• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by slpfi27

  1. A little late-night strolling on the forums I find this thread. You folks are scaring me, submitted my Spectacular Spider-Man 9.8 Stan Lee's off for some addition signatures. Unfortunately, I added the quick press simply hoping they maintain the grade not looking for a bump. Sounds like I should not have added the quick press. I sure hope I do not get "struck by lightning". Spectacular Spider-Man #9, 10. Signed by Stan Lee, and Sal Buscema. Submitted them for George Perez. One of these books my Spectacular Spider-Man #1 the “Whale” signed by Stan Lee, Mike Esposito, John Romi
  2. Thank you Brittany! I am grateful for your assistance. Brian W. <slpfi27>
  3. Okay, now we are at the point of this whole post. What do we call them? I agree with the reason to not call them Diamonds or Whitmans, and simply Direct Editions. How about as a boardie previously mentioned, "Early Direct Editions" ? I am about to submit the best of the best issues I have from my Spectacular set with the Diamond Logo in the top left. They will get classified with all the other issues I have, but I feel these are a bit special and more rare. It is ashame they do not have their own distinct reference on the Census. Thank you again for the added information.
  4. My friends, I am truly grateful for all the comments and wonderful information. I have spent the past months finishing up my set of Spectacular Spider-Man #01 - #263 (Nuff Said!). My goal is to complete the set in the most “Spectacular” fashion possible. I suppose I found it surprising to notice CGC has never classified a difference between Direct Editions, and Newsstand Editions. I have read every post I could find regarding Diamond Issues, Whitman’s, Western, Big Diamond, Skinny Diamond, Bar-Code, No-Barcode, and clearly only the BRAVE attempted to discuss this topic. Me personally
  5. Lazy Boy, I appreciate your kindness! You are a shining star of the CGC message boards. I have no doubt everyone here will agree your intellect is on display and your knowledge on this subject is supreme. I know you did not intend to offend anyone. So again, thank you! As for the rest of us “know nothing” folks… Review this and tell me if I am off base on anything…. (again) FACTS: (Yes or No, and please no opinions. Let’s try and base it on fact.) 1. Not all Diamonds are Whitman’s (previous pictures prove this. So again, why call them “Whitman’s?”)
  6. This is an interesting comment, and I can see that point of view. Infact this is the most compelling thought I have heard on this subject. I will need to reflect on this one. However, as I think about this. If there were not many distributors to need "Direct Market Editions" then why would they need to have a reason to stop the returns in the first place? Just thinking about it. I agree though, there were certainly not that many shops as exploded in the 80's. Great comment Bellrules!
  7. I do not understand why we cannot have a polite conversation. Statements like "you don't know jack" is rude. It discourages people from commenting and gaining knowledge. I am tired of people who think in absolutes without facts to back it up. Without facts, we are just stating a bunch of opinions. Please have respect when you comment to people on these forums. We all have different levels of knowledge regarding comics. I am sure all of us have careers and degrees and can respect that we share one thing in common. A passion and love for comic books. I am trying to picture the various peopl
  8. I am not sure if this is the proper place to ask this... if not please let me know. As always CGC thank you for the help! So in the Spectacular Spider-Man #01-263 (1976 1st Series) there is a duplicate slot for #213 Game Pro Magazine Edition. Can you please remove one. Thank you! Brian W. <slpfi27>
  9. I understand what everyone has said. What should they be called? 1. If they are called Whitmans seems highly contestable. 2. If they are refered to as "Direct Market Issues" then that seems to conflict with the "Newsstand UPC / Direct Edition Logo" versions that pop up later. That seems confusing to me. Most certainly will be confusing to upstart collectors and people trying to get into this hobby. 3. Can we just agree to call them "Diamond Editions"? It would appear that they are indeed books with a Diamond logo in the top left? Anyone have a problem with that moving for
  10. Is it okay to use your e.mail on a post or registry set? I don't want to get introuble so I thought i'd ask. Thanks folks! Sincerely, Brian W <slpfi27>
  11. I understand there is a debate of what to call these books, Whitman or Direct? I knew that it was a debate LONG before I started the thread. I probably chose the incorrect designations for these books. Which kicked us off on this debate once again all these years later. However, can't we call them "Diamond Editions" They have a Diamond on the cover, and this seperates them from the others does it not? It is my understanding there is variants of each Diamond as well? Some with month's and some without? We clearly have two sets of people that call them Direct Editions, and Whitman Editions. Is i
  12. Well... I appreciate you all! I just wanted to throw that out there. I am interested in this debate/discussion. I just hope everyone keeps it friendly. I am sure we'd all have a Beer together if we met up. Text and type is so hard to evaluate sometimes. So I'll presume you are all my friends and if not friends at lease we respect each other for our many differences. I am honored to be part of this Community. Thanks again folks for your awesome knowledge! Sincerely Brian W <slpfi27> P.S. CGC "Call them what they are." Please!
  13. Need this for my set. I'm willing to pay any reasonable price. Thank you! Brian W <slpfi27>
  14. I love the flexing of comic knowledge. The Whitman, Not Whitman, or Direct edition? We get it, you guys are comic smart. We can debate that on another post. Perhaps the intention of the post got lost in the title of it. My fault?! Let me clarify again.... Like I said at the start. I just want them to get classified to improve census data and give people the opportunity to expand collections and grow knowledge. I think people tripping over is/isn't is really irrelevant. Correct Book Classification is 100% a benefit to the CGC comic collecting community. As well as the "huckster
  15. I still believe making classifications for variations of books is a solid benefit to everyone. Including CGC. I still think they should do it moving forward. As for the "Huckster" Comment.. So because I have collected comics my whole life, and want to make a financial benefit on one set I have collected. That makes me a "Huckster"? If that is so I guess it was ment as a compliment. I'll take it. I'm not sure what you consider yourself?
  16. I am grateful for your kind words and respect your opinion. I am not sure exactly where I get lumped with "hucksters" for simply suggesting that it makes a lot of sense to add specific classifications to the Census of Books, but okay? I am simply suggesting that the books with a logo in the top left corner showing a Diamond in a Square (Pre-Spidey Logo, Pre Slash through the Barcode) get no recognition. The books that were distributed and sold where they used BAR CODE Scanners should get love as well. I may not use the correct classification for each ... (Variant) different type, but the
  17. Splitting hairs much? So should I call them White Diamond Box Version (since whitman isn't apparently accurate), and Newsstand Version (Because Variant is not what the dictionary say it is?)? Is that better? As a collector I just want to know what is out there. Best way to do that is classify it. Here is an example, I currently have the entire Spectacular Spider-Man set. Should anyone have versions with White Diamonds with Black Boxes I would love to purchase them in high grade condition. Since i do care about the rarity of said versions. Goal to get the entire set + ALL different kinds
  18. This is beautiful! I love the effort you put into finding the Variants. Don't forget Mexico made a run on the Spectacular Spidey series too! Since we are talking about going crazy.... OH and the DUTCH!
  19. Okay so "Direct Market Editions" Whatever they should be called. Clearly i'm not an "expert" but the clarity of what a book is should be noted. The way CGC makes this make sense is they make money on doing it. As you said, it benefits us and them in almost everyway possible. So I get it.... 20 Years later .... Here we are lets do this! Lets call a book what it is. Also software and technology is with us. Why keep the old ways when the new ways are so much more CRAZY!
  20. Great information friends! Thank you for all this great info. So my understanding is maybe CGC hasn't made classifications because..... Would you like the RED PILL or the BLUE PILL? It's a rabit hole that nobody knows really just how deep it goes? Hmmm....
  21. Haahahaha! "Fleer Inserts" too, you jerk! LoL cracking me up. OKAY FINE! My collection will NEVER BE COMPLETE! See all I do is bring up Whitmans and Newsstand and then you gotta go all crazy cowboy on me! you so funny! One thing to point out though, at least CGC mentions "Mark Jewelers" ,"Fleer Inserts", "Bubblicious" and a few others. How hard would it be to simply note "Newsstand" moving forward, and seperating it to its own census data as they return for reslab. Simple way to generate added re-slab money for CGC, and easy way for us to get the Rarity we covet. Except for you raw guy
  22. Actually my friend... I have a few of these, but I am curious I don't see this one in the CGC noted Variants. To my knowledge once the bag is opened it looks EXACTLY like the Direct edition in everyway including Price spot. Do you think it could be noted as a Variant simply because of the Dirt Bag Polybag? I was thinking about mentioning this to CGC to see if it was a possibility for a Variant? Thoughts? Also thank you so much for showing me your great books. I love it! So grateful for your time! I'm looking forward to seeing what everyone says. If they say anything that is lol. T
  23. See! Now ya gone and done it! Just when I thought I was hunting my final few Canadian Variants, some10P and maybe a Yaffa and look what you come up with! Error Prints.... I had no idea?! Thanks for sharing i'll have to be on the look out for these too. You find out more let me know. I'm sure you have seen my set of "Spectacular Spider-Man Nuff Said!" Collection. If anyone has any suggestions or some help you can provide to make it more complete I am always grateful. Thanks for the headsup! I'll be hunting these now as well. Brian W. <slpfi27>
  24. You are so right.... and I have not seen that great site you showed me! Thank you bunches! This #213 is really frustrating indeed.... alot of Variants on that one by my count there is Four not Three Also thank you so much for the kind post! Look forward to hearing all you folks have to say! I hope CGC understands the benefit to them to let us re-submit the Newsstand Variants for Proper Placement. Certainly would add more money into the reslabbing for their profits, and at the sametime give us collectors something to shoot for. I am going back through my collection, and finding Newsstand Vari