• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About 01TheDude

  • Boards Title
  • Birthday December 24

Personal Information

Recent Profile Visitors

2,386 profile views
  1. This triggered a memory for me-- as my mom was really into going to garage sales. We lived in the south suburbs of Chicago and about once a month, she would take me with her. Every now and then I would find some comics worth buying. It is kind of a happy childhood memory but also a sad one for me -- because she continued going to garage sales throughout her life and was doing so (accompanied by my grandmother) on the day she died-- leaving a garage sale and getting killed in a car wreck not even a mile from my folks house in Tampa. I was only 27 at the time. It was pretty rough - miss her all the time.
  2. Truth be told-- whether the OP was serious or just having fun-- I think someone could possible put a reasonable formula together but the effort involved would most likely be a waste of time. As many have said-- the book is worth what someone will pay for it.
  3. My dad has always been a science fiction fan -- or at least a reader, if not so much the movies. He used to subscribe to several Sci Fi digests. I don't recall my mom ever being against anything comics related. She was always an avid reader of books so she probably just felt they were good to read. Then again-- none of the comics back then (mid 1970s) were too crazy with the adult themed covers of oversized tatas-- save maybe the covers of the magazines like Dracula and Savage Tales. Not that it mattered -- my dad also had an extensive Playboy collection under the sink in the bathroom.
  4. Did it occur to you that I am also "arguing" as an exercise in fun? I suppose that would be impossible. I am always serious. Or are you defending them all in fun as well? This whole thread has gone to the dogs.
  5. I am perhaps-- but saying something is a rule is offensive to me. The thread starts off like they are trying to impress upon us some universal truth but almost none of the variables seem to be well thought out, and the evaluation methods are based on almost no comparable data points. If it was meant to be all for fun -- great. Have a good time. I find the whole premise a waste of time if the OP has decided to go that route.
  6. way to completely ignore anything I wrote in regards to your slipshod methods and answer with a link. I suppose that is the appropriate response based on the general lack of investment you made in coming up with some bogus rule based on a sample size of 1 and without any clear parameters. "Hey look-- my model based on this situation exactly fits that situation! Clearly a rule can be ascertained from that which generally applies to anything remotely similar- or even totally different. And if it doesn't fit-- I will create another rule that is based on sample two that fits exactly to sample 2." I am not saying that a rule cannot be constructed-- but I find your assumptions and general lack of effort in building it faulty.
  7. at best, I would call them Hypothesis 31 or Hypothesis 13 -- since they are not even close to being proven out to be a rule of any kind. Your initial "rule 31" was modeled to fit your current numbers. I just don't see any straight forward or even similar analysis at work here-- with the CGC grades being at some point 2.5 or 3.5 (and using those to average out a price for a 3.0) and then throwing in a 7.0 and even a 9.8 at various points as you expanded on your thoughts to other examples. Of course-- it didn't help when you made the typo using More Fun #1 instead of #31- but I eventually got past that figuring out what you were trying to say. If you had approached this as a study first of similar grades, their general values, collected data to get a general average that fits a sample size larger than 1 preview/key and done a little more leg work in general since everyone understands that the number of books on the CGC census can vary for a number of reasons. I don't know-- the whole thing is a mess. It has the potential to be developed into a viable equation but the assumptions are wildly random in some cases. While an interesting read, from a math or analysis standpoint- the only case that might hold water is for the specific books used in your "Rule 31" example itself. I would replace some of the valuations and look at this from a grade perspective perhaps using guide books or some other resource. It is a much more complicated equation that would seem to need a larger sample size to give a meaningful approximation. But in the end-- even if a perfected formula could be created - does any of this actually yield something useful in the end? I am doubting that as well. A more modern example might be to compare relevant bronze age values for books that had the IH 181 ads in them and that impact. Those are actually touted by sellers on ebay as something significant when most of us would agree that those ads are nothing more than noteworthy at best.
  8. I would bet that BUTM spelled Steranko's name correctly and whoever did the typesetting/whatever made the spelling error. Neat article though- thanks for sharing.
  9. to be fair-- he did not come up with some clever saying using a word like empathy. More like he called us a-holes like this individual_without_enough_empathys
  10. welcome to the Dallas Comic-cans, swambosis
  11. 3.0 for the guy and calling him a dunce? Really? That book came out in 1949. The house they appear to live in has very high ceilings-- like a mansion. His TV-- remember, this 1949 - is enormous and he has it right next to the bed watching baseball. Let's n ot forget that he landed this chick you are so enamored with -- who isn't leaving her sugar daddy-- but is upset that he isn't giving her his full attention. That is an Alpha Male there -- not a dunce-- that is a man who gets whatever he wants in life. There is no expiration date on hopping into her bed and going to town during a commercial break. The only thing he is missing is a Dagwood style sammich! Just ask George if that guy has it made!
  12. I feel like I just did when I tried to do an image search on F_ _ TING -- ouch-- don't go there, that was disturbing. You half expect them to pull a rabbit out of there or something. Yeesh!
  13. Lighten up, Francis MCS said they would waive the restocking fee. Nope-- not good enough for you. The fact that they have one is OUTRAGEOUS (throws hands in air like a lunatic) to you apparently. You do need to stop. You started by admitting you made a mistake and then went on a rampage over 3 bucks. C'mon man-- be reasonable for one and for two-- own your mistakes and quit making this about the people on this message board or even MCS. You had a bad day-- let it go. Remember-- this is over THREE DOLLARS. Nothing that insignificant should ever make you this upset. Take a break and come back when you cool off. That is my advice. Not that you are here anymore to read it since you left. .