Hake's comes up with a GA unrestored Key!

[showcase4]

I'm not sure the market has really completely caught on yet

 

I guess the rationale behind this is that when it comes to the GA books, all of the printings are tough to find which makes them all expensive.

Without a doubt though, the first print for a GA book should still be worth more money.

 

Yes, you would think so, but for whatever reason or reasons, the "market" has not made it an area of concern....not yet, anyway.

 

I know an antiquarian rare book dealer / collector, and determining if a book is a 1st printing is THE KEY to that entire market....if 2 rare books were printed in 1938, and look idenitcal in everyway, the title page typically has info that determines the print run, and a 1st printing may be worth $10,000 as an exapmle, and the 2nd printing may be $750. For this reason, there is A LOT of fraud.....someone will buy a beaten up /incomplete ( poor .05 in our world ) 1st printing of a key book, then buy a nice condition 2nd printing with similar PQ and color. The beat copy ( 1st printing ) will be disassembled to remove the title page, and on the nice copy ( 2nd printing ), that title page will be sliced off with a razor blade, and the 1st printing title page will be glued/mended in its place..........nice, huh? End result....a real nice condition 1st printing ( not really ). Sounds like those rare book guys have been getting some tips from us comic guys about large profits to be made from undisclosed alterations to the original book

 

Back to comics.....the OPG specifically mentions that October copies are 1st printings, and could be worth more........yet I don't think I have heard anyone except Steve F from Metropolis ( and myself ) mention the November copies of Marvel 1 as less desirable reprints. I don't own a Marvel 1, and I'm not trying to devalue anyones November copies with this post..... I would love to own one.

 

I guess time will tell if the "1st printing" issue spills over into the GA market at some point in the future...............just imagine if at comic book conventions in 2030, collectors ask "is it a 1st printing?" as often as they ask " is it restored?"

 

Steve

[G.A.tor]

hello all...

One thing that I take into consideration, is you really can't compare the idea of "first print" v "second print" of the modern day comic era to that of past (golden age, specifically)...in today's collecting world, these books are solicited in advance, a print run is determined based off those orders, and then the books are produced to order and released...if, after release, market demand exceeds existing supply, then the publisher generally goes back to production (if warranted), and produces a second printing, generally with intentional distinguishing characteristics (cover, etc). I do not believe you can compare this to the GA issues, where there was no industry wide "preorder system" in place, and where the books were generally produced with idential covers and contents (I realize there are some exceptions likes Supes 1, Marvel 1) and not "re solicited" as a new printing. Also, the fact that there still exists so little accurate publishing information from all the defunct publishers, unlikely we could ever accurately reconstruct across the board. Couple that with the fact that, as I have previously stated, likely 90%+ of the collecting community either can't afford, or choose not to afford or to chase multiple copies down of a $10,000 or $50,000 or $100,000 key book , I don't think there will ever be market demand enough to warrant a major price differentiation...

just my opinion, but considering it hasn't happened in the last 40 years, I cannot see any reason why that would change now..

gator

[showcase4]

I don't think there will ever be market demand enough to warrant a major price differentiation...

just my opinion, but considering it hasn't happened in the last 40 years, I cannot see any reason why that would change now..

gator

 

ahhhhhhhhhh.....and yet just 25 years ago, is what considered a desirable enhacement to a book to fill in a little cover chip with some color touch. Attitudes towards what is and what is not ' in vogue ' change over time

 

PS hey Rick

[G.A.tor]

I don't think there will ever be market demand enough to warrant a major price differentiation...

just my opinion, but considering it hasn't happened in the last 40 years, I cannot see any reason why that would change now..

gator

 

ahhhhhhhhhh.....and just 25 years ago, is what considered a desirable enhacement to a book to fill in a little cover chip with some color touch. Attitudes towards what is and what is not ' in vogue ' change over time

 

PS hey Rick

very true...and there has been a swing back to restored books having their place, in the market place, as long as disclosed and priced accordingly....but, again, we are talking about something that is very tangible and accessible (ease to discover a books restoration), versus information that is not likely to get any easier to discover (such as print runs, publishers intentions, etc)....

It is easy to see an intentional second print run on a book today and in most every case, that books is produced in far less quantities that the first printing...so, from a rarity factor, it should be more valuable, right?...wrong, less demand warranted the lessor supply, hence the lower price...

Take Superman 1...there are likely only a couple of hundred copies that still exist today, right?...given the relatively small supply (that continues to shrink as books are resting in private collections, and fewer and fewer unknown copies are coming to market), I don't think it is logical or practical that we will ever have a division in demand for a particular printing, it just "bucks" basic laws of economic supply and demand for an item at this price point/scarcity...99% + of the collecting community will never be able to buy "any" copy of Superman 1 (or marvel 1 or action 1, etc) .... there is not enough supply now to meet the current demand, so to further reduce supply (by dividing into various print runs) would, in theory, make one more valuable than the other, but from an economic model standpoint, there is already resistance to the current price point that many of these GA keys are at, so there would be a furthering of price resistance if we try to seperate which print run to buy...

again just my opinion...

rick

[showcase4]

I don't think there will ever be market demand enough to warrant a major price differentiation...

just my opinion, but considering it hasn't happened in the last 40 years, I cannot see any reason why that would change now..

gator

 

ahhhhhhhhhh.....and just 25 years ago, is what considered a desirable enhacement to a book to fill in a little cover chip with some color touch. Attitudes towards what is and what is not ' in vogue ' change over time

 

PS hey Rick

very true...and there has been a swing back to restored books having their place, in the market place, as long as disclosed and priced accordingly....but, again, we are talking about something that is very tangible and accessible (ease to discover a books restoration), versus information that is not likely to get any easier to discover (such as print runs, publishers intentions, etc)....

It is easy to see an intentional second print run on a book today and in most every case, that books is produced in far less quantities that the first printing...so, from a rarity factor, it should be more valuable, right?...wrong, less demand warranted the lessor supply, hence the lower price...

Take Superman 1...there are likely only a couple of hundred copies that still exist today, right?...given the relatively small supply (that continues to shrink as books are resting in private collections, and fewer and fewer unknown copies are coming to market), I don't think it is logical or practical that we will ever have a division in demand for a particular printing, it just "bucks" basic laws of economic supply and demand for an item at this price point/scarcity...99% + of the collecting community will never be able to buy "any" copy of Superman 1 (or marvel 1 or action 1, etc) .... there is not enough supply now to meet the current demand, so to further reduce supply (by dividing into various print runs) would, in theory, make one more valuable than the other, but from an economic model standpoint, there is already resistance to the current price point that many of these GA keys are at, so there would be a furthering of price resistance if we try to seperate which print run to buy...

again just my opinion...

rick

 

I hear you Bro'........however in the case of Marvel 1, identifying the 1st printing ( should it one day become important to collectors ) couldn't be much clearer......the whole October, November thing

[G.A.tor]

 

I hear you Bro'........however in the case of Marvel 1, identifying the 1st printing ( should it one day become important to collectors ) couldn't be much clearer......the whole October, November thing

 

hello all...

now, I am new to Timely collecting, but I actually don't think that is the case....yes, you can identify the variant cover, but I believe I read somewhere that they were all printed at the same time (as evidenced that all marvel 1 covers have the Oct insignia, only blacked out later and a Nov printed over it or reprinted cover)....I will search for the article, but it maintains that there is likely only one printing, and that the book was initially supposed to have the Oct pull date on it (naturally some got out early) but that the majority were held back, black stamped over and that the Nov was printed ontop of the original cover...

so, yes, it is a variant Dated cover, but was there really more than one printing? and at the vary least, I have only seen like 1 Oct copy for every 20 Nov copies, so if anything, the Nov copy is the one that hold the current value, and maybe the Oct covers would be at a premium, if someone so deemed it to me "more valuable"...

just curious if someone out there knows?

rick

[steelhelmet]

Excellent post , Rick.

[G.A.tor]

Excellent post , Rick.

thanks...just to be clear, i am not "debating" steve (well, at least not negatively, we are buddies), I am just in a quest for information and expressing my point of view (which is by no means right!)....

rick

[spoonerism]

I don't think there will ever be market demand enough to warrant a major price differentiation...

just my opinion, but considering it hasn't happened in the last 40 years, I cannot see any reason why that would change now..

gator

 

ahhhhhhhhhh.....and just 25 years ago, is what considered a desirable enhacement to a book to fill in a little cover chip with some color touch. Attitudes towards what is and what is not ' in vogue ' change over time

 

very true...and there has been a swing back to restored books having their place, in the market place, as long as disclosed and priced accordingly....but, again, we are talking about something that is very tangible and accessible (ease to discover a books restoration), versus information that is not likely to get any easier to discover (such as print runs, publishers intentions, etc)....

 

Well, in these three cases, it is fairly easy to discover which books were printed when, so this doesn't apply here. On some books, where a change is as small as an ad or something, and the scrutiny on the books isn't as close, it is true, though.

 

 

It is easy to see an intentional second print run on a book today and in most every case, that books is produced in far less quantities that the first printing...so, from a rarity factor, it should be more valuable, right?...wrong, less demand warranted the lessor supply, hence the lower price...

Take Superman 1...there are likely only a couple of hundred copies that still exist today, right?...given the relatively small supply (that continues to shrink as books are resting in private collections, and fewer and fewer unknown copies are coming to market), I don't think it is logical or practical that we will ever have a division in demand for a particular printing, it just "bucks" basic laws of economic supply and demand for an item at this price point/scarcity...99% + of the collecting community will never be able to buy "any" copy of Superman 1 (or marvel 1 or action 1, etc) .... there is not enough supply now to meet the current demand, so to further reduce supply (by dividing into various print runs) would, in theory, make one more valuable than the other, but from an economic model standpoint, there is already resistance to the current price point that many of these GA keys are at, so there would be a furthering of price resistance if we try to seperate which print run to buy...

again just my opinion...

rick

 

Right now, we discriminate price on a book based on any number of factors, but supply and demand are the two biggies, of course. If there weren't "pressure at the current price point" (my emphasis above), then the prices would be higher. The pressure between the two is what sets the price.

 

So, while supply, demand, condition and provenance (pedigree) affect the price of a book, we should look at a different printing (or variant) as a different book altogether, with a different market.

 

For example, I really like the Marvel Zombies variant covers that are take-off/homages to great Silver Age covers. So, while a third print of #1 wouldn't be attractive to me with the same cover as a first print, it is with the Hulk cover (I think that's the printing).

 

In the most recent Heritage auction, for example, I bid $3500 for the poor copy of Batman #1 "No 1" because I wanted that cover. I wouldn't have bid on it otherwise. That, by definition, increased the demand and price of that book, so we already see the market being affected by the knowledge of different print runs.

 

And -- you can bet that the next time I get my hands on a Supes 1, I am going to check what version of the ad for Action 13 (14?) exists.

[mikephoen]

I'm not sure the market has really completely caught on yet, however. Look at Superman 1 - There you have three different, much better documented printings, with the first printing easily identifiable and yet no one makes any distinction between them - I don't think CGC even notes it on the label. Yet if it were Zap #1 or TMNT #1 they would - that makes no sense to me.

 

I guess the rationale behind this is that when it comes to the GA books, all of the printings are tough to find which makes them all expensive. With respect to the Modern reprints, there is a definite difference between the first print which is usually much tougher to find than the subsequent reprints and priced accordingly.

 

Without a doubt though, the first print for a GA book should still be worth more money. But then again, I also feel that OS certainly does not have enough breakouts for the GA books in general in comparison to the SA and BA listings.

 

One that always gets me is the Batman #1 printings. The first, it seems, had "No 1" on the cover, and the second had "No .1" (space where it looks like it is on the cover)

 

One of my personal grails is a "No 1" Batman. Someone on here had a bound edition from Bob Kane's estate, which had Bats 1-5 or so in it. The #1 there was a "first printing" (what I'm calling it for lack of a better term).

 

Also, a shop in the UK had a "No 1" up for $15k BIN on eBay for a while a couple weeks ago when there were 5 Bats 1s on the bay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140114466056

 

And, the beat-to-hell copy in the May Heritage auction was also a "No 1":

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=824&Lot_No=41072&src=pr#Photo

 

It'd be interesting to see numbers on which versions of these books are out there in what ratios.

 

For the record, my current Bats 1 (bought from Adam/Filter) is a "No .1":

http://flickr.com/photos/welborn/494531103/

 

--James

 

Here's my "No 1", I picked it up on Ebay about 6 months ago.

 

[Straw-Man]

I'm not sure the market has really completely caught on yet, however. Look at Superman 1 - There you have three different, much better documented printings, with the first printing easily identifiable and yet no one makes any distinction between them - I don't think CGC even notes it on the label. Yet if it were Zap #1 or TMNT #1 they would - that makes no sense to me.

 

I guess the rationale behind this is that when it comes to the GA books, all of the printings are tough to find which makes them all expensive. With respect to the Modern reprints, there is a definite difference between the first print which is usually much tougher to find than the subsequent reprints and priced accordingly.

 

Without a doubt though, the first print for a GA book should still be worth more money. But then again, I also feel that OS certainly does not have enough breakouts for the GA books in general in comparison to the SA and BA listings.

 

One that always gets me is the Batman #1 printings. The first, it seems, had "No 1" on the cover, and the second had "No .1" (space where it looks like it is on the cover)

 

One of my personal grails is a "No 1" Batman. Someone on here had a bound edition from Bob Kane's estate, which had Bats 1-5 or so in it. The #1 there was a "first printing" (what I'm calling it for lack of a better term).

 

Also, a shop in the UK had a "No 1" up for $15k BIN on eBay for a while a couple weeks ago when there were 5 Bats 1s on the bay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140114466056

 

And, the beat-to-hell copy in the May Heritage auction was also a "No 1":

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=824&Lot_No=41072&src=pr#Photo

 

It'd be interesting to see numbers on which versions of these books are out there in what ratios.

 

For the record, my current Bats 1 (bought from Adam/Filter) is a "No .1":

http://flickr.com/photos/welborn/494531103/

 

--James

 

Here's my "No 1", I picked it up on Ebay about 6 months ago.

 

 

 

nicely done Mike!

[spoonerism]

For the record, my current Bats 1 (bought from Adam/Filter) is a "No .1":

http://flickr.com/photos/welborn/494531103/

 

Here's my "No 1", I picked it up on Ebay about 6 months ago.

 

 

Nice! I'm jealous!

 

Did you know at the time that it was a "no dot" Bats? Do you also own a dotted version?

 

I'm only consoled by the fact that mine has a signed sketch by Bob Kane on the back cover.

 

[mikephoen]

Yeah, I picked it up because it was the "No 1". I have a "No .1" as well. I guess I always was a bit of a completist at heart

 

And since you asked, here is my "No .1"

 

[skybolt]

I'm not sure the market has really completely caught on yet, however. Look at Superman 1 - There you have three different, much better documented printings, with the first printing easily identifiable and yet no one makes any distinction between them - I don't think CGC even notes it on the label. Yet if it were Zap #1 or TMNT #1 they would - that makes no sense to me.

 

I guess the rationale behind this is that when it comes to the GA books, all of the printings are tough to find which makes them all expensive. With respect to the Modern reprints, there is a definite difference between the first print which is usually much tougher to find than the subsequent reprints and priced accordingly.

 

Without a doubt though, the first print for a GA book should still be worth more money. But then again, I also feel that OS certainly does not have enough breakouts for the GA books in general in comparison to the SA and BA listings.

 

One that always gets me is the Batman #1 printings. The first, it seems, had "No 1" on the cover, and the second had "No .1" (space where it looks like it is on the cover)

 

One of my personal grails is a "No 1" Batman. Someone on here had a bound edition from Bob Kane's estate, which had Bats 1-5 or so in it. The #1 there was a "first printing" (what I'm calling it for lack of a better term).

 

Also, a shop in the UK had a "No 1" up for $15k BIN on eBay for a while a couple weeks ago when there were 5 Bats 1s on the bay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140114466056

 

And, the beat-to-hell copy in the May Heritage auction was also a "No 1":

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=824&Lot_No=41072&src=pr#Photo

 

It'd be interesting to see numbers on which versions of these books are out there in what ratios.

 

For the record, my current Bats 1 (bought from Adam/Filter) is a "No .1":

http://flickr.com/photos/welborn/494531103/

 

--James

 

Here's my "No 1", I picked it up on Ebay about 6 months ago.

 

 

Fantastic!!

[G.A.tor]

hello all...

I am a batman kind of guy...and, in the past 12 months, I have owned 5 Batman #1's....2 were the no "." version, and 3 are the period version...but, in a different thread, I think we estimated that only about 5% of the known sold copies (i.e. ebay, heritage, metro, this boards owners, etc) were of the no period cover...neat stuff, no doubt about it...

rick

[Crowzilla]

Thanks to Mark posting an old link to the Geppi Museum, I saw this picture of the Marvel #1 there again - much larger gap between the circle and the Nov stamp (in fact from this angle it almost looks like part of the stamp is cut off.