FSF

I apologize if I'm wrong, but aren't you the dealer that stated that you tell people that you are a collectibles dealer because of the negative perception of telling them you are a comic dealer. Someone clearly said that not long ago. I honestly have yet to meet anyone who didn't collect comics themselves that had anything other than a vague idea that comics have large values, and even that was a small minority. Those are my experiences. I could see your comment about the first appearance of Spider-Man et al eliciting some acknowledgement or understanding but far from "absolutely knowing". I think you are projecting your knowledge onto your audience.

The OP just started the thread tonight sharing his first hand experiences proving that not to be the case. Or do you think he is lying?

Agreed. And I don't know if Magic cards are included in any of that as I was not involved in those things but the Magic cards are gaining major steam with some selling well into the tens of thousands. Classic video games also.

And I would disagree with your perspective. I don't think they have turned that corner and aren't even that close. Let me add this one extra perspective about comics as an "investment". I have not done the math (and please feel free to chime in with your thoughts), but I would guess that the entirety of all books ever produced may have a market value of like $5 billion off the top of my head. Basically, less than 1% of the value of Apple or Amazon or Google. So in other words, the small amount of decline that Apple suffered on Friday (the likes of which virtually no investor including Apple shareholders bothered to pay any attention to), would probably easily be enough to buy out every comic book in the world twice over. Way less than 1% of the gold in the world would buy out the entire comic market. The art market is hundreds of times bigger than the comic market (and that's based on what little I know of it, it's probably much larger than that). No, they are not the same things. (this is in response to Kevin76). Comparing comics to cards may have some validity because they really blew up around the same time and they are by many thought of as "for kids". Here's the thing. Imagine being at a charity auction with a couple of hundred well earning people in the room. If a gold necklace, or a piece of good art, or a classic corvette were being auctioned, everyone would nod their heads in respect and understand what was being sold and that it was of value and a lot of it. Even something like an autographed Derek Jeter jersey would illicit respect from many if not most of the people in the room. Imagine them trying to auction off an iconic book like the OP mentioned (a CGC 9.4 Hulk 181). There might be a couple of people that understands what any of that means. The rest of the room: "CG what???" "Hulk is that big green guy, right?" "Did I hear them say they want $181 for that flimsy cartoonish looking book???" You get what I mean.

I don't believe most people who own precious metals or art or classic cars shares that opinion of comics. It's easy enough for a comic person to think that and feel that they belong (and maybe they do), but once again, neither the public nor the people involved heavily in those areas would likely agree. As the OP clearly articulated, the wider public scoffs at the notion of comic values. That might change, but I doubt it. They don't do so with classic cars or truly great art or precious metals. And for all of those constantly ripping on beanie babies, are you folks aware that there are beanie babies that sell for thousands TODAY. Almost two decades after the bubble burst. You folks are comparing the best of the comic world (like Action 1 and Hulk 181 or whatever) to the mass of beanie babies that are common and overproduced. Well, what about the THOUSANDS of comic titles printed since the 1980s comprising hundreds of million and maybe billions of books produced? The vast majority of them have at best mediocre art and writing and like 99%+ of those books would go begging in a $1.00 box. Wouldn't that be the apples to apples comparison? For my part, I'd way rather have a nice looking beanie bear baby (they're cute as hell) rather than 99% of comic books ever produced. And I collect comics and don't own one beanie baby.

First off, beanie babies are stuffed animals. They very much carry the same attributes as stuffed animals made over a hundred years ago. At least with beanie beanies, the investment is a couple bucks per so it's possible one might actually make a decent return on them. I do agree wholeheartedly that beanie babies in and of themselves were a "flash in the pan" but my original post was never meant to really compare the two as my flippant response was meant to indicate. I do agree that iconic books like Action 1, Tec 27, AF15 will very likely hold an iconic status with enough people over the next many decades that it will hold some high value though I don't believe that they are remotely good investments and will probably not hold up its value from an inflation adjusted perspective. Very few other books, if any, will do so IMO. I do NOT believe Hulk 181 will be in that group. Corporations don't have value because of how relative they are to the real world. It eventually ALWAYS comes down to what they can ultimately earn, and the growth rate at which it can do so. It's ALL numbers at the end of the day. Investor wouldn't give a about Google or Apple, no matter how relative they were unless it either made a ton of money (as they do) or showed a very strong promise that it can do so soon enough (as with Amazon or Netflix). Overpriced relative to where I think they would and should be if their wasn't an asset bubble created globally by central bank and governments. Overpriced because I don't see organic natural demand as much as speculation holds. When "collectors" buy up dozens of copies of Hulk 181 hoping for financial returns, to me, that isn't natural demand. But more than anything, overpriced because I don't see that future generation of kids buying books. When dealers buy and hold for higher prices, that isn't natural demand. And yes, the "future" is exactly what I expect will bear all that out. I apologize that I can't show you the GPA data from 2025. For my part, I don't agree that people don't need art. And comics are a subculture of that but its clearly different from a Van Gogh or a Picasso. But the important thing here is that art has been around since civilized society first began and it's universal in it's appeal. This is the conversation that always comes up in coin forums, card forums, and right here about comics. The "doom and gloom" vs. "the future is bright" crowd. For me, I don't care which way it goes. It won't affect me financially either way. I'm just giving my honest assessment (right or wrong) of what I see coming down the pike. If you want to buy "collectibles" with real promise, probably sealed and mint first generations of iPods, Nanos, iPhones and the like are probably the way to go.

Yes, and I've made that very same argument concerning gold on many a PM forum. Silver is an industrial metal and most all of it gets used up so you'd be wrong concerning the white metals.

Yes, really. It would be obfuscation at best to state that comics were truly considered an "investment" by a wide margin of even comic collectors let alone the wider public as far back as 80 years ago or anything close to that. Heck, even today there isn't that awareness among the wider public concerning comics that coins and stamps, and arguably even sports cards, have. As for beanie babies, since they are in the stuffed animal category, they've been around a CENTURIES longer than comics. What you consider "manufactured" or "pedestrian" is just your opinion. Those items very well could be the only thing worth much in the comic world in the distant future for all we know. If you have to sit thee and talk about owning "quality pieces" (which is highly subjective to begin with), you're already significantly diluting the notion of it being an investment vehicle. Even a washed out hobby/"investment" like stamps has it's highly priced items. But no one, even most stamp collectors, think of stamps as an investment today. And the fact that stamps were considered an "investment" by a good portion of the population and that notion has died off (due to the aging curve of those that bought into for money reasons) should clearly explain to you the blueprint from which I am reciting when I speak of the FUTURE value of comics. No one is arguing that investing in "assets" isn't a viable investment choice. Atop that would be stocks and real estate, though they are both overpriced today, though not as much as comics IMO. Everything in life comes down to how well you choose. But I would be 99.9999999% more confident in the returns of the S&P 100 or 500 or the entire stock market than whatever list of "quality" pieces you can come up with. That is not to suggest that people shouldn't buy comics, just don't do it with an investment theme in mind. This country spends a TON on hobbies, and that's the prism through which one should be looking at this. If they make money, or can at least recoup a good portion, than fantastic. But it will never come close to beating traditional assets like stocks and real estate over the long term. The fundamental reason is this. Nobody NEEDS comics. Virtually EVERYONE needs shelter and the products/services provided by businesses.

I would never use the word "investment" with comics and no real financial advisor is going to recommend 10% of an investor's asset be allocated toward comics, and if they did, they should have their license revoked. Having said that, a lot of people use to consider "stamps" as a quasi legitimate investment and rare coins, even to this day. Because of the sheer market force that the Baby Boomers were, and because spending a lot of money on stamps and coins preceded cards and comics, those collectibles have traditionally not been sneered at in the way comics and sports cards have. But that older generation is becoming more of a dinosaur and the folks in their prime earning years today, and moving forward for a decade or two, grew up on comics and cards. Which is why we've seen multiple million dollar plus auctions for individual cards and comics Having said that, I think comics have a shelf life in terms of its value and long-term investing in them would be near the equivalent of investing in beanie babies.

I would echo every bit of that. I was only casually watching comics from afar during those years, but even then I knew that was the case. The EXACT same thing happened with sports cards and coins, prior to comics. Where thousands of different issues appeared "scarce" or "rare" but it was merely a function of the SUBSTANTIAL amount of all of the raw material that had yet to be graded. Once you saw a good portion of the raw population being graded, it was obvious that there was no where near enough demand at the lofty levels (once the supply was evident).

BTW, we are both now officially members of the 137 posts' club. Exclusive indeed, even it is ephemeral.

Thanks for the detailed show report! It was a very interesting and entertaining read.

It's very simple. We all agree that condition regarding collectibles is very important. For me (and I think for most all collectors), condition denotes and connotes the appearance of the item in question. When a comic book looks CLEARLY better than another of the same grade (with TEARS) almost every single time, the problem isn't with my reasoning or interpretation of the grade, the problem is with this arbitrarily established guideline created by a limited number of so called experts that the endless flock of sheep (dealers and collectors) decide to treat as holy gospel. It's completely illogical to me why two books that look clearly different aesthetically should get the same grade and approximately the same value in the marketplace. We're talking about TEARS here. It impacts the structural integrity of the book. That Overstreet wants it that way and CGC wants it that way isn't good rationale as far as I'm concerned. It's just another point of proof that the market is flooded with ignorant buyers who are speculating/investing and not really collecting. As long as the plastic grade is there, who cares about the ACTUAL appearance of the book??? Well, REAL collectors do!

9.6 and certainly less depending on severity. I agree that it would depend on the size of the tears. If it's maybe one corner and very minor effecting only the cover, then perhaps 9.8 could be given if the rest of the book is all there. But there are plenty of books out there with both corners disturbed where the majority of the pages or every page is fraying. How in the world that could be a 9.8 is beyond me. It's a VERY noticeable defect. If a book deserves 9.9 or 10.0, then CGC should give it, but obviously never to one with any binder tears. It's not like the majority of thee 9.8 books with bindery tears are any sharper (putting the tears aside) than most of other 9.8s that don't have it. It might be apples and oranges, but in the card world a 10.0 card would be downgraded to 8 or less with one corner disturbed in such a manner. Corners are focal points on books and cards and stand out. And they are fugly as hell.

I really wish CGC would lower the grade ceiling for bindery tears. I've seen way too many books, often with both corners with this issue, and it's apparent to the eye right away. They look SO MUCH inferior to a comparable book that does not have the tears.

You may have already done this but I would google "Ireland comic shops" and go the Maps area. The reason I like going to the Maps area is that if you click on the link of any particular store, you should be able to see multiple photos of the inside that will give you a feel for the vibe and layout of the place as well as the various items that you might expect to find there.

Aww..you do care.

I admit it, I didn't know that I didn't know that.

You hardly tried to educate anyone other than to express that the topic had been beaten to death. As for CGC's stance on this, please educate me in the form of press releases or whatever as to what they explicitly stated. Because I don't recall you saying anything about what has been addressed other than to state or make references to the fact that the money is still flowing and submissions are up and people are buying regardless, the market has spoken, etc. I have yet to read anything from you in this thread that provides any insight on the topic. And once again, what is it exactly in your mind that the posts from two years ago, and since, have brought to definitive finality that this issue can't or shouldn't be discussed??? I mean just the way you talk of "crusade" in the obvious condescending manner that you are shows time and again your derisive and dismissive nature. God forbid that I express public dissatisfaction on an issue that YOU also find to be "unacceptable" and actually expect for someone like you to actually support the position. Because that would make no sense, right?

Obviously you are because you ARE indeed shadowboxing with me. So unless you agree that Newton Rings are awesome, obviously you've given up and in fact are going out of your way to discourage those who would express their satisfaction. That's the thing I really don't get in the myriad of illogicality that must be going through your head, which you've displayed numerous times in this one thread alone. You agree that it is a problem, and yet you are going out of your way to defend the notion of keeping that problem going. As for beefing with you, once again, I'm not going to take any derisive comments by anyone lying down. YOU are the one that came into this thread and picked the argument. A stupid argument if you ask me since you state you agree with my comments about the issue (at least to the extent that it clearly exists). YOU are the one that expressed fatigue from talking about this issue yet it's all you can do to stop talking about it, which you haven't been able to.

First off, if that attitude of your's was how humans behaved, we'd literally still be in caves. "We tried lighting a fire, it doesn't work, we'll just have to do without." "We asked the government to free slaves but they wouldn't so slavery it is." "We tried to take Normandy but it was too hard so we'll just let Germany have it." Seriously, do you give up on everything so easy? Yes, my beef is with CGC. I'm not sure where you think I have made beef with anyone else, including YOU. Any derisive comments I've made in your direction was only in response to your derisive comments. Maybe I should be more mature than acting in a "tit for tat" behavior, but I'll be honest...I'm really not.

And I sneer look down on your's.

If it's so obvious, you should be helping in the attempt to change the angle. But since CGC is making money, Vintage Comics and most dealers are making money, who cares right? Only the lowly collectors like myself who are the end repository for these things you are pawning off to make your livings.

Nobody is disputing CGC's success right now. Companies who rest on their laurels or think things are "good enough" usually eventually become dinosaurs. It may not be tomorrow, next month or next year, but you can't ignore obvious dissatisfaction as has been expressed repeatedly just on these boards with a very small sample of the collector base which I'm convinced represents a good proxy for how most collectors feel. How could they not? It's a MAJOR eyesore which YOU have already agreed to. As for my posts here including dealer submissions (since you missed it) is that we should all be pushing back, collector or dealer. First off, I read those posts including the ones on CBCS almost a year ago. I don't remember every word I read but I agree that it was filled with a LOT of complaining. That only SUPPORTS my position unless you feel like the intervening two years has made most collectors fond of Newton Rings. Secondly, I'm not sure why you think I haven't read them or even what you think it proves if I hadn't. If you don't want to believe me, don't. It makes no difference to me or anything I've posted here. It seems like an odd and stupid thing to lie about (and even odder that you keep bringing it up in some silly 'gotcha' attempt) but maybe that's how your mind works.

That isn't a correlation, it's a speculation. You may be correct, but I doubt it eventually for reasons already mentioned. But my understanding is that their reholdering isn't really correcting the underlying issue. It may help a little in some cases. We'll see if they offer "free" reholdering when they get their new slab in place eventually. I'd almost bet my life the answer is no. I agree dealers do a huge chunk of the submissions. It's their livelihood. So what? Ultimately, as for the beauty of the book, what's happening today is that CGC is saying: "Send us your book and we will make it look MUCH worse then before you sent it to us." That just seems absurd to me. Obviously, there are various other value propositions being provided such as the grading and protection.