8/30/2019
Topic:
Did JIM and Thor comics suddenly drop in price?
stephanm
|
Ron, I was wondering about the same thing.
And, honestly, can't believe that's right. I have no skin in the game (I should be so lucky owning JiM 83....), but that seems very odd.
By now, a few days later, it's up to 42k again, so the 27.5k was obviously an error.
But even 42k, at a bit over half what it was a week ago, is too low.
Thor might not be ultra-hot at the moment, but the films keep coming and he's a cornerstone of the Marvel Universe, both comics and cinematic.
It might drop by 10% not by more than 40%...
It's a key issue, 1st and origin Thor, the third/fourth Marvel superhero after the FF and the Hulk (it came out simultaneously with Spidey's first appearance in Amazing Fantasy 15)(OK, there's Ant Man, but he wasn't in costume until a month after this).
And bear in mind this is the value for a 9.4. That is exceedingly rare. There are only 12 copies in the CGC census in 9.4 or better (ten 9.4 and two in 9.6). Admittedly that's slabbed. But I doubt there are many (if any) raw 9.4s of such a key in existence (also, amusingly, CPG lists the same book as 170,000 graded in 9.4. Hmm, four times the raw value.... can't be right...)
Another pet peeve of mine are the odd amounts CPG has started listing about two years ago.
JiM 83's 9.4 value is, supposedly, $42,464...
Aha... so not 42,463, or 42,465, -- but precisely 42,464...???
This makes CPG's pricing look unprofessional. At these stratospheric heights, the prices (certainly of a cornerstone value like the Near Mint price) should be listed in round thousands (or at least hundreds). Anything else is obviously just false precision.
Another odd book is JiM 112.
At the same time as the JiM 83 price drop it collapsed from $2,000 to $438 (again, why not $440 or $430?).
This is a key, an early Thor/Hulk battle, with an iconic cover.
It can't have dropped overnight by 78% (!)
Granted, the 2,000 might have been overly optimistic (as are many of your early Thors, by the way. I think most are overpriced by about 20%), but the extent of the drop must be an error.
It is now priced almost equal to the two surrounding (non-key) issues, 111 and 113, at $420 each.
No way would issues with Mr Hyde/Cobra, respectively the Grey Gargoyle, fetch roughly the same as an early Hulk battle.
edited by stephanm on 8/30/2019 |
8/30/2019
Topic:
Did JIM and Thor comics suddenly drop in price?
stephanm
|
And on further checking Heritage, I realized that there are many more recent sales than I had at first spotted, including these (the only ones at levels comparable to 9.4):
a 9.0, just four weeks ago, for $60,000
a 9.0 in February for 66,000
a 9.4 in February for 144,000
So, yes, there might be a slight downward trajectory -- the 9.0 sale in August was 9% below the one in February.
But, sorry, no way that 42,000 for 9.4 (which should be substantially higher than a 9.0) can be even remotely correct...
(by the way, my follow-up post came up as "guest" instead of "stephanm". But I remain signed in... odd...)
edited by stephanm on 8/30/2019 |
12/2/2019
Topic:
Organizing by Countries
stephanm
|
Ronbatman wrote:
This change is going to take a long time to implement because it moves so many issues and requires research.
We are basing our data on where the book is sold. So if a book was printed in the US and shipped to the British market with Pence on the cover. It will be listed as a British book. The same applies to books printed in Canada but sold in the US. That would be a US book. Canadian price variants will now be listed under the Canadian title.
Ron, are you sure treating the Pence issues (and the Candian price variants) in the way you describe is really
(a) the correct way to do it?
(b) and a good use of your team's time (given that you state it's a mountain of work)?
After all, the Pence variants (and the Canadian variants) are totally identical, printed off the same printing presses. The interior pages are 100% identical, with the same American adds etc. -- you could not tell coverless books apart. And the covers only differ in the price (and sometimes other minor text alterations). The publisher was Marvel US (it would have gone through a local agent for shipping etc., but that's not the same as having a UK publisher).
In fact, at the same time the Pence variants of the original books were sold in the UK, "real" UK versions were being sold in the UK in parallel -- these were specifically made for the Bristish market, usually reprinting US book a in a completely different way, usually combining different heroes, different paper, different adds, sometimes in b&w (and later even having their own original stories, like the first Captain Britain comics, before he made it to the US in Marvel Team Up 65).
The latter book are of course British books.
The price variants, by contrast, are, to my mind, just that - price variants. |
6/15/2020
Topic:
Favourite Marvel Silver Age Covers
stephanm
|
What are your favorite Marvel SA Covers?
I'm starting off with these three beauties (chosen for visual impact, not necessarily historical importance, although FF 49 is no slouch in that regard, either).
Next on my list would be Avengers 57 (Vision), but sadly I don't own that one...
 |
6/15/2020
Topic:
Favourite Marvel Silver Age Covers
stephanm
|
PS ... on reflections, seems I really like giant super villain hands... ;-) |
7/5/2020
Topic:
Favourite Marvel Silver Age Covers
stephanm
|
To bring this back on topic ;-) .... by Marvel SA Age covers I meant FF1 until the end of the 60s.
BUT, Rustyauger and Defiant, your monster TTA/TOS covers are awesome, I'll give you that.
And always interesting to see one of these "what is SA" (or GA? or BA?) discussions. Although ultimately that'll always be a matter of personal taste, because these "Ages" are fluent. |
12/3/2020
Topic:
Marvel VS DC!
stephanm
|
Marvel or DC... hmmm...
At first glance (and probably second), Marvel.
Just looking at my collection, almost 6000 Marvels, and a little over 2000 DCs ... seems obvious ...
And my first and ongoing love are Silver Age Marvels. Although I wasn't around to read them when they were new, the Marvels being published in my native Germany in the 1970s were mostly reprints of the 60s books.
Nothing will ever beat my youthful excitement over the Galactus saga, or the Vision's first appearance, or Pharao Rama-Tut, who became Kang, or the young X-Men in the Danger Room, or those Spider-Man issues by Ditko then Romita (although I read them the other way round, because when I started collecting, there were the Romita issues, and only afterwards I got the back issues). A bit later, actually in a fanzine, I first saw Buscema's Conan (OK, Bronze Age now...) from the Savage Sword mags (and later Barry Smith, in a way-too-small paperback edition, but wonderful nonetheless).
But in later decades it becomes less clear cut. I think the 70s still belong to Marvel, with the aforementioned Conans, and the "cosmic" books, usually by Jim Starlin etc.
But DC was really catching up, not least through Neal Adam's stunning Batman books, and other masterpieces (OK, he started in the Silver Age, but I'd count him as the master of the early Bronze Age). The Englehart/Marshall Rogers Detective Comics run was also a highlight.
Early 80s clearly belong to Marvel, with John Byrne towering over everything (chiefly his X-Men run of course, but pretty much everything else, too), Miller's Daredevil run, Simonson's Thor.
But then things changed. First Byrne and Miller switched to DC. Of the big events, I liked Crisis much more than Secret Wars (probably because of George Perez)
And then, crucially, the British writers at DC/Vertigo created, to my mind, the best (kind of...) superhero comics of all time. As I read them in my late teens, early twenties, they might not have created the childlike excitement of the Silver Age Marvels, but the quality of writing was beyond anything seen before.
Moore's Swamp Thing run! Then, of course, Watchmen, towering over everything before or since. Gaiman's astounding Sandman. To a lesser degree, Morrison's Doom Patrol. I think Marvel had nothing remotely comparable (the Macfarlane Spider-Man run, some decent Epic stuff etc., but not the regular high quality of the Karen Berger era at DC/Vertigo).
So second half 80s and early 90s, I'd give to DC.
Afterwards I stopped reading regularly, but from what I have read (usually digitally -- since comics paper became more glossy, I feel like I might just as well read them on my iPad. I loved the pulpy paper of old...), the two publishers have become pretty indistinguishable in quality (which is generally very high, arguably higher than in my favorite eras, but lacking that sense of wonder...) |
4/30/2021
Topic:
New Personalized Gains and Drops
stephanm
|
In principle, nice. I like it. Yet on the overall gains and drops, your recently, yet again, dropped the number of recent changes that Bronze member can see, from from 20 to 10. Fair enough, you want to give special benefits to paying members. I get it it. But wouldn't the way to do so be to enhance the benefits to Silver and Gold members, not to reduce them for Bronze members? Yes, we don't pay cash, but you benefit through ad revenue (I noticed that adds are getting more intrusive. Fine, you have to make ends meet, but at least keep existing benefits). I bet Bronze members are the vast majority. |
5/1/2021
Topic:
New Personalized Gains and Drops
stephanm
|
Perfectly true, Ron. As a free member, I accept that you can do what you want. Also, I probably should not have responded to this thread, which was indeed about announcing a new cool benefit for silver and gold members, and instead. I should have made my point in a separate thread. That said, as it happened at roughly the same time, and was about a closely related issue, it seemed a fitting place.
I don't want to complain too much. You do provide a great service. But as your advertising revenue will be linked to the total number of active users, no doubt we Bronze members also add to the bottom line. And decreasing the number of "recent value changes" we can see presumably does not cut your costs (I would assume that whether you show 50 (as was the case until a while ago) or 20 (until last week) or 10 (as of now) is only a setting in the software).
My point was that while I applaud the fact that you add benefits for paying members (and I understand that these are meant to increase the attractiveness for Silver and Gold members only), I thought it felt a little mean to at the same time decrease benefits for Bronze members.
But it's your show... and as I said, I agree with you that this site does provide a fine service for ALL members. |
5/4/2021
Topic:
New Personalized Gains and Drops
stephanm
|
Ok, thanks :-) |
10/26/2022
Topic:
TTA 35 -- question re potential PGX typo
stephanm
|
Hi,
I just won (well, remains to be seen if it's a "win" ;-) Tales to Astonish 35 in an auction.
A PGX graded 3.5, for EUR 450 (which is pretty exactly US$ 450 these days).
If it were a 3.5, I suppose it's an excellent price.
I very much doubt it a 3.5, though -- in the photos the spine looks terribly distressed.
(I attach the three photos the seller put online for the auction -- I hope they are visible, as I have limited experience posting photos on the Forum. (That stuff about the <br/><img src=)
Apart from the spine problems, it really does look like a 3.5, but severe spine damage is a serious thing.
But I was aware of that, and even if it turns out to be a 3.0 (or even a 2.5) I think it's an OK deal.
Any comments welcome (also whether I should crack the case -- I am not a fan of slabs anyway, as I like to read (and look at) my comics, PGX doesn't add much in terms of value anyway, and I'd rather know whether there are any hidden horrors in this supposed 3.5, for example a loose cover)
But my main question is the following:
PGX put an issue date of "10/72" on their label.
TTA 35 is more than ten years older than that, of course -- 9/62
The book looks totally like the original 1962 version, and I have never heard of a a 1972 reprint of the issue, so I am reasonably relaxed about it and assume it is just a typo by PGX.
Does anyone on the forum have any experience with similar label errors by PGX? (seems like a silly error to make. If it were just the year, or just the month that's off -- but two errors?)
Thanks in advance for any advice/feedback!
Stephan |
10/27/2022
Topic:
TTA 35 -- question re potential PGX typo
stephanm
|
Thanks, Aaron -- much appreciated. Pretty much as I thought.
One positive update, however.
Overnight I've written to PGX, with little hope for a response (having read elsewhere that their response times are long to non-existent)
To my pleasant surprise I got a super-quick and super-friendly response from a lady called Collette, who confirmed that the release date on the label must be an error, she apologized, and offered a free relabeling (and re-casing) PLUS a complimentary free grading of a book of my choice (which I could send together with the TTA 35)
Not sure if I'll do it, as I'm based in Germany and the shipping is super expensive and takes ages.
But I thought it was a really nice response and changed a lot of my misgivings about PGX.
Maybe they are really getting their act together ... |
10/28/2022
Topic:
TTA 35 -- question re potential PGX typo
stephanm
|
Thanks, Rixmaxx ...
Hmm, I'm torn. I take your point about value (although value is secondary, really, as it's for my collection).
Plus, I've never really seen the point of having low grade books (unless it's Action Comics 1 or so) slabbed.
If it wasn't for the obviously dodgy spine, I almost certainly would crack it.
I'm just concerned that the book might be so fragile that cracking the case and putting it in a standard bag will result in a detached cover...
Ah well, maybe I'll wait for the moment.
I can crack it later, but not "un-crack" it ... ;-)
edited by stephanm on 10/28/2022 |
10/30/2022
Topic:
TTA 35 -- question re potential PGX typo
stephanm
|
Congrats on your TTA 27. Looks really nice! Impossible to
really tell from one photo, but maybe a 5.0?
Yes, like you I never had any of my books slabbed (about
1000 SA, a little under 2000 70s BA, and about 7000 80s and early 90s).
I‘ve only bought 3 slabs, simply because they were available
and the price was right. A JIM 109 (CGC 3.5) which I promptly cracked and a TOS
59 (CGC 6.5) which I wanted to crack and didn’t, because, admittedly, it looked
rather pretty in its case (presented much better than 6.5). I ended up buying a
lower grade TOS 59 as a reading copy, LOL. And swore never to buy slabs again
and broke the promise to myself with the aforementioned TTA 35 just now :-I
As for the paper quality of the TTA 35, I don’t have the
graders notes yet, but have asked PGX. Let‘s see… |
11/7/2022
Topic:
TTA 35 -- question re potential PGX typo
stephanm
|
Thanks :-)
It's definitely for my own collection, not for resale,
and after thinking it through and listening to everyone's helpful
suggestions, I have decided to keep it
slabbed.
Normally I would crack the case for a low grade book,
but:
a. TTA 35 is one
of the priciest books I own, and
protection is a factor (not least because of the damaged spine)
b. it is not
the most exciting book inside (it is nice
Kirby art, but far from his his greatest accomplishment. The cover is
its best feature.) and I have a number of reprints to read the story.
c. because it's a pretty recent PGX case (2018), it
really presents well in the case (not much different from a CGC).
Thanks, all!
Stephan |
