the past couple of years.

 

It's quite possible that 2 overly aggressive bidders just went at the book too hard and drove it past what it normally would have gone for. Who really knows at this point, as entry level prices can be very volatile?

 

Definitely good for the consignor if this was the case.

 

 

Didn't realize it wasn't the same copy, it was unclear from the post, and I didn't look them up.

 

I definitely agree that not all 1.0s are the same. The lower the grade, the more diversity in actual flaws and it gets harder to compare sales.

 

If that is right then the CGC 10 point scale is flawed in the lower end?

[The-Collector]

Anyone have the prices for the high grade Marvel Mysterys?

 

I only have the MM 12 @ $10,444. Maybe others can chime in on the rest.

 

Someone took a bath on the Harvey Comics Library 1 in 9.0. Sold as an 8.5 on HA in August last year for $3346. Went up to 9.0 and sold for only $2050 on CC!

[VintageComics]

The lower the grade, the more diversity in actual flaws and it gets harder to compare sales.

 

If that is right then the CGC 10 point scale is flawed in the lower end?

 

The point of the grade is not to provide a value for a book but to accurately represent physical condition.

 

The bidding decides final price based on several factors, including eye appeal.

 

You don't need a grade to factor in eye appeal.

 

So the final bid is a combination of technical grade AND what the scans show.

 

IMO the grade is doing exactly what it should be doing.

[Mr. 10%]

The lower the grade, the more diversity in actual flaws and it gets harder to compare sales.

 

If that is right then the CGC 10 point scale is flawed in the lower end?

 

The point of the grade is not to provide a value for a book but to accurately represent physical condition.

 

The bidding decides final price based on several factors, including eye appeal.

 

You don't need a grade to factor in eye appeal.

 

So the final bid is a combination of technical grade AND what the scans show.

 

IMO the grade is doing exactly what it should be doing.

J

 

Hmm...

So you claim that a book has a technical grade covered behind an eye appeal grade?

I have to think about that...

For sure: on a big book id put my hard earned dough into the eye appeal grade 100%.

7 days a week and twice on sundays.

An abstract postulated technical grade has no value for me. The eye candy factor has all the value when i value a books condition.

But each to his own.

[VintageComics]

Eye aapeal affects a higher grade book much more than a lower grade book. In fact, eye appeal can keep a book out of the nosebleed grades.

 

Once you are dealing with low grade books, there are so many overlapping defects that you can't factor technical grade into eye appeal effectively.

 

For example, a 0.5 missing a back cover can present nicer than a wrinkled 2.0 with several missing pieces.

 

In cases like that, the scan dictates market value.

[rjpb]

The lower the grade, the more diversity in actual flaws and it gets harder to compare sales.

 

If that is right then the CGC 10 point scale is flawed in the lower end?

 

The point of the grade is not to provide a value for a book but to accurately represent physical condition.

 

The bidding decides final price based on several factors, including eye appeal.

 

You don't need a grade to factor in eye appeal.

 

So the final bid is a combination of technical grade AND what the scans show.

 

IMO the grade is doing exactly what it should be doing.

J

 

Hmm...

So you claim that a book has a technical grade covered behind an eye appeal grade?

I have to think about that...

For sure: on a big book id put my hard earned dough into the eye appeal grade 100%.

7 days a week and twice on sundays.

An abstract postulated technical grade has no value for me. The eye candy factor has all the value when i value a books condition.

But each to his own.

 

I tend to feel eye-appeal should be a factor in grading, particularly when it comes to post manufacturing issues like foxing, dust shadows and fading, all of which I feel CGC and others often don't hit hard enough.

 

In the lower grades one starts to get flaws that many consider unacceptable beyond a certain grade, but have little impact on eye-appeal; major spine splits, detached covers, back cover damage, etc. For many buyers eye-appeal trumps technical grade on books like this, and there is an argument that perhaps grading should more greatly reflect that desirability. At least CGC doesn't adhere to the ridiculous notion some have that a detached cover means the book is no better than GD no matter how nice the book otherwise.

 

At the very bottom it can be absurd, where a brittle, beat rag, complete or otherwise, gets the same .5 grade as a sharp looking copy missing a centerfold. As good an argument for a Q grade as there is. Qualified grades are pretty much eye-appeal only grades anyway, something ebay buyers seem often unaware of.

 

As for the 10 point scale being flawed, of course it is if you are attempting to use it as the only measure of a books value, no matter whether the top or bottom end. High end collectors obsess on things like centering and PQ that are not reflected in grade, and value accordingly.

 

 

[rjpb]

Anyone have the prices for the high grade Marvel Mysterys?

 

I only have the MM 12 @ $10,444. Maybe others can chime in on the rest.

 

Someone took a bath on the Harvey Comics Library 1 in 9.0. Sold as an 8.5 on HA in August last year for $3346. Went up to 9.0 and sold for only $2050 on CC!

 

The MM 20 CGC 8.5 sold for $3577.

 

I missed seeing the HCL, or I would have followed it. $2K seems kind of cheap for a 9.0 (or 8.5 even).

 

 

[Ricksneatstuff]

Well, I'm tapped out on the Planet 29- $1060 was not enough to get it.

 

Guess I will just have to keep waiting.

 

[SushiX]

I really hope planet 33 ends at 1,050 ?

[Artboy99]

Well, I'm tapped out on the Planet 29- $1060 was not enough to get it.

 

Guess I will just have to keep waiting.

 

I am out on that book as well. Just to much for a 7.0 in my opinion. Sold for $1273

[jhutton2]

Wow, big bucks for that book. What did all the Planets finish at?

 

I was not in any of the bidding this round.

 

Jason

[The-Collector]

Anyone have the prices for the high grade Marvel Mysterys?

 

I only have the MM 12 @ $10,444. Maybe others can chime in on the rest.

 

Someone took a bath on the Harvey Comics Library 1 in 9.0. Sold as an 8.5 on HA in August last year for $3346. Went up to 9.0 and sold for only $2050 on CC!

 

The MM 20 CGC 8.5 sold for $3577.

 

I missed seeing the HCL, or I would have followed it. $2K seems kind of cheap for a 9.0 (or 8.5 even).

 

 

2k seems cheap to me too. It was the Magic Woo copy which is also pretty cool.

[VintageComics]

The lower the grade, the more diversity in actual flaws and it gets harder to compare sales.

 

If that is right then the CGC 10 point scale is flawed in the lower end?

 

The point of the grade is not to provide a value for a book but to accurately represent physical condition.

 

The bidding decides final price based on several factors, including eye appeal.

 

You don't need a grade to factor in eye appeal.

 

So the final bid is a combination of technical grade AND what the scans show.

 

IMO the grade is doing exactly what it should be doing.

J

 

Hmm...

So you claim that a book has a technical grade covered behind an eye appeal grade?

I have to think about that...

For sure: on a big book id put my hard earned dough into the eye appeal grade 100%.

7 days a week and twice on sundays.

An abstract postulated technical grade has no value for me. The eye candy factor has all the value when i value a books condition.

But each to his own.

 

 

I tend to feel eye-appeal should be a factor in grading, particularly when it comes to post manufacturing issues like foxing, dust shadows and fading, all of which I feel CGC and others often don't hit hard enough.

 

 

In the lower grades one starts to get flaws that many consider unacceptable beyond a certain grade, but have little impact on eye-appeal; major spine splits, detached covers, back cover damage, etc. For many buyers eye-appeal trumps technical grade on books like this, and there is an argument that perhaps grading should more greatly reflect that desirability. At least CGC doesn't adhere to the ridiculous notion some have that a detached cover means the book is no better than GD no matter how nice the book otherwise.

 

At the very bottom it can be absurd, where a brittle, beat rag, complete or otherwise, gets the same .5 grade as a sharp looking copy missing a centerfold. As good an argument for a Q grade as there is. Qualified grades are pretty much eye-appeal only grades anyway, something ebay buyers seem often unaware of.

 

As for the 10 point scale being flawed, of course it is if you are attempting to use it as the only measure of a books value, no matter whether the top or bottom end. High end collectors obsess on things like centering and PQ that are not reflected in grade, and value accordingly.

 

 

 

But CGC does factor eye appeal into the grade. It may not do it as much as some may like but it does affect the grade.

[Ricksneatstuff]

I really hope planet 33 ends at 1,050 ?

 

You got it?

[SushiX]

I really hope planet 33 ends at 1,050 ?

 

You got it?

yup!!! I think it was a good price?

[rjpb]

The lower the grade, the more diversity in actual flaws and it gets harder to compare sales.

 

If that is right then the CGC 10 point scale is flawed in the lower end?

 

The point of the grade is not to provide a value for a book but to accurately represent physical condition.

 

The bidding decides final price based on several factors, including eye appeal.

 

You don't need a grade to factor in eye appeal.

 

So the final bid is a combination of technical grade AND what the scans show.

 

IMO the grade is doing exactly what it should be doing.

J

 

Hmm...

So you claim that a book has a technical grade covered behind an eye appeal grade?

I have to think about that...

For sure: on a big book id put my hard earned dough into the eye appeal grade 100%.

7 days a week and twice on sundays.

An abstract postulated technical grade has no value for me. The eye candy factor has all the value when i value a books condition.

But each to his own.

 

 

I tend to feel eye-appeal should be a factor in grading, particularly when it comes to post manufacturing issues like foxing, dust shadows and fading, all of which I feel CGC and others often don't hit hard enough.

 

 

In the lower grades one starts to get flaws that many consider unacceptable beyond a certain grade, but have little impact on eye-appeal; major spine splits, detached covers, back cover damage, etc. For many buyers eye-appeal trumps technical grade on books like this, and there is an argument that perhaps grading should more greatly reflect that desirability. At least CGC doesn't adhere to the ridiculous notion some have that a detached cover means the book is no better than GD no matter how nice the book otherwise.

 

At the very bottom it can be absurd, where a brittle, beat rag, complete or otherwise, gets the same .5 grade as a sharp looking copy missing a centerfold. As good an argument for a Q grade as there is. Qualified grades are pretty much eye-appeal only grades anyway, something ebay buyers seem often unaware of.

 

As for the 10 point scale being flawed, of course it is if you are attempting to use it as the only measure of a books value, no matter whether the top or bottom end. High end collectors obsess on things like centering and PQ that are not reflected in grade, and value accordingly.

 

 

 

But CGC does factor eye appeal into the grade. It may not do it as much as some may like but it does affect the grade.

 

Not nearly enough. There are lots of CGC 6.5-9.2 books out there that never would have gotten the grade from reliable dealers in the pre-CGC era. Maybe my memory is fading, but I don't recall books with major dust shadows getting VF/NM grades back in the 90s.

 

Conversely there are plenty of midgrade books that look fantastic that get hammered for some technical flaw that might have been given less weight by a dealer considering eye-appeal, even today. An example being the MM #52 that just sold in the CC auction. It looks like a high grade book in the scan, and must have a major spine split or something that brings it down to a 4.5 for CGC, because it's hard to see why else a book that looks that nice would only be a VG+

[Sqeggs]

Spitfire

[Timely]

Spitfire

 

Can't say I ever expected that one to go for over 34 times guide.

[Sqeggs]

Spitfire

 

Can't say I ever expected that one to go for over 34 times guide.

 

I was thinking $2,500 would do it. When these guys started going at it, I figured no way it closes above $10K.