short_box-migration

Anyone know?

Smarty pants. But yes, you could call weak 9.8s "9.7" And eventually....they will. Not weak books just weak GRADERS. Once again you will never see 9.7 or 9.5, unless your that stupid company called Wizard. When the 9.7s and 9.5s come out...ignore Wiztard, that has nothing to do with this....will you come back and say "ok, RMA was right"....? (And whether it's a weak book, or weak graders, the end result is still the same.) It doesn;t make sense to break down the grading scale anymore. It's not going to happen. The book is the same the end result is determined by the grader. Sure, it doesn't make sense to you. It doesn't make sense to a lot of people. But that doesn't mean it doesn't make sense to the market...especially with the vast differences paid between the uber grades. MS61, MS62, MS64...those grades didn't make sense to a lot of people, either. Look, CGC didn't really HAVE to have a 9.9, did they? I mean, 9.8 and 10 would have worked fine, right....? So why do they have a 9.9? And wouldn't a 9.7 alleviate some of the problems with cracking and resubbing, hoping for 9.8s? The one difference is that 9.8 and below did correlate to the traditional OS grading designations. 9.9 is the only creation off the grading scale. Did Overstreet use both Split Grades and the +/- Grades before CGC showed up? (Haven't bought one in a long time).

Ha...learned something new. That makes the whole ped thing more interesting and impressive. That would work as well, so instead of being a ped he gets recognized for this amazing collection and all the books get a bump because of the way he collected over a period of time. what kind of numbers are we talking about? How many 9.9's make an amazing collection? Oh and a side note did the seller get his check yet? Danny "From the Collection of ___________________" designations are not given. They are paid for. That's pathetic. That's CGC.

It'd be worth even more if Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow hadn't tanked

Anyone else a member of the "Showcase # 22 signed by Gil Kane and Julius Schwartz" club? "Autograph on the cover" haters need not apply.

That image is old. I think it was in Comic Book Artist around 2003?

Ian and Arnold Blumberg used to go at it regarding "fixing" Overstreet: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=45806&Number=848515#Post848515

Don't forget my buddy Murph. He retired his first ID at 10,000 posts. He actually posted with his current ID yesterday.

06/29/02 03:48 PM, ya spotty bahstad!

Well it's not the art. I checked this one out after reading all the hype, and the art is horrible. I was going to buy a copy of #2 but put it back on the shelf.