Justin Tnic Otyme

Did you guys see what the 8.0 that sold on Heritage last night went for? Sold for: $3,360.00 Superboy #8 (DC, 1950) CGC VF 8.0 Off-white to white pages....

I'll take the Superboy #18

I'll take it!!

Nice books.

Thanks!!!

Has this book been trimmed or has the printing on the cover just shifted upwards leaving the white line towards the bottom of the book? Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. ~Justin

In regards to a recent purchase from Roy: Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen #134 VF/NM. The grading was perfect and the book was in absolute great condition. I really, really hope to purchase more raw books from him in the future. As the old movie critics Siskel and Ebert used to say: "Two thumbs up!!! Way up."

Here is part of the transaction, leaving out personal information:

Guys, I appreciate all your input. What I am going to do, (since there, at this point is no winners between the two parties) I am going to refund his money back, keep the book, and chalk it up as a learning experience. Please keep in mind my original and still main intent was the to look out for this "community" so that in these types of transaction expectations are known, understood, etc. So that these types of situations in the future are avoided.

In regards to my original post: I have a question that I hope someone(s) would be able to give me insight on. When listing CGC graded pre-sales, or items for sale that are being made available from the conventions etc. Is it right to assume that the CGC pre-sale grade should be a CGC 9.8 even if it is not stated in the ad specifically? I ask this because I would like to make sure other board members do not get burned, disappointed, or taken advantage of because their expectations are to receive a 9.8 graded book if the ad or sales thread doesn't say specifically. A similar situation just happened to be me, and I would hate to have it happen to someone else. I would also ask that maybe we should make it mandatory that a grade expectation is listed for CGC pre-sales? For example: Seller(s) should post "No grade assigned" or minimum 9.8... Thoughts anyone? I would like to add this issue was resolved. And I am happy with the end result. A-DONIS and I talked through the resolution, I was refunded my money and also kept the book. I thought this was fair and equitable seeing that I was under the belief that I was going to receive a 9.8 CGC graded book but got a 9.6. The refund along with the value of the 9.6 CGC SS book to me was a fair end result. Having said all that, I would like to get back to the original point that I still hope, going forward with "presales" in general, that we can reach some sort of consensus that as buyers and sellers we should be able expect a minimum CGC 9.8 and that the sellers are going to give us a 9.8 CGC graded copy unless specifically stated otherwise or previously agreed upon for whatever reason. Sincerely, Justin Tnic Otyme

To be clear at this point it is now a he said she said type scenario. All I wanted out of this was my book from a fair and equitable transaction. Now I get more grief, feel like a bad guy, and I am out the 9.8 I presumed I would get. From this point forward I would just like, and let me reiterate, this to not happen to any one else. These ads need to be clear and should not be allowed without full disclosure being presented in the ads as to the intent of the grades. Also, A-DONIS, I really don't like my P.M's being made public without my permission. That is why they are called P.M.'s (personal messages). You have some gall. Also, posting P.M.s after you edited them, really? Do you think anyone really buys that? It just gives more credence to the point that something is trying to be covered up.

Yes he did, it even states it here in my P.M., it is definitely not original. Guys I really don't want to keep arguing with this guy. My intention was not to resolve my issue but to keep this from happening to others.

The problem is I did not want to sell this book... I wanted it because who it was written buy and its future collectability...Not for short term monetary gain.

That was in the original receipt for the item I was about to purchase. I "added" that at the time to make it clear this is what I was about to purchase. He got the exact same receipt and I "assumed" (I feel rightly so) that is exactly what it was for. If he did not agree with what was clearly stated in the receipt it should have been noted or a P.M. sent or something within a reasonable amount of time that the grade was not guaranteed. Not until I got notice several weeks later that some of the grades were coming back as less than 9.8 did I start asking questions as to why this could / would be possible. I feel what I did was in good faith and that an assumption of a pre-sale should be just that a 9.8 grade period. Not whatever comes back. That seems a bit archaic and not "standardized" business.

I have to input something here guys...For one I think this is disgusting the back and forth ridiculousness, than the leakage of only the information that A-DONIS wants displayed. As you can see below when the PayPal transaction was originally done the receipt Cleary states this is payment for a CGC SS 9.8: I blanked out my address since another individual boldy decides it is ok to put it out there. I say to you Mister A-DONIS shame on you, that is down right bad business and disrespectful to the CGC community that you, without permission of the individual would make mine or anyone else's information public. Also, it is convenient how he left out the intimidation and other banter in the P.M. we posted back and forth about this issue. I am sincerely disappointed and I really hope this does not happen to anyone else.