Heritage Marvel Comics 1 CGC 9.0 161K???

[Forbush-Man]

I would be shocked if CGC missed a color touch on a book like this (or even on any book for that matter).

 

There is a huge difference between detecting most restoration and trimming. Remember, trimming happens to every book. So the key is determining if it was done at the time of printing or much later. Even the best professionals say it is possibly the hardest type of restoration to detect (and I'm excluding pressing as it is impossible to detect at times, and not considered restoration by some).

 

 

I wouldn't be that shocked, but then again, I'm a rather cynical person.

 

We know for a fact CGC misses restoration.

 

You would think CGC would catch restoration on a book of this caliber. You would think there's no way in hell CGC would bump up in grade a $150,000 comic, but guess what? It happens.

 

Forgive me, but after all that's come out lately, if something looks like color touch (is going to disagree that it doesn't look like color touch?), I'm inclined to go with what I see and not play CGC apologist.

 

First off: Filter81, I hope there is no color touch to your book!

 

Secondly: When has CGC missed color touch before? It's not too difficult to detect.

[CGCMINT]

That Fred Karger?!

[Forbush-Man]

Are there any before & after scans for this book? I'd sure like to see them!

[action1kid]

Filter

Im sure Heritage will verify if the book is unrestored before you purchase it[send in funds] But let them know 1st That some of your knowledgible collector friends have advised you of the possibility of color touch.

This has happened to me before with other collectibles and they went through great lengths to verify it for me.They told me they would do whatever it took to make me happy.So have it checked and tell them whats been happening.

Dont assume that they are hard nosed[im sure you wont for 161k.They were not with me.

[FFB]

So yeah, let's ignore the possibility of the color touching in the upper right hand corner, even though what appears on the high resolution scan looks troubling. The possible bump from 8.5 to 9.0 by CGC? Let's ignore that too, because Hammer brought it up.

 

Seriously, you would think after the Ewert debacle, people would be a bit more skeptical and hold CGC a bit more accountable, but I guess that's asking too much.

 

 

I would be shocked if CGC missed a color touch on a book like this (or even on any book for that matter).

 

There is a huge difference between detecting most restoration and trimming. Remember, trimming happens to every book. So the key is determining if it was done at the time of printing or much later. Even the best professionals say it is possibly the hardest type of restoration to detect (and I'm excluding pressing as it is impossible to detect at times, and not considered restoration by some).

 

That same dark area is on the book in both scans -- the first scan from when it was an 8.5 in an old holder and the current scan now. CGC would have had to miss the CT twice on that book. Somehow I doubt that.

[tth2]

My original idea was that a book discovered to be regraded should have every grade given marked on the label. Without that, We are witnessing a bit of deception again. Once again it's buyer beware.

Until CGC agree to do that (and I wouldn`t hold my breath ), the best solution is to track any changes in grade ourselves. We`ve started a thread here in the General forum to list all known resubs that resulted in a change of grade which people can use as a quick reference tool.

[Alex DeLarge-migration]

who's hammer? are you guys talking about mc hammer?

 

Yes..that's him...he had a hit in the 90's

 

'You can't (color) touch this!'

[Kakapo]

That same dark area is on the book in both scans -- the first scan from when it was an 8.5 in an old holder and the current scan now. CGC would have had to miss the CT twice on that book. Somehow I doubt that.

 

Do you really think that anyone at CGC would have had the nerve, when looking at the book a second time, to PLOD it having previously declared it to be unrestored? It's not a Hulk 181, people tend to notice $200 000 books suddenly going from unrestored to restored.

 

The more I read, the more I'm glad that I don't have that kind of money.

[adamstrange]

Isn't that how it usually is. You should ask how much was paid for the MH copy way back when

 

The answer to this question is well over 200k in the mid 1990s.

It sits on the cgc census today as an 8.0

 

It was "reported" as over 200k.

 

Would this be the first time that a deal was announced at a higher price than what actually occurred?

 

Ohio allowed a coin dealer to invest state money. He loaned 500K to Bechara who put up comics and art for collateral.

 

[action1kid]

Thank you.

That is very interesting...

[esquirecomics]

but was that chicken and egg? meaning was the 250 so high that it pulled up the 5.5 price?

 

Yes i agree!

 

Actually, the 5.5 sale price was not that far off from Guide, but certainly it helped to have a ceiling price for the 7.5 to refer to as an example.

 

But my question is, what do you think is worth more an

 

unrestored 9.0 superman #1

OR

unrestored 9.0 marvel #1

 

Superman #1 for the obvious reason that the character means more to the public (and hence investors who could afford this book) than Marvel #1.

[esquirecomics]

Secondly: When has CGC missed color touch before? It's not too difficult to detect.

 

I've been told by a prior owner of the More Fun Comics #51 (Church/Mile High copy) that it has color touch, though it currently sits in a blue label.

[rjpb]

The 5.0 October copy in Heritage's archives also has a darker area at the top right corner - although it looks more like a stain. I think it's crazy to try and deduce color touch from a scan - unless it's blindingly obvious - which is not the case with the 9.0 copy. Even if the corner did have color touch - the piece is small enough that even if it were removed the book would probably still be an 8.0.

 

As to the relative values of Marvel #1 and Superman #1 - which printings? Is a Superman #1 with an "On sale now" Action #14 ad ( 2nd or 3rd printing) worth more than an October copy of Marvel #1 in the same grade? Should it be?

[Rip]

If I'm not mistaken, the print runs on the 3 Superman printings are much closer in size. Unlike the MC1

[esquirecomics]

As to the relative values of Marvel #1 and Superman #1 - which printings? Is a Superman #1 with an "On sale now" Action #14 ad ( 2nd or 3rd printing) worth more than an October copy of Marvel #1 in the same grade? Should it be?

 

This raises a valid point. I am not aware of any distinction in price, or even a discussion, with respect to the different print runs of Superman #1.

 

Should there be a distinction if we are going to create one regarding Marvel #1?

[comicwiz]

Just another example that illustrates that November copies (2nd printing) of Marvel #1 aren't worth the price in listed Overstreet.

 

The price in guide may be accurate for October copies and SHOULD have a seperate listing for November copies that are at least 50% lower.

 

And that is coming from someone who has had lots of November copies.

 

Steve

 

Are the November copies of Marvel Comics #1 actually second printings or are they just books from the first print run that didn't sell in October and were stamped with NOV. and put back on the shelves?

 

It seems to me that if it was actually a second printing then Timely wouldn't have left the OCT. on the cover, albeit covered up with a black dot.

 

Per Steve F. in the Golden Age thread on this topic:

 

There were 70,000 copies printed with the October date. They sold out in one week. 775,000 copies were printed with the November date, and appeared on the stands 2 weeks later.

 

It floors me sometimes when I think about the preoccupation some collectors have with certain mainstream books.

 

Granted, 70,000 copies is a low print-run, and is dwarfed by 775,000 copies in the second print run, but even when you compare those print numbers to pre-1968 early print undergrounds that rarely went higher than 25,000 copies, and on average were in the 5K range, its mind-boggling to think about the amount of money being paid for some of these early and truly unatainable mainstream books... looking at it another way, how many dealers can produce a 8.5/9.0 copy of 1st print Zap Comix 1 (approx. 1500) or Snatch Comics 1 (approx 300) in comparison to how many dealers able to provide an Action 1 or a Marvel Comics 1...

 

I mean, I don't care how old the book Marvel 1 is, with a print run of 775,000 copies, I don't care how many exist -- I barely consider that kind of number being anywhere near a low print run

[rjpb]

From the Audit Bureau of Circulation (thanks to Russ Maheras of the Grand Comics Database), regarding Superman #1:

#1 FIRST PRINT 500,000

#1 2ND PRINT 250,000

#1 3RD PRINT 150,000

TOTAL 900,000

 

Per Steve F. in the Golden Age thread on this topic:

There were 70,000 copies printed with the October date. They sold out in one week. 775,000 copies were printed with the November date, and appeared on the stands 2 weeks later.

 

 

What makes a discussion of relative values of the Superman #1 printings problematic, is that unlike Marvel #1 - the books have to be

out of the slab to tell the difference, and currently there is no way of knowing if the 2nd printing resembles the 1st or the 3rd.

 

What is evident from the numbers above - is that October copies of Marvel #1 are likely scarcer than any print of Superman#1.

[FFB]

That same dark area is on the book in both scans -- the first scan from when it was an 8.5 in an old holder and the current scan now. CGC would have had to miss the CT twice on that book. Somehow I doubt that.

 

Do you really think that anyone at CGC would have had the nerve, when looking at the book a second time, to PLOD it having previously declared it to be unrestored? It's not a Hulk 181, people tend to notice $200 000 books suddenly going from unrestored to restored.

 

The more I read, the more I'm glad that I don't have that kind of money.

 

Yes I do. The embarrassment of missing it the first time would be nothing compared to the embarrassment of missing it twice and having an owner down the line discover that his book in a blue label CGC holder had undisclosed color touch.

[lou_fine]

Secondly: When has CGC missed color touch before? It's not too difficult to detect.

 

I've been told by a prior owner of the More Fun Comics #51 (Church/Mile High copy) that it has color touch, though it currently sits in a blue label.

 

 

Mark;

 

Is this the case of a GA book with minimal enough resto that CGC has simply noted the colour touch on the blue label, as opposed to missing the resto work completely?

 

If it is the former, this is quite common for GA books and is in line with CGC's stated policy on GA books with minimal resto (claasic example being the Church copy of More Fun #52). If it is the latter, then this is a something completely different and another can of worms for CGC.

[esquirecomics]

Secondly: When has CGC missed color touch before? It's not too difficult to detect.

 

I've been told by a prior owner of the More Fun Comics #51 (Church/Mile High copy) that it has color touch, though it currently sits in a blue label.

 

 

Mark;

 

Is this the case of a GA book with minimal enough resto that CGC has simply noted the colour touch on the blue label, as opposed to missing the resto work completely?

 

If it is the former, this is quite common for GA books and is in line with CGC's stated policy on GA books with minimal resto (claasic example being the Church copy of More Fun #52). If it is the latter, then this is a something completely different and another can of worms for CGC.

 

Lou, I can't say for sure if the color touch is so minimal that CGC felt it unnecessary to note or simply missed it altogether. The only thing I can say unequivocally is that there is no notation on the label.

 

BTW, I was told the CT was on the back cover - somewhere.