comicwiz

Member: Seasoned Veteran
  • Content Count

    13,370
  • Joined

7 Followers

About comicwiz

  • Boards Title
    TOTAL NEWBIE
  • Birthday 06/05/1971

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    IT Consultant
  • Location
    Toronto

Recent Profile Visitors

2,445 profile views
  1. If you collected comics, then you know the dangers of keeping comics in yellowed polypropelene bags. Anyone that's bought a collection knows as soon as the bags show any yellowing, they need to be rebagged. IF people didn't know this, I'm telling you now not to keep the comics in those bags because it's no longer a stable archival environment to store your comics. The general rule with plastics is the softer the plastic (think shower curtain) the more chemicals needed to make that plastic pliable/soft. The harder the plastic, the less chemicals. The more chemicals used, the more possibility of destabilizing off-gassing and/or a reaction to occur between one or more of those chemicals. Soft plastic Star Cases should be checked regularly. Examine them under natural light if possible. I generally use a comparison clear clamshell blister or something close to the plastic of a Star Case to compare. This is especially important because people usually buy Star Cases in quantity, so you need a clear plastic as a point of reference to really notice the slightest hint of yellowing. And usually when there's even the slightest hint of it, it's a sign of a chemical reaction occurring. That destablized state is either being caused by the combination of the acids in the cardstock and chemicals used to produce the blister being trapped inside that case, and just like the yellowing poly bag, you should remove the MOC from those soft cases once you see any yellowing in the plastic case. Is it possible to safely store an MOC in a soft case? I would say yes, but again this goes back to make sure you catch it before they begin to yellow. iIt's not to say that hard plastic acylic cases don't yellow, but you do have option of going with UV protected acrylic. Those will last longer and are a safer choice from a conservation standpoint. Of course this is a suggestion, not one I'm paid to provide, nor am I sponsored by any company to share this information with collectors, but I can assure you that it is a real cause for concern and the reason why I won't store any of my MOC's in soft cases.
  2. Not from the UK, but it's the no. assigned to the helicopter - i.e. Corgi Junior Spider-Man Helicopter #75.
  3. The cost/benefit of submitting wouldn't make economic sense, unless these would grade 80 or higher. The yellowed blister is also going to cause them to put a Y-designation on the grade, which is something collectors shun. The ESB wave tend to be hit and miss for yellow, but I know even with my 31 Back A and B run, my two Bossks were the only ones that had started yellowing. I'm of the opinion that the soft plastic Star Cases accelerate it so unfortunately not much you can do now except to put them in acrylic hoping to slow them down. I don't keep any of my MOC's in the soft cases anymore because of it, and have begun using them as protection during shipping instead. It's all acrylic cases for me, and has been for quite some time now.
  4. I would just get sliding bottom acrylic cases for these. They will do just as good a job at preserving/protecting. Iain of GW Acrylic USA could help you. If that Bossk is a 31 Back A, it is a difficult debut card for that character. Maybe post a photo of the back of the card and I can confirm for you. I personally wouldn't recommend getting these graded. AFA is the only grader I would trust, at least in the USA. UKG is also reputable, but they are out in the UK. Don't even think of grading with any other company. The bowing on the card is something you should be able to address by getting a sliding bottom case. Just make sure you slide that side with the bowing carefully. One trick that's used is to use a sheet of paper as a buffer between the cardback and the side rail of the case so it doesn't scratch the packaging art when you slide the MOC in the case.
  5. Just when you think you've seen all that is out there to see, IRWIN Toys continues to surprise us all. I give you the IRWIN VoltronⅠMini Warrior/ Mini Guerrier (No. 70003). This was a previously unknown to exist MOC, and not just unknown to me, but many collectors who I consider leading Canadian toy and Super Robot experts. This Dairugger arrived in the mail today and I couldn't be more stoked to add it to my Canadian IRWIN Voltron run.
  6. I think it gets even more complicated (and possibly even divisive within the ranks of high end collectors/customers) by the very fact that a grader shouldn't assume the position as arbiter of determining which service should be performed on a comic if it's something being requested by a paying customer. I can frown all day knowing CGC now has a 'fixer' within it's own company that they get to grade to their benefit, and potentially even rewards that work higher than someone performing the same work external to their operations, but for every person like me, there's maybe 100 that it makes happy that CGC and other third-party's perform this service. Following this to the path of logical conclusion, defining a practice causing a detriment to the hobby is not as easy to explain or define when a practice is fine with one collector, and not with another. I've always felt that leafcasting is a good counterpoint to the whole issue with IGB and CGC's claim they couldn't detect where the resto started and ended. I wouldn't do leafcasting on any book for the same reason, and yet, there are paying customers who do want it. Me even stating this on a public message board with members here who might not only perform such work, but have possibly ordered it, might be viewed as an affront to their work and preferences, so imagine when you start to look at the interference of not allowing an entity to carry out their service and even possibly have them blacklisted from having their work sold at a consignment or auction house. I do believe if you explain it from this viewpoint, the IGB argument at the very least seems reasonable, and not entirely without merit.
  7. Most of the time it's monetized as a service cost offset. You can go with hosting company X who don't use this dynamic linking at full cost, or with hosting company XYZ who do, but provide the site hosting at a reduced price point.
  8. If this were true, then CGC has to find a solution to whoever is forcing feeBay links to function they way they do whenever anyone types that dastardly site. To say nothing of the fact that at any given time, if an exploit were to occur from the scripting this site uses, it could cause a number of issues for its members here. The only time I've seen this sort of thing happen is if there's some agreement with the hosting company to generate dynamic links from content (specific keywords) generated by users on a forum site. Some sites turn this off when users login, I came up with feeBay just so I wouldn't participate in any of this nonsense. Seems like an unusual quip, but I have seen this become a scripting nightmare after a site exploit occurred.
  9. Maybe it's the way it's worded, and newspapers got into a whole heap of trouble over this when a reporter wanted to cover an important community story that would make one of their advertisers look bad. If you are an advertiser, your conduct shouldn't put yourself at odds with a simple communal function of keeping checks on missteps and bad practices. More specifically, there has been a history on these boards of a certain advertiser having content pulled because it made them look bad. The moment you do this as a site host is the moment you abandon your impartiality, to say nothing of the fact that as it stands, the site hosts principle business is supposedly contingent on impartiality, so it strains the community/consumer and/or board members perception and validity of such claims when the site host complies and removes such content (likely at the request of the paid advertiser).
  10. Had a really rough stretch, very overwhelmed with kids return to school planning. Was unpopular for days with my oldest for making the call to do remote learning. Things got better and then I got a call that hit me hard. One of my oldest friends passed unexpectedly. I've been in a fog ever since. Then I see a tag from a FB friend and I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw what was being listed. It's taken a lot of back and forth over the last 18 hours or so but I believe I just sealed the deal. This is something I never even knew existed, furthers my Voltron run, and was the first thing this week that I was able to concentrate on with all that's happened. I'll return to share pics when I have it in hand. Stay safe everyone!
  11. Sorry to hear. My comic wasn't damaged by their case. It was returned to me far lower in grade (8.0) than I had sent it, and it should have at least graded a 9.4, with a good shot at a 9.6. To give you some indication on what that would have meant, at the time, a 9.2 of that book was being offered to me at $1000, so when I finally found this comic in the condition it was in, I was over the moon to say the least. When I called to get the graders notes to understand what had happened to have gotten such a low grade, the person mentioned "coaster ring" on front cover. I asked him what that is, and he told me it's a stain from putting a beverage bottle, can or cup that soils the cover and leaves a ring stain. I knew immediately something had happened with the book while in their care. A long-standing and reputable boardie here, who has also participated in this thread, knows what I'm saying is exactly what happened, and he saw and handled the book before it was submitted,and his words to my recollection were along the lines of "I would have to have had a stroke or something similar not to have noticed that stain before sending it in."
  12. Full stop for me. There were other factors, but the treatment I got was the last straw. The very person who accused me of sending the book in that way had also been quite good at calling me on the phone asking for my help in the past with submissions. I never once expected anything in return, certainly not any preferential treatment, but to accuse me of sending a book that way meant he never really gave a mess about me, or the fact I would always put down whatever I was doing to at the very least offer an opinion, or that he had enough respect for me to believe I wouldn't make such a thing up. It was all about brooming my concerns to the curb. Happened 12 years ago and I still haven't found a replacement. I've already said my piece on this whole situation here, and I'll admit I can't even get past the first few pages because his flippant attitude is off-putting. But as someone that has been a member here as long as I have, I would just caution everyone here to take some of the things being said by him as having happened to others. The scans I had were no help, CGC already made up their mind, and I was SOL the moment I handed over my book and trusted them with my property. I would have loved to have been given the benefit of the doubt or even an apology, but that would have meant admitting they messed up, and that's something they won't ever admit.
  13. You're assuming a lot here. Primarily that CGC gives a mess. The fact pattern of tone deafness over a wide range of issues relating to their slab causing undue damage over the years should be evidence enough. However when they damaged one of my books, I was pretty much told I sent it in that way. There was no change in process, they denied the problem could have ever happened at their place of business. I really don't know who this Dylan character is outside of the posts made on these boards about his past conduct and practices, however it sounds like CGC have already kicked him and his grievances to the curb. Looks like business as usual to me.
  14. Do you have two-step authentication? I'd highly recommend it. A few years back, I did a deal with someone that seemed a bit off. I can't remember why exactly, but the next morning, I just wanted to double-check the payment they had sent. I logged out. As I'm getting ready to drive my kids to school I see a notification that a payment for my entire balance (a significant amount of money) had been sent to someone I didn't authorize or know. I'm a fairly tech savvy person, have AV installed on all my computers, so if any keypad logging happened, it occurred while I was on PayPal's site (and I told them this much). Anyhow, I get on the phone with PayPal, I explain someone cleaned out my account, and they began going down the road of putting the blame on me. I asked the person if he could check the IP log on my account activity within the timeframe this all happened, from the point I first logged-in, to the transfer, and my second attempt to examine what happened. There was no more than a 10 minute gap between all three of these login incidents. I then ask him what the IP location was of the second login (where the transfer was made) and the CS said it is in Spain. I then explained that it would be physically impossible for me to be in location seven thousand miles away in a matter of minutes, and return home in Canada all within 10 minutes. I then asked the person to run a trace on that IP address and all I heard was "oh my - ok sir, I see what you mean, don't worry we will refund you this money." The CS wouldn't tell me, but my impression is this person would have hacked dozens, possibly hundreds of accounts on PayPal's network, and they wouldn't have known anything about it unless I told them to run this check. It was at this time that I explained that no person (particularly in the short time these attacks took place) could act on key-logging that quickly, and that it had to be some vulnerability exposed on their network that was allowing his person to access accounts in this manner. They didn't acknowledge it as an issue, but at that point I was just relieved they returned my money. Again, I highly recommend the two-step and appreciate the heads-up. I definitely have reason to be concerned with PayPal beyond the balance I keep, since they more recently strongarmed me to provide sensitive personal information or hold my money hostage. I eventually had to relent to the ultimatum, and I know who ordered it, so hearing stuff like this (including my experience) makes me constantly unnerved about a potential privacy breach, and unfortunately PayPal's lax attitude doesn't inspire confidence I'd hear about it from them.
  15. Panosh Place had taken this concept at least to the stages of prototype for photography, as is shown in these photos on Greg Tyler's website taken from the 1986 Toy Fair catalogue. The castle from the '86 PP line was not as developed as the conceptual drawing you have for this later line. The figures on Greg's site were unproduced and a FB friend found them while picking in a warehouse of prototypes in a box marked "crash test dummies." He contacted me knowing I was fond of Voltron, and I ID'd pretty much all the molds and hardcopy parts for him. What happened from that point is a bit of a sore spot for me because he had asked me to help him find someone to sell them to, I put him in contact with two people (Greg being one of them). The other person who expressed the most interest (not Greg) was keen on them, but my friend was asking top, top, top market on these, and basing them on other toy line values, which didn't in my estimation climatize well to the Voltron market. So while I was asked by my friend to keep this on the down low, and I did want a few pieces for myself, what ended-up happening is that this individual I introduced him to went around me, got a group of people to help him acquire the whole collection, and then I ended-up finding out about this when they began sharing pictures of their acquisitions. I have helped by putting buyers into contact with frriends more times than I could count, never once taking a cent from any of those deals (and there is a member on these boards who can attest to this when I helped him sell a set of Sears ESB shrinkwrapped MOC's) but this was one of the only time I was brushed to the sidelines in this manner. To say I wasn't a fan of how it all went down would be an understatement, and I'm not posting this for sour grapes, but because I had warned my friend that one of the suggestions made to me early on by this individual was that he was thinking of using the molds to recast some of these figures for the collector market as a possible way to offset the acquisition costs of the prototypes and molds, and I told him that was a bad idea. Which is very likely why he went around me. I also warned my friend about this, but you know how things go, money always seems to cloud people's judgment. In the last month, I've caught this person now twice promoting in Volton FB groups that he's releasing one of the recasts, and I let my FB friend know. It is what it is, and I sometimes wonder if I had just hibernated my helpful nature more, perhaps I wouldn't let things like this bite me in butt like they do sometimes.