Are prices still climbing or have they eased up a bit??? 43 43

[Phill the Governor]

On 1/23/2023 at 10:10 AM, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

That wouldn't be a 9.6 at time of grading, which leads me to believe Shaken Comic Syndrome

Despite all the other issues, I've come to the conclusion that the the wedges at the top of the cases, and the space that's given to the book to move around in the slab has to be purposeful; it has to be. There's no case that can be made (no pun intended) that the way the inner wells are made to keep the book protected: it appears they are made to "mostly" protect, but purposefully allow for enough superficial (and unfortunately more in some cases) damage to occur. There's no reason this would be allowed, other than CGC wanting to collecting more money for regrading, reholdering, and pushing books to CCS to be damaged, I mean pressed.

How this problem hasn't been fixed is beyond my comprehension.

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/23/2023 at 11:28 AM, Phill the Governor said:

Despite all the other issues, I've come to the conclusion that the the wedges at the top of the cases, and the space that's given to the book to move around in the slab has to be purposeful; it has to be. There's no case that can be made (no pun intended) that the way the inner wells are made to keep the book protected: it appears they are made to "mostly" protect, but purposefully allow for enough superficial (and unfortunately more in some cases) damage to occur. There's no reason this would be allowed, other than CGC wanting to collecting more money for regrading, reholdering, and pushing books to CCS to be damaged, I mean pressed.

How this problem hasn't been fixed is beyond my comprehension.

CGC doesn’t know how to make an inner well that is immune to SCS.  They tried tighter fitting tapered wells, and covers were being torn at the staples as the interior pages shifted around. 

[Phill the Governor]

On 1/23/2023 at 12:06 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

CGC doesn’t know how to make an inner well that is immune to SCS.  They tried tighter fitting tapered wells, and covers were being torn at the staples as the interior pages shifted around. 

 

It feels like car companies in the 1950s saying: "so what if people die in car accidents, do you know how much it costs to put seat-belts in them?? Far more than the settlements from people dying!"

Equally, it sounds like CGC's stance is: "so what if books are damaged inside the cases that people pay to keep them protected, do you know how much it would cost to change that? It's impossible! What? You want the book to retain the specific grade we assigned it, too? We have no idea what you're talking about, sounds like a mechanical error!".

 

@CGC Mike This can't possible be something that the higher-up aren't aware of.

 

[LordRahl]

On 1/20/2023 at 7:16 AM, Superman2006 said:

The first appearances for each of the characters above not named Fury are worth more than the first appearance of Sgt. Fury, and have been going back many years before Samuel L. Jackson got involved, so I think it's simply due to popularity of the various characters, right?

Looking at the 9.8 prices you shared above, I don't understand why Iron Man #1 in 9.8 is worth so much more than Hulk #102 in 9.8, other than the fact that Iron Man is a #1, and not a #102.

Far, far, far superior cover on the IM 1. IMO, one of the best covers of the late silver age. Hulk 102 cover... very

[buttock]

On 1/23/2023 at 9:28 AM, Phill the Governor said:

Despite all the other issues, I've come to the conclusion that the the wedges at the top of the cases, and the space that's given to the book to move around in the slab has to be purposeful; it has to be. There's no case that can be made (no pun intended) that the way the inner wells are made to keep the book protected: it appears they are made to "mostly" protect, but purposefully allow for enough superficial (and unfortunately more in some cases) damage to occur. There's no reason this would be allowed, other than CGC wanting to collecting more money for regrading, reholdering, and pushing books to CCS to be damaged, I mean pressed.

How this problem hasn't been fixed is beyond my comprehension.

I don't think it's an easy problem to fix.  Any pressure you put on the book elsewhere has the potential to damage it.  The first iteration of the 3rd gen of holders led to a lot of problems (just look up "creep engine").  I think you could try and reverse that idea to make the slab concave in the center rather than convex, but that would probably lead to torn covers and damage from indentation at the center.  If you eliminate the whole aspect of an inner "well" and just sandwich it between two pieces of plastic with a seam, then any overhang is in jeopardy of being damaged.  Other than that, I don't know what the answer is.  

And to be fair, the damage isn't caused by the well.  It's caused by motion within the well.  So the answer is just never ever move a slab, and then you're fine. 

 

[pickycollector]

On 1/23/2023 at 12:06 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

CGC doesn’t know how to make an inner well that is immune to SCS.  They tried tighter fitting tapered wells, and covers were being torn at the staples as the interior pages shifted around. 

Crack them all 

[kimik]

On 1/23/2023 at 7:37 AM, chrisco37 said:

FF#74 is the "budget friendlier" version of 49 (I've always thought).  Similar color scheme with both Galactus & Surfer on the cover.  With 49 out of reach for many collectors nowadays, some people probably gravitating to 74.  

The uptick in prices on the second and third SS arcs (FF 55, 57-60 & 72-77, if I recall correctly) was only a matter of time. There are some great covers like #55, 57, 72, 74 & 75. They are still reasonably priced for the same reason that Roy cited for X-Men - slow movie development for the Fox properties at DIS. Once the SS is confirmed to appear they will pop further. Now is still a good time to be accumulating multiples.

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/23/2023 at 1:35 PM, pickycollector said:

Crack them all 

[pickycollector]

On 1/23/2023 at 1:40 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

That's the easy part, removing the book from the inner is more critical

[VintageComics]

On 1/23/2023 at 10:10 AM, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

That wouldn't be a 9.6 at time of grading, which leads me to believe Shaken Comic Syndrome

There's likely no color breaking (just slight waviness on the Marvel overhang) and the lighting from the scan (or camera) definitely makes it look worse in the image than in real life.

On 1/23/2023 at 9:37 AM, chrisco37 said:

On 1/19/2023 at 5:07 PM, VintageComics said:

These are some of my Clnk results. I erased one book which I wanted to keep private. 

But the rest of results are all in a ballpark where they should be with some going a bit cheap, some in the middle and a few even breaking records..

The FF #74 went nuts and set a record. I couldn't sell it at 2/3 the price in a fixed price format. 

The FF #58 went about 10% cheap, as did the Nick Fury #1 but they had OWW to pages so I expected that. 

The ASM #1 GRR went just a hair under the last GPA (it also had OWW pages)

Had they been White pagers they would have gone nuts I'm sure. 

The IF #14 was White pager but a book was ready to discount thinking the market was dropping a few months ago. Had a boardie I was talking to about and he ended up not pulling the trigger. Glad he didn't. It went for a crazy price on Clink. Ditto to the FF #74, couldn't move this book for the life of me and it goes nuts at auction. 

The DD #7 went really cheap. Someone got a steal on that book as it looked like a NM copy. 

The X-men 9.8s went a bit cheap compared to GPA but all in the $3000 range where I expect mid 1960's X-men to be.

So that's my snap shot in time. 

 

Expand  

FF#74 is the "budget friendlier" version of 49 (I've always thought).  Similar color scheme with both Galactus & Surfer on the cover.  With 49 out of reach for many collectors nowadays, some people probably gravitating to 74.  

Maybe.

I never thought of it that way, esp since #72 has a WAY BETTER Surfer cover but a good point to take note of is that at a fixed price NOBODY would pay 30% over GPA for that book. 

But at auction someone did (and there was an underbidder too).

[lizards2]

On 1/23/2023 at 10:40 AM, THE_BEYONDER said:

The glove wearers always crack me up. Why don't you just wash your ******* hands first?

Oh yeah, because some other comic collector has had his dirty, greasy paws on bag/slab?

I could go on another about the carp I receive off the boards - wash your GD hands people, and if you must grease and schmutz up your bags so much, replace them before you send them to me. And, QUIT PUTTING TAPE ON EVERYTHING!!

I should start a thread in General to document some of the carp junk I receive from many of you. 

[VintageComics]

On 1/23/2023 at 1:31 PM, buttock said:

On 1/23/2023 at 11:28 AM, Phill the Governor said:

Despite all the other issues, I've come to the conclusion that the the wedges at the top of the cases, and the space that's given to the book to move around in the slab has to be purposeful; it has to be. There's no case that can be made (no pun intended) that the way the inner wells are made to keep the book protected: it appears they are made to "mostly" protect, but purposefully allow for enough superficial (and unfortunately more in some cases) damage to occur. There's no reason this would be allowed, other than CGC wanting to collecting more money for regrading, reholdering, and pushing books to CCS to be damaged, I mean pressed.

How this problem hasn't been fixed is beyond my comprehension.

I don't think it's an easy problem to fix.  Any pressure you put on the book elsewhere has the potential to damage it.  The first iteration of the 3rd gen of holders led to a lot of problems (just look up "creep engine").  I think you could try and reverse that idea to make the slab concave in the center rather than convex, but that would probably lead to torn covers and damage from indentation at the center.  If you eliminate the whole aspect of an inner "well" and just sandwich it between two pieces of plastic with a seam, then any overhang is in jeopardy of being damaged.  Other than that, I don't know what the answer is.  

And to be fair, the damage isn't caused by the well.  It's caused by motion within the well.  So the answer is just never ever move a slab, and then you're fine. 

Borock, when he was president, on this forum openly stated that if anyone had a better design CGC would pay you for it. 

So if anyone is an engineer and wants to make it happen, go for it. 

[chrisco37]

On 1/23/2023 at 2:23 PM, VintageComics said:

There's likely no color breaking (just slight waviness on the Marvel overhang) and the lighting from the scan (or camera) definitely makes it look worse in the image than in real life.

Maybe.

I never thought of it that way, esp since #72 has a WAY BETTER Surfer cover but a good point to take note of is that at a fixed price NOBODY would pay 30% over GPA for that book. 

But at auction someone did (and there was an underbidder too).

72 is definitely THE cover.   

[Rob]

On 1/22/2023 at 7:02 PM, VintageComics said:

Just to be clear, I wasn't criticizing you. Just meant to add to your thoughts. 

Sure. Some books are dropping more than others. 

The books that went up fast and hard are coming down fast and hard. Books that stayed stable are still stable. 

X-men #1 rose sharper and faster than most books so it seemed due to over correct. 

But X-men run books for example are more stable because they didn't rise as quickly. They are selling well and prices are reasonable stable from what I've seen. 

My point was really geared towards the steep rise for X-men keys like #1, #94 and GSX #1 which went up hard and pulled back a bit. Pretty sure those key books will rebound in the same way AF #15 popped around 2017, pulled back a bit and then went off to new heights again.

Don't take my word as Gospel though. This isn't investment advice. Just my opinion based on what I've seen over and over. 

I just don't see X-men #1 or GSX #1 going back down to 2019 levels again personally, although I could be wrong. 

I don't follow stats much but isn't it Marvel's most popular franchise?

In fact, I see them pushing the franchise as it embodies Marvel's new "PC" outlook on everything. 

Makes sense.  I got the message you were explaining the drop for Xmen 1, as if that was an anomaly. 

[Microchip]

On 1/23/2023 at 5:08 PM, World Devourer said:

All true, but there is a 9.9 of NF#1 that is noteworthy.

Interestingly, it trails the 9.9 of Iron Man & Sub-Mariner #1 and Iron Man #1 by a considerable margin.

 

2015 is a lifetime ago.  That price reflects the market perfectly at that time.

If the book came up for sale today, the book would fetch multiples of that number, though I would say it would come in less Iron Man #1.

I haven't seen that book for a long time.   I can't recall whether Doug said it was the NF#1, or the FF #55 9.9 would only grade out as a 9.8 if subbed today... I think it was the FF #55.

[Microchip]

On 1/24/2023 at 6:23 AM, VintageComics said:

There's likely no color breaking (just slight waviness on the Marvel overhang) and the lighting from the scan (or camera) definitely makes it look worse in the image than in real life.

Maybe.

I never thought of it that way, esp since #72 has a WAY BETTER Surfer cover but a good point to take note of is that at a fixed price NOBODY would pay 30% over GPA for that book. 

But at auction someone did (and there was an underbidder too).

#72 has been hot for a while.   The high grades are hotly chased.   Everything from a 9.0 is going for solid money.   There's just too few copies floating around.

Closely followed by #75 and #77.  #74 seems to be sliding lately.

The red covered FF issues with the Surfer on the cover, and #77 is a classic Kirby montage cover.

 

[Dick Pontoon]

On 1/23/2023 at 2:23 PM, lizards2 said:

The glove wearers always crack me up. Why don't you just wash your ******* hands first?

Oh yeah, because some other comic collector has had his dirty, greasy paws on bag/slab?

I could go on another about the carp I receive off the boards - wash your GD hands people, and if you must grease and schmutz up your bags so much, replace them before you send them to me. And, QUIT PUTTING TAPE ON EVERYTHING!!

I should start a thread in General to document some of the carp junk I receive from many of you. 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/23/2023 at 9:50 PM, MR. Pontoon said:

On 1/23/2023 at 2:23 PM, lizards2 said:

The glove wearers always crack me up. Why don't you just wash your ******* hands first?

Oh yeah, because some other comic collector has had his dirty, greasy paws on bag/slab?

I could go on another about the carp I receive off the boards - wash your GD hands people, and if you must grease and schmutz up your bags so much, replace them before you send them to me. And, QUIT PUTTING TAPE ON EVERYTHING!!

I should start a thread in General to document some of the carp junk I receive from many of you. 

Expand  

[World Devourer]

On 1/24/2023 at 11:11 AM, Microchip said:

2015 is a lifetime ago.  That price reflects the market perfectly at that time.

If the book came up for sale today, the book would fetch multiples of that number, though I would say it would come in less Iron Man #1.

I haven't seen that book for a long time.   I can't recall whether Doug said it was the NF#1, or the FF #55 9.9 would only grade out as a 9.8 if subbed today... I think it was the FF #55.

Heh. Yes, 2015 certainly feels like a lifetime ago.

Yes, it would be far more but my point was it is the only NF standout. 

I personally would be happy with a Sgt. Fury & HC in 9.4. Like Hulk #1, the highest grade.

[lou_fine]

On 1/18/2023 at 10:18 PM, kimik said:

Well, if you won this Batman that I had consigned then you scored big:

Batman #190 CGC 8.0 - $187 on Clink, which is below the Jan 2023 CGC 6.5 ($235) price on GPA   

So far my other books are all selling for a bit to significantly lower than GPA which continues a trend. I guess it is time to look at other venues to consign books.

I guess that's probably also due to CL's customer base which generally tends to be the home for the more speculative type of buyer from my POV.  

With the more speculative type of buyer, I believe they tend to jump in when the market is going well and more likely to leave when the market is not going so well. 

Edited January 24, 2023 by lou_fine