Comic Monthly 1 Great book and "unrestored"-- but crayoned. Oh the insanity!.

[bluechip]

This is a truly rare and underappreciated book. But I cannot help pointing out that while the listing waxes poetic about how it is unrestored -- in big bold underlined. Unrestored! Unrestored! Unrestored!. And then it casually mentions crayon coloring inside. That doesn't matter, of course. Because the former owner made those marks with the intention of DEFACING the book. So long as the marks are urgly and it's clear the previous owner wanted to make it look bad. Then it's okay. But, God, of God, if the mark somehow had the taint of possibly, just potentially, -- theoretically -- having been done with the intent of filling in a missing dot of ink somewhere. then by Odin the booik would be worthless. Not an unrestored VG, but an apparent fair (once a book is judged restored then the crayon markings must also be considered a defect. Defects are only ignored in books in unrestored books. And the guide is only ignored in unrestored books. so, if any of those crayon marks bear even the slightest possibility of having been put there to make the book appear better then it goes from being a mid-gr5ade four figure above guide book to a less than good restored book.worth a fraction of the guide good price.

[bluechip]

completely forgot to mention, the book in question is currently on ebay. I truly think that book is HUGELY undervalued. But the guide has proven it is unlikely to increase the price no matter how much it sells for. And to take a truly rare book like that and to care little about how bad the marks are while obsessing over what the person who did the marking was THINKING at the time. That is just truly F-ing nuts.

[showcase4]

Well Bob,

your post really caught my attention...because I am the seller. I will stick to my description and defend it thru eternity.......crayon on interior panels coloring in some of the art is not restoration. Period...end of story. If crayon was used on the cover to fill in a chip, and the crayon was the same color as the cover ink...then that would be restoration.

 

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/Comic-Monthly-1-Embe...tem170043826538

 

Glad you appreciate the book. I am VERY confident that others will agree with me on this subject......Boards members, please state your opinions on this subject.

[bluechip]

I didn't catch that you were the seller, which would have been easy, I suppose, if I had looked at the seller name. I had looked at it quickly and it seemed the seller bought into the anti-resto hype to such an extent that he presumed buyers don't care about defects so long as the intent was to make the book appear worse.

 

But what if standards change YET again. It used to be okay, even encouraged by the overstreet guide, to have minor repairs done to a book. And it used to be nobody would ever think that we should spend time trying to guess whether a book was flattened intentionally or accidentally. I think if we follow that train of logic then it's fair to be concerned that at some point in the future coloring in books should be considered restoration because it is clearly an attempt by a former owner to improve the appearance of a book. (just like those color touches that you can spot even without a black light)

 

I know this is a black and white book, but what if some of the crayon marks were done with a black crayon? Should we look really close to see if, at one point, the crayon marks fill in a tiny spot of missing ink?

 

If so, wouldn't that be restoration?

 

.

[bluechip]

I will add one more note.

 

That is an unquestionably rare and important book, ridiculously undervalued in the guide.

 

It should go for big bucks EVEN IF some of the markings were to be judged now -- or by some insane but insistent person in the future -- as restoration.

[HouseofComics.Com]

What do you two feel about prices of Comic Monthly 2-12? Also undervalued?

[action1kid]

Well Bob,

your post really caught my attention...because I am the seller. I will stick to my description and defend it thru eternity.......crayon on interior panels coloring in some of the art is not restoration. Period...end of story. If crayon was used on the cover to fill in a chip, and the crayon was the same color as the cover ink...then that would be restoration.

 

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/Comic-Monthly-1-Embe...tem170043826538

 

Glad you appreciate the book. I am VERY confident that others will agree with me on this subject......Boards members, please state your opinions on this subject.

 

its not restoration ,its just not in its original condition.It should be noted but nothing more.

[bluechip]

I would say also undervalued though not as significant. Definitely rare. But it's the book's first monthly comic status that really makes it important. Hey, it even says "comic monthly" in the title, so they knew exactly what they were doing and since it hadn't been done before they wanted customers to know what it was.

[bluechip]

[

its not restoration ,its just not in its original condition.It should be noted but nothing more.

 

I agree that all defects, including restoration, should be "noted and nothing more."

 

Perfect way of putting. We should all enshrine that.

 

"...NOTED AND NOTHING MORE."

[1koko]

I agree it not restoration and it has been disclosed.

 

To realise a good price however, pictures of the pages that have coloring on it should have been included. Without pictures a buyer can't make a decision as to how much a problem if at all the coloring is. Most buyers prepared to spend large amounts tend to be cautious and therefore pessimistic at best. Bids will be scaled down accordingly.

[BLBcomics-migration]

it was very common for kids to color in on some pages in these Plat black & white comic books which also served as coloring books in many cases. How some kid coloring in a B&W comicbook some 85 years ago can be thought of as restoration by any standards past present or future is beyond silly - sorry

[action1kid]

A childs coloring is not restoration as it was clearly NOT done to improve the appearence of the book.Restoration is done to IMPROVE [hopefully] the appearence of the book[it is INTENTIONAL!]...The childs coloring of a book is for his enjoyment and nothing more.There is no intent to improve the books appearence.[well maybe in the childs mind ]

A colortouch on the other hand is Intentional[most likely and should be noted as Restoration.

 

I will say this...

Whether it be crayon or colortouch[Monitarily speaking only] they should both deter to the value of the book significantly.Whether intentional or not.

[shiverbones]

I dont think his point is that its restoration, obviously it isn't, its the mindset that values this book higher with crayon markings then a book with color applis in a less conspicuous place. People will have no problem dropping $$$ on the book with writing because of semantics. Restoration is just "writing" on a specific spot.

[1koko]

my comments are not regarding whether the comic has restoration or not. I don't deem it restoration. My comment is more whether the extent of colouring will detract from the pleasure of owning it.

 

It is whether the comic is aesthetically pleasing or not. Each buyer has there own views as to whether a comic is worth buying regardless of grade. Some won't buy if a comic has a date stamp. Others will when looking at 2 comics always purchase the comic which doesn't have writing on it.

 

Where a description notes that there are 8 panels with crayoning on it disclosure as all have stated is important. A picture would confirm the extent and a buyer can make a decision accordingly..

 

A clarification of the extent of colouring would allow the buyer to make a better analysis of the comic and bid accordingly.

 

Buyers with no knowledge of Showcase-4 and experience of e-bay only would bid much lower than would be expected for this item.

[bluechip]

it was very common for kids to color in on some pages in these Plat black & white comic books which also served as coloring books in many cases. How some kid coloring in a B&W comicbook some 85 years ago can be thought of as restoration by any standards past present or future is beyond silly - sorry

 

 

blb is a great guy, but his response makes me wanna quote the old charlie brown gag, "don't you know sarcasm when you hear it?" And I suspect it's not because Bob isn;t aware but because we're already dealing with things being considered restoration using logic that is "beyond silly."

 

If a kid put a black mark on a book 40 years ago and it's obvious both inside and out that this it's felt marker and only a *spoon* would look at the book and think it's in original condition, then the book is not "restored." It is altered, defaced, devalued, etc. But it is not restored. It should be noted like any other defect, and it's truly beyond silly to say that it matters more than another mark which might be larger, more obtrusive and more defacing to the book.

 

If I used the same approach others have used and applied it to this rare copy of Comic Monthly I would be inserting myself into the debate about how much it's worth and demanding that others agree with me that crayon marks are worse than any other and that all would be collecters be advised to "never buy books with crayon marks," insisting it be put in a special colored label so I can spot it from across a room (and not just rely on the label notation) and -- finally -- to insist the book be considered restored, something lie an apparent fair-good worth a fraction of overstreet guide. Basically trying to undermine the book and to make sure it fails to sell for four figures and instead try to badger down potential buyers so the seller makes a percentage of the good price (which'd be more like two figures).

 

But that would be taking a silly, irrational view and using it to attempt to drive down the value of another person's attempts to sell a book profitably and honestly.

 

Would that we all avoided doing that.

[showcase4]

my comments are not regarding whether the comic has restoration or not. I don't deem it restoration. My comment is more whether the extent of colouring will detract from the pleasure of owning it.

 

It is whether the comic is aesthetically pleasing or not. Each buyer has there own views as to whether a comic is worth buying regardless of grade. Some won't buy if a comic has a date stamp. Others will when looking at 2 comics always purchase the comic which doesn't have writing on it.

 

Where a description notes that there are 8 panels with crayoning on it disclosure as all have stated is important. A picture would confirm the extent and a buyer can make a decision accordingly..

 

A clarification of the extent of colouring would allow the buyer to make a better analysis of the comic and bid accordingly.

 

Buyers with no knowledge of Showcase-4 and experience of e-bay only would bid much lower than would be expected for this item.

 

 

point well taken...and to prove it, I will add a pic to my auction of a typical colored panel for clarification

[1koko]

let's hope it increases the price for you.

[showcase4]

Ok Bluechip...here you have one of the 8 panels with light crayon, exactly as my ad describes.

 

Taking the fact that it is my book out of the debate, I will bet you dollars to donughts that this books crayon will still allow it to sell for 90-95% of its "non-crayon" value, but if it had any restoration, it would sell for no more than 40-50% of "unrestored" value.

 

[selegue]

You colored inside the lines real good, Steve!

 

Jack

 

Ok Bluechip...here you have one of the 8 panels with light crayon, exactly as my ad describes.

 

Taking the fact that it is my book out of the debate, I will bet you dollars to donughts that this books crayon will still allow it to sell for 90-95% of its "non-crayon" value, but if it had any restoration, it would sell for no more than 40-50% of "unrestored" value.

 

[bluechip]

Ok Bluechip...here you have one of the 8 panels with light crayon, exactly as my ad describes.

 

Taking the fact that it is my book out of the debate, I will bet you dollars to donughts that this books crayon will still allow it to sell for 90-95% of its "non-crayon" value, but if it had any restoration, it would sell for no more than 40-50% of "unrestored" value.

 

 

And if so, that is absurd. And things like are not happening in a vacuum. They are happening, when they happen, because of people who not only refrain from buying such a book themselves but make it their mission to destroy the value of others books.

 

I hope your book sells for full non-crayon value, full unrestored value above guide and the whole nine yards.

 

Although I hate crayon markings in black and white books, and would not pay hat percentage for "non-crayon" value, I would not go out of my way -- and spend time trying to convince others not to buy it.

 

I wouldn't consider that a fair thing to do to you or to them.