September Heritage Auction

[FFB]

Didn't Chuck mention that his original distribution source for new comics was a large Denver newsstand owner who was the ID wholesaler (distributor) for the area? Seems likely that the newstand owner from whom Edgar purchased was the area distributor for all new comics back in the 30s and 40s, and this would explain why he had multiple copies of everything.

[FFB]

Tom (or anyone else),

 

I know that the Detective 1 and Detective 27 were second-hand copies-but how many of the other Detectives from 2-26 were second-hand? I know I've seen some issues in that range that were definitely not second hand (like the #5, for example).

[nearmint]

Tom (or anyone else),

 

I know that the Detective 1 and Detective 27 were second-hand copies-but how many of the other Detectives from 2-26 were second-hand? I know I've seen some issues in that range that were definitely not second hand (like the #5, for example).

 

I bet Peter can answer that question right off the top of his head. Paging rarehighgrade...

[nearmint]

Does anyone know whether the McLaughlin books are being auctioned without reserves?

I seem to recall reading in one of Heritage's announcements that the McLaughlin family didn't want to pay for slabbing and didn't want reserves.

 

Per today's Scoop, there are no reserves.

[RareHighGrade]

Tom (or anyone else),

 

I know that the Detective 1 and Detective 27 were second-hand copies-but how many of the other Detectives from 2-26 were second-hand? I know I've seen some issues in that range that were definitely not second hand (like the #5, for example).

 

That is a very good question. One indication that a given book was bought first-hand by Church is the presence of the classic "D" arrival date. To my knowledge, only the #23 and #25 have those indicia. Based on my familiarity with the condition of the pre-hero Tecs, I believe that Church probably began buying them off the stands when the issues were in the late teens. I am fairly confident that the #5 was bought second-hand. I have no explanation for why the #27 would have been bought second-hand if, in fact, it was.

 

RHG

[tb]

Tom (or anyone else),

 

I know that the Detective 1 and Detective 27 were second-hand copies-but how many of the other Detectives from 2-26 were second-hand? I know I've seen some issues in that range that were definitely not second hand (like the #5, for example).

 

That is a very good question. One indication that a given book was bought first-hand by Church is the presence of the classic "D" arrival date. To my knowledge, only the #23 and #25 have those indicia. Based on my familiarity with the condition of the pre-hero Tecs, I believe that Church probably began buying them off the stands when the issues were in the late teens. I am fairly confident that the #5 was bought second-hand. I have no explanation for why the #27 would have been bought second-hand if, in fact, it was.

 

RHG

 

I am 97% certain that the #2 also has a "D", but it is in a writing I have

never seen on any other Church copy. It is depicted in one of the first

Sotheby's or Christie's catalogs. It was graded either 9.2 or 9.4. I have

also seen a picture of it somewhere else recently but forget where. The

unusual "D" might suggest it is a second-hand copy(?).

[adamstrange]

Tom (or anyone else),

 

I know that the Detective 1 and Detective 27 were second-hand copies-but how many of the other Detectives from 2-26 were second-hand? I know I've seen some issues in that range that were definitely not second hand (like the #5, for example).

 

That is a very good question. One indication that a given book was bought first-hand by Church is the presence of the classic "D" arrival date. To my knowledge, only the #23 and #25 have those indicia. Based on my familiarity with the condition of the pre-hero Tecs, I believe that Church probably began buying them off the stands when the issues were in the late teens. I am fairly confident that the #5 was bought second-hand. I have no explanation for why the #27 would have been bought second-hand if, in fact, it was.

 

RHG

 

My thought of the most likely scenario is that the Tec 27 sold out at the drugstore because of the cover and so Church was forced to go the used route.

[adamstrange]

Tom (or anyone else),

 

I know that the Detective 1 and Detective 27 were second-hand copies-but how many of the other Detectives from 2-26 were second-hand? I know I've seen some issues in that range that were definitely not second hand (like the #5, for example).

 

That is a very good question. One indication that a given book was bought first-hand by Church is the presence of the classic "D" arrival date. To my knowledge, only the #23 and #25 have those indicia. Based on my familiarity with the condition of the pre-hero Tecs, I believe that Church probably began buying them off the stands when the issues were in the late teens. I am fairly confident that the #5 was bought second-hand. I have no explanation for why the #27 would have been bought second-hand if, in fact, it was.

 

RHG

 

I am 97% certain that the #2 also has a "D", but it is in a writing I have

never seen on any other Church copy. It is depicted in one of the first

Sotheby's or Christie's catalogs. It was graded either 9.2 or 9.4. I have

also seen a picture of it somewhere else recently but forget where. The

unusual "D" might suggest it is a second-hand copy(?).

 

-script D code is on the Tec 2, and, according to Kohanek's article in CBM, occurs on a number of the early books that appear to have been purchased off the newstand.

 

No code on the Tec 8.

[adamstrange]

Just added to Heritage online listing descriptions:

 

Important Note on Pedigree Designations

We have provided pedigree attributions wherever possible for the uncertified comics in this auction, as well as providing grades for every lot as usual. Designations in bold type (e.g. All-New Comics #2 Mile High pedigree) represent a high degree of certainty on our part as to the pedigree; in some cases as an aid to bidders we have noted in the body of a description that a given comic is "possibly" or "probably" a pedigree copy.

 

The grades and pedigree attributions for uncertified comics were primarily assessed by Ed Jaster of Heritage Auction Galleries and vetted by Lon Allen and other Heritage staff members. Ed and Lon are seasoned graders. Ed is a senior Overstreet Advisor who served as an AACC Grading and Certification panelist for Christie's auctions in 1994 and 1995; Lon Allen is also a senior Overstreet Advisor. In many cases, other experts were consulted as well; the pedigree attributions represent our best guess based on a firsthand evaluation and all available facts.

 

For the record, John McLaughlin was considered by many experts to have the largest holding of Mile High/Edgar Church books of any individual collector. He tended to collect by sets, runs, or clusters of an individual title, rather than assembling the collection in smaller, piecemeal fashion.

 

Heritage does not guarantee that lots in this auction will receive the same pedigree designation or grade from third-party certification services if submitted later. Returns on the basis of disputes over pedigree designations or grading will not be accepted.

 

I'm already confident of one "probable" designation being incorrect.

[sfilosa]

Returns on the basis of disputes over pedigree designations or grading will not be accepted.

 

 

Are they saying that you can't return a book if you feel the grading is inaccurate?

[nochips]

Returns on the basis of disputes over pedigree designations or grading will not be accepted.

 

 

Are they saying that you can't return a book if you feel the grading is inaccurate?

 

Yep. That's what they are saying.

[nearmint]

Returns on the basis of disputes over pedigree designations or grading will not be accepted.

 

 

Are they saying that you can't return a book if you feel the grading is inaccurate?

 

Yep. That's what they are saying.

 

Guess I won't be buying raw from Heritage.

[Timulty]

That's why I have avoided doing so, on Heritage. That and some of the their grading seems spotty. Why buy an ebay NM on Heritage and PAY a premium?

[CentaurMan]

I'll give Heritage credit on two things: They provide enormous scans and they maintain their image archive (a fantastic resource). If their raw grading is spotty, it's certainly possible to "buy the book, not the Heritage grade" by checking the scans out personally. I'm sure there will be a number of people doing just that, looking for hidden opportunity (as well as for books that haven't reached their full potential).

 

As long as Heritage keeps their image archive up and running, I'm hard-pressed (so to speak) to be terribly critical of them.

[Timulty]

I will agree too, that it appears that they can undergrade as well. At least it appears that way. I have seen a couple books and wondered why they graded so low. Still, I don't like to take my chances based on speculation.

[skybolt]

I'm going to basically analyze the scans and bid accordingly. If a book is graded as 9.4, but has flaws that bring it down to an 8.0, then I'm bidding according to the lower grade. Of course my bid would be higher than the 8.0 OS guide value, since it's a "Church" book. On the otherhand, if the book is graded as a 7.0 by Heritage, but the front and back cover scans make it look like a 9.0, I'm still bidding according to the lower grade. The book probably has some interior defect to drop it down that much in grade.

[Aman619]

thats the ticket: buy the book, not the grade! Herirtage's grading is as good as anyone elses who sees thousands of raw and slabbed books a year... which is to say that they will parallel CGCs grades on many, and be higher and lower on the rest. duh. None of us out here can ever grade exactly as CGC DOES on every book.

 

and lets face it, grading some of these near perfect Mile High copies must be hard. You hold in your hands an umopend fresh looking book with various localized flaws. 80% of the surface of the book front and back may be perfect.. What do you grade it?? What I mean is depedning on the flaws, an 8.0 could be the sweetest 8.0 out there since the flaws only affect one small area on a killer book.

[sfilosa]

thats the ticket: buy the book, not the grade! Herirtage's grading is as good as anyone elses who sees thousands of raw and slabbed books a year... which is to say that they will parallel CGCs grades on many, and be higher and lower on the rest. duh. None of us out here can ever grade exactly as CGC DOES on every book.

 

 

Did you even look at the book that I pointed out was graded NM and two board members said no better than VF?

 

At least on that book, they aren't even CLOSE to CGC's grading standards.

 

Yes, they give big scans, which is very helpful. But say they grade a book NM- but from the scan it looks more like a VF+, which isn't terribly bad. But we all know that books can have hidden flaws (surface creases which don't show up on scans very well or interior defects). So, they call it a NM-, you grade the scan as VF+ and bid accordingly and it really ends up being VF-.

 

Are you going to be dissappointed? I know I would.

[skybolt]

What I mean is depedning on the flaws, an 8.0 could be the sweetest 8.0 out there since the flaws only affect one small area on a killer book.

 

That is certainly very true, but since the Mile High Edgar Church copies will probably sell at 2 to 3 times higher value than normal copies in the same grade, you have to be really conservative when grading the book. What I mean is that the buyer is already recognizing the quality of the Church pedigree by overpaying for an accurately graded 8.0 copy. Therefore, they should deduct points for any minor flaws, no matter how nice the rest of the book looks.

[Rob]

Got my catalog today. It's my first Heritage catalog. Real nice!!! But seems like a royal waste of money.