Church/MH Superman 1 record sale in January 7 7

[Bronty]

On 4/14/2022 at 3:38 PM, Transplant said:

 

Guessing, but also 99% sure

mkay

[waaaghboss]

On 4/14/2022 at 12:57 PM, lou_fine said:

What do you mean because the proof is right here, as like they say, a picture is worth a thousand words:  

If you squint you can see an uncapped yellow marker behind him on the counter.  

[Jaydogrules]

On 4/14/2022 at 10:24 AM, Larryw7 said:

Yeah, Roy and all of the guys here who were witnesses made it all up. It was a plot to discredit AF 15 and the Marvel Zombie movement. And you are powerless to stop it! 

I don't know who Roy is and neither do 99.99% of people.  

@Crowzilla My bad, when I first quickly read the article, I saw "mile high" and immediately conjured Rozanski.

My points still stand nonetheless. Public auctions > "Private sales".  All day.  Every day.     If it beats AF 15 in a public auction on the same terms and ground rules, great.  Otherwise, *asterisk*

-J.

[MasterChief]

On 4/14/2022 at 5:34 AM, nearmint said:

On 4/13/2022 at 9:52 PM, lou_fine said:

Why would you say this now results in greater transparency since you have now lost the grading history (i.e. prior grade and prior date graded) for the book as the only information that now shows up for the book would be the current grade and date?  

I agree.  I don't like that we've lost the prior grading history for the book.

Ditto.

Using the same certification number for grading resubmission does not generate greater clarity in the historical record of a certified book. It does the exact opposite. It seals the record and obfuscates the certification provenance and the data points of previously assigned grade, page color, graded date, pedigree, label text, and grader notes that can be used for research purposes.

As someone mentioned in another post, I don't recall the conspiratorial complaint of using new certification numbers for resubmissions. The issue was not in using new numbers, the issue was with removing the ability to search on and view old data for zeroed-out numbers. When that happened on Borock's watch, it added an enormous amount of fuel to the coverup theory as CGC took active steps to eliminate the ability to track certification provenance. That all took place during the manipulation debates of the early 2000s when boardies were posting before and after images and the certification history of worked on books.

The below is just one of countless examples where one can see that using the same certification number would eliminate transparency and historical knowledge. While this book currently has two assigned numbers, picture for a moment if only the original number was used for the resubmission. When searching the certification database, you'd never know it was previously certified restored from the Nicolas Cage collection, and then sometime later regraded lower as certified blue with the collection notation removed (unless you were in the know or had the before and after imagery).

IMO, the argument is not for using the same certification number for resubmitted books; the argument is to allow the ability to search on and view the data for zeroed-out books. Doing so would build back transparency and integrity that should be the cornerstone of CGC's business.

 

Edited April 14, 2022 by MasterChief
image work

[sfcityduck]

On 4/14/2022 at 2:42 PM, MasterChief said:

 

IMO, the argument is not for using the same certification number for resubmitted books; the argument is to allow the ability to search on and view the data for zeroed-out books. Doing so would build back transparency and integrity that should be the cornerstone of CGC's business.

 

Good points!  My concern has always been with an original record of a resubbed book NOT being deleted because it messes up the census counts and creates phantom non-existent (anymore) books.  But, I get your points and your solution is better.  

[rob_react]

On 4/14/2022 at 5:42 PM, Jaydogrules said:

I don't know who Roy is and neither do 99.99% of people. 

99.99% of people in the world don't know who Roy is, I'll give you that. The percentage of people in this thread that know who Roy is is much higher (including Roy himself )

Quote

Mile High Copy of Superman #1 Sells for Record $5.3 Million

Posted on 4/13/2022

With the record-breaking price, the Man of Steel is back on top of the comic book world.

In a year of constant record-breaking prices for comic books, the ante has been upped yet again. The Edgar Church/Mile High copy of Superman #1, graded 8.0 Universal by Certified Guaranty Company® (CGC®), privately traded hands in January 2022 for $5.3 million, far outpacing the previous record of $3.6 million paid for a CGC 9.6 Amazing Fantasy #15 at auction in September 2021. This sale was brokered by Tony Arnold of TonyeTrade Enterprises, one of the renowned sources for vintage collectibles, and Roy Delic of Vintage Comics, a well-respected dealer in Canada. Both the seller and buyer prefer to remain anonymous.

 

[sfcityduck]

On 4/14/2022 at 2:42 PM, MasterChief said:

 

 

Here's my question:  Why isn't a Retored book given a grade for what it would grade out at if the restoration was removed or had not occurred?  IMHO, from the perspective of making sure that books are not damaged in a quest for money, this book would be better if it was assigned a 6.5 restored grade with the notation that it is estimated it would be a 5.5 if the restoration was removed.  That way, the book could get a 5.5 price without damage to the book.

Of course, I'm also mystified (1) how the unrestored version of the book has eliminated the white dots on the upper right of the shorts and lower left inside of cape without a CT notation and (2) why we want to encourage the removal of reversible seals that are intended to prevent further tearing to a book.  Strange that removing the seal yields an "unrestored" book even though the unreversible glue still exists.  Wouldn't it make more sense for the unrestored grade to treat a tear seal as if it wasn't there?  E.g. the book with a seal is assigned an unrestored grade of 5.5 with a notation that it has a reversible tear seal that was not factored into the final grade (e.g. it was graded as if tear was unsealed).

[Aman619]

I made the original comment that keeping the number was transparent, but I see now I was looking one way not the other.  Meaning that if someone had a scan of the 8.0 and looked up the number they'd see it was upgraded to 8.5. If the 8.5 got a new number, you couldn't make the connection.  But, Masterchef makes a deeper point that the problem from way back was deleting the pre upgrade record from the CGC database so that research into upgrades was harder to do..  It WOULD be much more transparent to keep both serialnubers in the database .  But back then that would only have invited hard questions to answer.  Even now, would the zeroed out record have to say "Label returned", or "see #367826001" ?

[Aman619]

On 4/14/2022 at 6:16 PM, sfcityduck said:

Here's my question:  Why isn't a Retored book given a grade for what it would grade out at if the restoration was removed or had not occurred?  IMHO, from the perspective of making sure that books are not damaged in a quest for money, this book would be better if it was assigned a 6.5 restored grade with the notation that it is estimated it would be a 5.5 if the restoration was removed.  That way, the book could get a 5.5 price without damage to the book.

Of course, I'm also mystified (1) how the unrestored version of the book has eliminated the white dots on the upper right of the shorts and lower left inside of cape without a CT notation and (2) why we want to encourage the removal of reversible seals that are intended to prevent further tearing to a book.  Strange that removing the seal yields an "unrestored" book even though the unreversible glue still exists.  Wouldn't it make more sense for the unrestored grade to treat a tear seal as if it wasn't there?  E.g. the book with a seal is assigned an unrestored grade of 5.5 with a notation that it has a reversible tear seal that was not factored into the final grade (e.g. it was graded as if tear was unsealed).

I dunno.  Im tempted today "because it's More Fun that way?

 

[Grendel72]

On 4/15/2022 at 6:16 AM, sfcityduck said:

Here's my question:  Why isn't a Retored book given a grade for what it would grade out at if the restoration was removed or had not occurred?  IMHO, from the perspective of making sure that books are not damaged in a quest for money, this book would be better if it was assigned a 6.5 restored grade with the notation that it is estimated it would be a 5.5 if the restoration was removed.  That way, the book could get a 5.5 price without damage to the book.

 

Wonder how much that would increase grading costs ? Would it be even possible to determine a grade if restoration was removed without actually removing the restoration ? 

[sfcityduck]

On 4/14/2022 at 2:42 PM, Jaydogrules said:

 

My points still stand nonetheless. Public auctions > "Private sales".  All day.  Every day.     If it beats AF 15 in a public auction on the same terms and ground rules, great.  Otherwise, *asterisk*

-J.

Auctions may, if held in a state where shill bidding is illegal, yield results that are the best evidence of the actual market value.  Unfortunately, Texas is not one of those states.  And we have had at least one very prominent admission of shill bidding on this site. Even without shill bidding, auctions can encourage stupidity followed by corrections when the books are re-auctioned later.  

My guess is that even the Allentown CA 1 9.8 would yield a higher value than any of the four AF 15 9.6s.  If the MH MC 1 grades 9.8 also, it would beat those four books out too.  AF 15 does not make my top 5.  I expect that more high grade AF 15s will appear over time.  Too many guys still alive and sitting on their collections today were collecting comics in the 1960s.  

[LDarkseid1]

On 4/14/2022 at 3:39 PM, sfcityduck said:

Auctions may, if held in a state where shill bidding is illegal, yield results that are the best evidence of the actual market value.  Unfortunately, Texas is not one of those states.  And we have had at least one very prominent admission of shill bidding on this site. Even without shill bidding, auctions can encourage stupidity followed by corrections when the books are re-auctioned later.  

My guess is that even the Allentown CA 1 9.8 would yield a higher value than any of the four AF 15 9.6s.  If the MH MC 1 grades 9.8 also, it would beat those four books out too.  AF 15 does not make my top 5.  I expect that more high grade AF 15s will appear over time.  Too many guys still alive and sitting on their collections today were collecting comics in the 1960s.  

I agree, there's definitely more high grade AF 15's out there, and doesn't make my top 5 either. The Torpedo copy most recently I can think of that graded out at a 9.4, albeit not the prettiest 9.4 imop, less than desirable wrap. They sold that much sooner than they would have liked lol. And there's the guy on youtube who goes by LeeKirbyDitkoComics. Not him, but he's shown his father's unrestored raw AF15 in a video, and as I recall that copy damn near looks as minty as can be. Have to imagine it's at least a 9.4-9.6, with who knows, maybe 9.8 potential were it ever graded. I'm sure there's more out there though. See below at 6 minutes and 30 seconds in.

 

Edited April 14, 2022 by LDarkseid1

[adamstrange]

On 4/14/2022 at 6:16 PM, sfcityduck said:

Here's my question:  Why isn't a Retored book given a grade for what it would grade out at if the restoration was removed or had not occurred? 

It seems to be challenging enough for them to handle standard unrestored grades...

[G.A.tor]

Let’s nudge this thread back and make it about me

why is my 2009 “record” purchase not listed. I’m so hurt hehe

[rob_react]

On 4/14/2022 at 7:08 PM, G.A.tor said:

Let’s nudge this thread back and make it about me

why is my 2009 “record” purchase not listed. I’m so hurt hehe

I'll add you! Give me details! Seriously, I'm updating the timeline tonight or tomorrow.

[G.A.tor]

On 4/14/2022 at 7:18 PM, rob_react said:

I'll add you! Give me details! Seriously, I'm updating the timeline tonight or tomorrow.

Now that’s more like it

[MrBedrock]

On 4/14/2022 at 6:08 PM, G.A.tor said:

Let’s nudge this thread back and make it about me

Roy is going to be so butthurt!

[Jaydogrules]

On 4/14/2022 at 3:13 PM, rob_react said:

99.99% of people in the world don't know who Roy is, I'll give you that. The percentage of people in this thread that know who Roy is is much higher (including Roy himself )

 

Touché lol.  And nothing against Roy, we may go back and forth sometimes but I have nothing against the guy personally or professionally.  

But when somebody says "it's just as good as a public auction because Roy saw it", that doesn't move the needle.  

@sfcityduck You're right, shilling an auction  can definitely queer data points, and I'm sure it at least "can" happen even with all the sefagaurds the big auction houses have in place. 

But again, that's the beauty of sales happening in public view , they are open to scrutiny and can be questioned and vetted by the masses on boards like these.  

-J.

[adamstrange]

On 4/14/2022 at 6:13 PM, rob_react said:

99.99% of people in the world don't know who Roy is

They are so lucky 

[rob_react]

On 4/14/2022 at 8:46 PM, adamstrange said:

They are so lucky 

😂