CGC Recognizes Newsstand Edition on Label
2 2

31 posts in this topic

On 10/4/2022 at 9:53 AM, wytshus said:

I also hope you will reconsider, @Iconic1s  I can tell you that those of us behind the scenes really appreciate the work you have put into your sets.  

Thank you very much!  That means a lot and I really appreciate it!

Also appreciate all the hard work you put into the registry!  

Edited by Iconic1s
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/3/2022 at 12:03 PM, Qalyar said:

I don't care if pedigree books are worth more points than blue labels. Heck, I think that's a better idea than having SS books worth more points than blue labels (although I'm unabashedly anti-SS). But pedigree books shouldn't have their own slots, because they were not created as physically-distinguishable books by their publisher.

IMHO:

A Pedigree is nothing more than designation of an original owner collection - which makes it entirely after market. 

Pedigrees being "worth" more registry points makes no sense. The condition of the book, is the condition of the book.

In addition some (most?) pedigrees are really not indicative of superior overall quality over non-pedigree copies. Lets take "Oakland" for instance - I have many of these all purchased from in Aug&Sept 1998, some I've had graded. Of the books I've had graded 1/2 I submitted in all the back in 2001-2003 and then again another 2 batches nearly 20 year later in 2021.   75% have ow/w pages , with slightly less than 25% being WP as 1 was OW.  I've also tracked sales of these when possible and the ratios are similar 75% are NOT WP.  My guess is the way the environmental condition in which they were stored from day of purchase until Vinny and Carbinaro raking in the haul was less than optimal. I will say that 9.6 and 9.8 abound with the Oakland books I purchased. 

As for signed books that is a large revenue generator for CGC so the absurdity of them being more registry points for what in effect are damaged books is something sadly that has to be accepted as it's part of their business model.

Edited by MAR1979
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2022 at 10:30 AM, Iconic1s said:

Appreciate the reply!

So CGC just forced newsstand collecting onto anyone that wants to be competitive within the Registry!

 This sucks!

The registry exists to bring in income for CGC.  Even if it's nowhere near PSA's gold standard of an app.

The answer is simple; the individual must decide if the dopamine hit of having a high or the highest ranked registry set is worth all the other factors like cost, time, effort, sanity etc..

BTW: Many times registry sets are nothing more than a wiener wallet measuring contest :)  Unless of course its about holding the #1 ranked set in every DC published Digest category as that is simply and undeniably the coolest   :whistle:

Edited by MAR1979
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
On 10/4/2022 at 10:53 AM, wytshus said:

I also hope you will reconsider, @Iconic1s  I can tell you that those of us behind the scenes really appreciate the work you have put into your sets.  

 

 

100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/3/2022 at 2:23 PM, Iconic1s said:

The problem I see with this is that the census will never accurately reflect relative scarcity. So, who is to say what extra points any particular book would get?  It’s just CGC or a few people that are passionate about a particular book or two making their case. It’s going to be a mess. 

It may get there over time. They have to start somewhere, and if not now, when? I've been collecting newsstands for a few years now, if for no other reason than they seem to be (and may actually be) much rarer than hard to find Golden Age comics at a fraction of the price and in much better condition. I am very curious how rare they are but already have a pretty fair idea from the effort I've had to make to track them down. I like the idea that rarity will be one day acknowledged, much as the 35 cent Star Wars #1 is now recognized as genuinely rare. That said, the Marvel 1999-2000 price variants are likely more rare than the 35 cent SW #1. I recently sent my collection of those in to CGC. Half came back with their price variant status on the label, the other half didn't. My opinion, that should always be noted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/4/2022 at 12:08 PM, MAR1979 said:

The registry exists to bring in income for CGC.  Even if it's nowhere near PSA's gold standard of an app.

The answer is simple; the individual must decide if the dopamine hit of having a high or the highest ranked registry set is worth all the other factors like cost, time, effort, sanity etc..

BTW At least some of the time registry sets are nothing more than wiener wallet measuring contest :)  Unless of course its about holding the #1 ranked sets in every DC published Digest category as that is simply the coolest   :whistle:

 

A very sober and sobering assessment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also do not think sets should include slots for Newsstand Editions separately. If the indicia does not notate a difference then it shouldn’t have a separate slot IMHO. I’m all for the notation on the label but not for additional slots in the registry. This is now a slippery slope where the argument can be made to assign higher points for page quality and pedigree designation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of these #7 Wizard Magazines is a Newsstand Edition with Bart Sears cover art and the other has Barry Windsor-Smith cover art. Can you guess which is which? 

Should there be a slot for it? 

The Wizard #1 Newsstand Edition commands a significantly higher price than even the SDCC Edition and I'm not certain but I believe that I've got the only copy graded with the designation on the label. 

Screenshot_20221105-115511_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20211206-085957_Gallery.jpg

Screenshot_20221231-131322_Gallery.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So... if anyone is paying attention. 

The most recent census update for Wizard Magazine , has Wizard #7 with an addition of "Variant Cover" and a change of the cover artist to Bart Sears added to the art comments. 

This is also wrong. 

Listen carefully. 

Wizard #7... Barry Windsor-Smith cover 

Wizard #7 Newsstand Edition... Bart Sears cover. 

This is not hard. I don't get it.

Screenshot_20230126-195406_Gallery.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2