MrBedrock Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 14 hours ago, Junkdrawer said: Rocket to the Moon 9.0 $3300 pretty impressive headlight cvr tonight I was curious about that book. ComicConnect listed it as the highest graded at 9.0 cr/ow...but GPA shows two different pedigree 9.2s having sold and the CGC census shows two at 9.2 and none at 9.0. It is in a new holder but it has been listed in the auction for enough time to be added to the census. And at $3300 it sold for more than either of the 9.2s on GPA. No big deal, but I did find it curious. Could it have been one of the 9.2s resubbed, downgraded, without the pedigree designation? Or is it simply a newly graded book that hasn't been added to the census and was mis-described in the auction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkdrawer Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 10 minutes ago, MrBedrock said: I was curious about that book. ComicConnect listed it as the highest graded at 9.0 cr/ow...but GPA shows two different pedigree 9.2s having sold and the CGC census shows two at 9.2 and none at 9.0. It is in a new holder but it has been listed in the auction for enough time to be added to the census. And at $3300 it sold for more than either of the 9.2s on GPA. No big deal, but I did find it curious. Could it have been one of the 9.2s resubbed, downgraded, without the pedigree designation? Or is it simply a newly graded book that hasn't been added to the census and was mis-described in the auction? There is another label I saw I think different publisher, so the true census is split. The book they sold is tied with another 9.0 for highest, but when you combine the two groups, it's clearly not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkdrawer Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 @MrBedrock here what's going on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBedrock Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 39 minutes ago, Junkdrawer said: @MrBedrock here what's going on Well that clearly makes sense...and no sense at all. So the 9.0 is actually second highest and instead of being one of 5 universal #1s it is one of 46 universal no-numbers. I wonder if that info would have affected bidding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Love Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 These data issues can be worth some real $, either costing you or benefiting you, depending. I don't know enough to say, but apparently CGC sees this book as sometimes nn and sometimes #1. It isn't like there's a consistent approach - for over a decade it was of course an nn, as it is a one shot? Then in 2013 a 5.5 got a #1 label. Since then it's been this or that , with no consistency. The real kicker is Metro calling it high grade, when you'd have to assume they dang well know that's not so. "The highest graded #1" could maybe hold up in a court of law, but that's about it. 1950's war comics and FoggyNelson 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkdrawer Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 29 minutes ago, MrBedrock said: Well that clearly makes sense...and no sense at all. So the 9.0 is actually second highest and instead of being one of 5 universal #1s it is one of 46 universal no-numbers. I wonder if that info would have affected bidding? A good question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 3 hours ago, Dr. Love said: These data issues can be worth some real $, either costing you or benefiting you, depending. I don't know enough to say, but apparently CGC sees this book as sometimes nn and sometimes #1. It isn't like there's a consistent approach - for over a decade it was of course an nn, as it is a one shot? Then in 2013 a 5.5 got a #1 label. Since then it's been this or that , with no consistency. The real kicker is Metro calling it high grade, when you'd have to assume they dang well know that's not so. "The highest graded #1" could maybe hold up in a court of law, but that's about it. File under "Probably ain't happening" but CGC could do a real service to the hobby if they assigned somebody to clean up the census. They could solicit suggestions in a thread (or threads) on the boards. Hiring a knowledgeable local high school/college comic geek as a summer intern to implement the changes once they had been compiled might make it possible to get the job done for minimal expense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBedrock Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 5 minutes ago, Sqeggs said: 3 hours ago, Dr. Love said: These data issues can be worth some real $, either costing you or benefiting you, depending. I don't know enough to say, but apparently CGC sees this book as sometimes nn and sometimes #1. It isn't like there's a consistent approach - for over a decade it was of course an nn, as it is a one shot? Then in 2013 a 5.5 got a #1 label. Since then it's been this or that , with no consistency. The real kicker is Metro calling it high grade, when you'd have to assume they dang well know that's not so. "The highest graded #1" could maybe hold up in a court of law, but that's about it. File under "Probably ain't happening" but CGC could do a real service to the hobby if they assigned somebody to clean up the census. They could solicit suggestions in a thread (or threads) on the boards. Hiring a knowledgeable local high school/college comic geek as a summer intern to implement the changes once they had been compiled might make it possible to get the job done for minimal expense. I think some of us would volunteer to help work on it for free. It shouldn't be that hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkdrawer Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 @Sqeggs isn't it true that Cinderella Love 25 also has its total cgc census numbers divided into 2 groups as well. I think we discussed this at one time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robot Man Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/23/2017 at 10:36 AM, MrBedrock said: I think that is rather a "tail light" cover... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robot Man Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/20/2017 at 3:49 PM, Sqeggs said: When my mind drifts over to "headlight" covers, this is the one that I think of first. Closely followed by Phantom Lady #17 and most any Junior cover. Seems like Victor Fox was well aware of what sold comic books... Ricksneatstuff 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 36 minutes ago, Junkdrawer said: @Sqeggs isn't it true that Cinderella Love 25 also has its total cgc census numbers divided into 2 groups as well. I think we discussed this at one time. I think there is just one 6.0 that's listed by itself because of a typo: https://www.cgccomics.com/census/grades_standard.asp?title=Cindrella+Love&publisher=St.+John+Publication&issue=25&year=1954&issuedate=12%2F54. That's the only glitch I know of with that title. But I come on problems with others all the time, as I'm sure we all do. Some have to do with slight differences in the wording of the title -- adding an "s" at the end of the title, including "comics" or not, and so on -- others have to do with differences in how the publisher is given. Or, like the case, here, differences in numbering. The indicia on a lot of books don't quite match the numbering the book usually goes by. Iirc, even Cap 1 is actually Captain American Comics, Vol. 2, No. 1 on the indicia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted April 3, 2017 Share Posted April 3, 2017 On 3/22/2017 at 9:04 PM, MrBedrock said: Love the expression on the guy in the inset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted April 3, 2017 Share Posted April 3, 2017 Pulps are an endless source for this thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted April 3, 2017 Share Posted April 3, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted April 3, 2017 Share Posted April 3, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted April 3, 2017 Share Posted April 3, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted April 3, 2017 Share Posted April 3, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted April 3, 2017 Share Posted April 3, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comicjack Posted April 3, 2017 Share Posted April 3, 2017 13 minutes ago, JohnT said: Love that cover and the low cut dress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
