valiantman

Mona Lisa was trimmed Would it be worth more if it wasn't?

I can't beat a CGC 4.0 from 1902 by much... but I can beat it.

$673,410,063 adjusted domestic $535,234,033 domestic (2008)

Yes. Because in most cases the best of something in existence is not the only one in existence. Being subjective, the only way to determine if one of two, or three, or 50, or 100 of the same thing is the best in existence is to have them assessed by the same grader or jury of graders. Until that happens, and they've been judged on the grading table, all accounts of which is better are anecdotal and not practical. That's not what I'm saying. Somewhere, there is exactly one "best copy in existence" for Action Comics #1. There are none better. Somewhere, there is exactly one "best copy in existence" for Detective Comics #27. There are none better. Is there any reason to believe that the absolute best copy in existence for Action Comics #1 is worth less if it isn't 9.8? I don't believe there's a ceiling (especially not based on the grade) once something is the best in existence. Any imaginary higher grade will always be imaginary.

Maybe followed by his Allentown Tec 27? Was just about to bring up the AT Tec 27. It would give the Church Action 1 a run for its money for most valuable comic book in the hobby I think. I would lean towards the Tec 27 AC1 9.2/9.4 vs Tec 27 9.6/9.8 I'll pick the Allentown Tec 27 as most valuable comic. That's an interesting discussion. When something is "the best in existence" does it really matter what the grade is? If there was a chip on the edge of the Mona Lisa would some other Da Vinci be worth more? Ultimately, I think the debate is "is the world's best surviving copy of the first Superman more valuable than the world's best surviving copy of the first Batman?" - because it seems like it wouldn't (philosophically) matter what the exact grades are, if they're the "world's best surviving copy".

Maybe the mcfarlane Cgc signing? That's probably it. Announced a few days ago: https://www.cgccomics.com/news/article/7862/

With or without the UPC? Without the UPC barcode, the CGC 9.8 average for the past 90 days is $82. The 2018 average was $105. That's a drop of 22%. With the UPC barcode, the last three CGC 9.8 sale prices are up ($900+), but there aren't any 9.8 sales since September, no 9.6 sales since June, and the most recent CGC 9.4 sale was 20% below the 2018 average.

To paraphrase: ""No one in this world, so far as I know ... has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people." -H.L.Mencken, 1926

Sure, it's all relative, and no, X-Men #94 isn't a quarter book...but for the first 30-40 years of their existence, X-Men #94 was *THE* book to own, and was always the more valuable book. It's only in the last 5, maybe 10 years at most that GSXM has surpassed it. Relative to X-Men #94, it's now much, much more valuable. That's new. I still feel like there's "mass appeal" for kindergarten-level thinking, no calculus involved. For example, Superman #1 is the first issue of a title which everyone recognizes with a nice #1 to go with it. It's just a book of reprints. It's not a big book from calculus-level thinking. But from kindergarten-level thinking, it's the second-best Superman book of all time. Giant-Sized X-Men #1 has a "#1" on the cover. Well, if you could own just one X-Men book, it should probably be X-Men #1. But if you could own two... Giant-Sized X-Men #1 also has a "#1" (like Superman #1), so kindergarten-level thinking pushes it up to the second-best spot. Still thinking like a kindergartener... what is a "#94?" Who cares!?! If the general public who knows kindergarten-level details about comic books has to choose between two expensive X-Men comics that are the same age and one of them is a #1 and the other is a #94, it's no contest. #1 wins. ...and here we are.

Your math is off. If there are 2000 shares of something and you buy 10 of them, you own 0.5% of the product. 2% would be 40 shares.

It's funny to me that a bunch of guys on the official CGC board are opposed to the idea that "someone could own a part of a high-valued comic book" while simultaneously supporting CGC... the idea that "comics should be sealed up in a slab and not read." Of the two concepts... ownership in part of something bigger is the one that makes more sense.

According to the hipcomic.com website, they're connected with Stanley Gibbons. http://www.hipecommerce.com/2016/07/22/press-release-mark-rosenberg-agrees-to-purchase-bidstart-from-stanley-gibbons/

True....and Calculus was an eye-opener, because everything finally started to come together....but how do you account for the fact that previous generations of collectors managed to figure these things out? X-Men #94 vs. GSXM #1 is a perfect example of that... The "first adopters" are usually the ones with vision. Vision generally takes more calculus than single-digit addition. The "success" of the comic book industry being so accessible "to the masses" means that calculus isn't being used by collectors anymore. The fact that all of us use electricity all the time, but very, very few can explain how it works is a good summary of what happened (in miniature) to comics. The visionaries (who see many possibilities) are the core the hobby, but "everyone else" (always a vast majority) only see what they're capable of seeing.

True, but characters come with a story attached I mean coin's the story is considered the grade or providence, much less with comics A coin's story (proof vs. circulation, and the mint mark) reminds me of direct edition vs. newsstand.