• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JTLarsen

  1. 6 hours ago, lou_fine said:

    It is right near the front of the guide on Page 10.  :gossip:

    It states that:  "Efforts have been made to present accurate information, but the possibility of error exists.  Readers who believe (they) that have discovered an error are invited to mail corrective information to the author, Robert M. Overstreet, at Gemstone Publishing, 10150 York Rd., Suite 300 Hubt Valley , MD 2030.  Verified corrections will be incorporated into future editions of this book."  (thumbsu  :wishluck:

    Hopefully, you won't be sending him a list of current prices on books because I believe he will file that one in his round filing cabinet without even looking at it.  lol


    Thanks, and no, I wouldn’t think about price corrections.

    But are you really telling me they don’t have an email address? That’s crazy.

  2. 2 hours ago, bronze johnny said:

    Your calling me out as condescending and then going on about making an argument by taking part of my entire point isn’t the way to go about this. Look at the remaining part of my argument. There’s only one Unknown Soldier. You can make submissions about World War 2 unnamed heroes but Kanigher and Kubert created one Unknown Soldier in 168 and the story is “I knew the Unknown Soldier,” which is also specified on the cover of 168. Kanigher and Kubert didn’t have any other Unknown Soldier in mind. There’s only one. The fact is they do have license to do what they want with their creation even if it means changing a story to bring that character back to life. That’s done quite often. They could have simply created a new character and left it at that. They didn’t and the significance of 157 is that the Unknown Soldier in 168 is the Unknown Soldier Of 1970. The other thing to keep in mind is that the Soldier’s alter ego is Unknown, and that’s significant in the Soldier’s case because it would provide greater definition. It’s not the creator’s objective to change reality when they are giving greater definition to their creation. Calling this a “seamless retcon” begs the question. The retcon whether seamless or not is in the case of the Soldier, the decision made by Kanigher and Kubert for creative reasons. You can draw your interpretations of the reality of period of 1966 - 1970 as it relates to the Soldier. That’s your right and I respect your position👍

    Your unclear expression and claims to know the creators’ intentions both undermine your arguments. It seems—though I’d never assert to know anyone else’s intent—pretty likely that they had to do a reprint and came up with a framing concept to justify it. Never underestimate the likelihood that frenzied deadlines drive decisions more than long-term thought-out plans did.

  3. On 6/28/2019 at 9:58 PM, NoMan said:

    None. Better to get drunk. 


    11 hours ago, westerberg14 said:

    What did you find on your trip?  I’m heading to Ireland tonight for a week in Dublin, Galway and Belfast (mostly).  Would like to find some of the She-Ra UK books from early eighties along the way...

    Galway was a bust. No back issues at Sub City. Sean at Sub City Dublin on Mary Street is kickass. Tell him Jonathan sent you. I also recommend Coffee and Heroes and Atomic Books Comics and Muzic both in Belfast.

    Also...check charity shops! Good hunting!

  4. 1 hour ago, Aweandlorder said:

    Are you asserting that her popularity (or lack of) warrants the ridiculous high prices we've experienced on the market as of late with said book?

    Or did you just find ground to promote her with this thread

    please elaborate 

    I'd elaborate on whether I just found ground to promote her with this thread if I understood what that meant. 

    As you can clearly see in my original post, there was confusion about which variant was the subject of the cease-and-desist letter. I was trying to clear that up so that people wouldn't pay needlessly high amounts for variants they could still obtain for at or near cover price. 

    And as for the wacky notion that popularity might correlate with high prices, gosh, I think maybe you're on to something there.

  5. 1 hour ago, Aweandlorder said:

    The proof is the book has not been issued a cease & desist warning by DC to sellers as the news has claimed. 

    The proof is that the book is readily available by tens of vendors with no interruption by DC as article has claimed on eBay  

    I'm just like you now. Reading the news and taking at face value without getting into details. 

    How arrogant of me!

    Stating the thing you're asked to prove is not proof of it. Is this honestly the level you're debating on? 

    The variant that was the SUBJECT of the cease-and-desist letter is NOT "readily available by tens of vendors." It's available on eBay, and it's certainly possible that (a) DC didn't send cease-and-desist letters to individual eBayers (b) did do that but stopped, and/or (c) didn't do anything AFTER sending cease-and-desist letters. As I tried to explain already, a cease-and-desist letter isn't magic--it doesn't MAKE people cease and desist. If a cease-and-desist letter isn't obeyed, it takes ADDITIONAL legal action to enforce it. That costs money. DC doesn't HAVE to spend that money, because its primary motive here is to protect against FUTURE copyright infringement, which is more difficult to do if you do NOTHING to protect your copyright now--which is exactly why DC could content itself with initial letters to Devil's Due and Collector Cave and NOT CARE whether they're followed or not.

    And, no, you're not just like me. You're just assuming another factual claim without backing it up. For instance, I'm NOT just taking the news at face value. Did you go to the shop in the Bronx and talk to the owner? Didn't think so. I did.

    Glad we can agree on your last point, though.

  6. 44 minutes ago, Aweandlorder said:

    I'll reply to you with a simple reply since most of the effort you put into discussing my conclusions are nothing but a lot of wind with no grounds. 

    We all believe in what we believe

    I believe that an over inflated book spiked due to NOTHING but a headline is shilled. Emphasis on the word OVER INFLATED. Not HEADLINE. There's no conspiracy in that statement. This is business as usual in our market. 

    You dont.

    It just so happens to be that this time it's directly involving a politician. 

    Not a popular TV show/movie. Not a popular writer/ artist. Heck, there wasn't eve a pe*is involved with this one

    And that my friend is the beginning of the end. 

    Think about what you just allowed to happen here, think about what you accepted as a reality in our hobby. That will set the ground for another big tear in our already suffering industry. And it's because people like you allow it to exist 

    My grounds? For what? If you're disputing the factuality of something I'm saying, share with the class. What have I said that's untrue?

    Your proof that the book is shilled rests on the following:

    - The book is over inflated. That's a subjective opinion.

    - It spiked to to nothing. Sorry, "NOTHING." Again, subjective. I and others have laid out multiple reasons OTHER PEOPLE might have for the price spike.

    Your belief in the subjective opinion of over-inflation, and your groundless ignoring of the fact that OTHER PEOPLE have genuine reasons to want this book... do not constitute proof that it's been shilled. Shilling is a pretty well-defined phenomenon that others on this site have proven adept at documenting. Try that.

    Your claim that I just killed the hobby, I think, does more to undercut your credibility than anything here. So, thanks.