The Pre-Robin Tec Club 18 18

[RareHighGrade]

You may be right Lou, but if there's no spine split, that's some seriously tight grading.

[lou_fine]

2 hours ago, RareHighGrade said:

You may be right Lou, but if there's no spine split, that's some seriously tight grading.

Take a look at the gorgeous CGC 3.5 graded copy of Batman 1 (this one below does have a small spine split) that just sold on HA and the beautiful 3.5 copy of Detective 1 in the upcoming CC auction:

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/batman-1-dc-1940-cgc-vg-35-off-white-pages/a/7158-91008.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515

The one thing that all 4 of these books have in common is that they were all graded around the same apparent extreme tight grading time period and they all present much nicer from a visual point of view relative to their assigned CGC grades.    

[lou_fine]

9 hours ago, RareHighGrade said:

Does the Tec 29 being auctioned on CC have a spine split?  It looks way too nice to be a 3.0, even if it does have tape on the interior cover.

Wow, all this talk about the various copies of Detective 29's and it looks like this one on CC has shot out like a bullet from the starting blocks even before the starting gun has gone off:

http://scoop.previewsworld.com/Home/4/1/73/1014?ArticleID=190515

It's already sitting out there with 20 bids at $25K with the auction not due to open for bidding until 12PM Eastern Time on Monday February 27th.     

Edited February 26, 2017 by lou_fine

[quicksilver]

19 hours ago, lhcomics said:

I don't see anywhere on GPA where a Tec 29 restored 1.5 (at the time) has sold but on page 108 of this thread it was mentioned the Tec 1.5 sold for $22.5K last Nov. Since then the comic was resubbed and now is 1.8 with trimmed CF and just sold for $20,315. I thought it would top out at $15 K so for me the $20,315 was a surprise.

As Peter mentioned the sale of the Nov 2016 1.5 Tec 29 has been removed from HA archives.

Maybe a interior page trim isn't the death of a comic like it used to be. I've started accepting tape on some comics where as back a few years ago I wouldn't.

Leroy - oddly, the sale no longer shows on GPA, maybe HA got it removed, but it was there when I posted that, I checked at the time. It was 1.8 with no mention of the trimmed C.F. , and it sold for $22,108 in November. And you're right - the interior trim doesn't bother me. The book needs more work anyway.

Edited February 26, 2017 by quicksilver
Grammar police

[Gotham Kid]

Giving the thread a bump with Leroy's 29

 

[lhcomics]

6 minutes ago, Gotham Kid said:

Giving the thread a bump with Leroy's 29

 

[batman_fan]

6 minutes ago, Gotham Kid said:

Giving the thread a bump with Leroy's 29

 

  Amazing !  Was it painful having that left nut removed? 

[lhcomics]

7 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

  Amazing !  Was it painful having that left nut removed? 

Not at my age.

[Sqeggs]

48 minutes ago, lhcomics said:

58 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

  Amazing !  Was it painful having that left nut removed? 

Not at my age.

[clarkkentdds]

what do you think that #29 3.5 will go for?

[lou_fine]

5 hours ago, Gotham Kid said:

Giving the thread a bump with Leroy's 29

 

 

1 hour ago, clarkkentdds said:

what do you think that #29 3.5 will go for?

Why, is this CGC 3.5 copy of 'Tec 29 up for auction or sale somewhere? 

[woowoo]

Look a little like the 3.0 copy in the CC auction looking at the black top left.

http://www.comicconnect.com./bookDetail.php?id=684452

Edited March 3, 2017 by woowoo

[lou_fine]

2 hours ago, lou_fine said:

7 hours ago, Gotham Kid said:

 

 

2 hours ago, woowoo said:

Look a little like the 3.0 copy in the CC auction looking at the black top left.

http://www.comicconnect.com./bookDetail.php?id=684452

Very interesting as that is definitely the same kind of defect as the one on the CC's 3.0 copy of 'Tec 29.  As far as I can tell though, they are 2 completely different copies. 

Is it just me or does the 3.0 copy in the CC auction appear to be quite a bit nicer from just a front cover visual point of view, as compared to the CGC 3.5 graded copy posted up above?   

Edited March 3, 2017 by lou_fine

[woowoo]

27 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

 

Very interesting as that is definitely the same kind of defect as the one on the CC's 3.0 copy of 'Tec 29.  As far as I can tell though, they are 2 completely different copies. 

Is it just me or does the 3.0 copy in the CC auction appear to be quite a bit nicer from just a front cover visual point of view, as compared to the CGC 3.5 graded copy posted up above?   

I thought it might have been dry cleaned and press. If it is the same copy some damage happened and it got the new holder and a .5 downgrade.

[Gotham Kid]

Leroy's 29 is the previous CC 29, properly pressed. Not for sale. Happy it turned out nice for him. Nothing to do with current CC 29 copy.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Gotham Kid

[woowoo]

6 minutes ago, Gotham Kid said:

Leroy's 29 is the previous CC 29, properly pressed. Not for sale. Happy it turned out nice for him. Nothing to do with current CC 29 copy.

They look close to the same and have the same marks in the black are on top left.

[lou_fine]

2 hours ago, woowoo said:

2 hours ago, lou_fine said:

 

Very interesting as that is definitely the same kind of defect as the one on the CC's 3.0 copy of 'Tec 29.  As far as I can tell though, they are 2 completely different copies. 

Is it just me or does the 3.0 copy in the CC auction appear to be quite a bit nicer from just a front cover visual point of view, as compared to the CGC 3.5 graded copy posted up above?   

I thought it might have been dry cleaned and press. If it is the same copy some damage happened and it got the new holder and a .5 downgrade.

Nothing at all to do with dry cleaned and pressing as they are 2 completely different copies. 

Probably a lot more to do with CGC's inconsistency in grading as the nicer and cleaner looking CGC 3.0 graded copy that is in CC's current auction was graded back in August of 2016.  Clearly an extremely unforgiving time for having your GA books graded as CGC was seemingly in a grading hissy fit for some apparent reason.  Just take a look at the equally visually appealing CGC 3.0 copy of Detective 38 in the current CC auction that also appears to have been graded extremely tightly back in July of 2016.  Or to the beautiful looking CGC 3.5 graded copy of Batman 1 that was graded back in June of 2016 and just auctioned off in last week's Heritage auction:

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/batman-1-dc-1940-cgc-vg-35-off-white-pages/a/7158-91008.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

Now compare that CGC 3.5 graded copy of Batman 1 to the unpressed copy of Detective 29 which was also given the exact same 3.5 grade:

http://www.comicconnect.com/bookDetail.php?referral=EAlist&id=685980&title=DETECTIVECOMICS

Doesn't take a rocket scientist or even a comic book expert to easily tell which copy looks nicer from a visual cover appearance point of view since we do not have the Graders' Notes handy.   

[lou_fine]

5 hours ago, lou_fine said:

Giving the thread a bump with Leroy's 29

 

 

1 hour ago, Gotham Kid said:

Leroy's 29 is the previous CC 29, properly pressed. Not for sale. Happy it turned out nice for him. Nothing to do with current CC 29 copy.

Interesting........this pressed version of the book as shown above definitely looks a lot better, especially along the spine, than in its previous unpressed stage:

http://www.comicconnect.com/bookDetail.php?referral=EAlist&id=685980&title=DETECTIVECOMICS

and yet, CGC decided to only give it the exact same 3.5 grade for a superior looking version of the exact same book.     

[lhcomics]

8 hours ago, woowoo said:

They look close to the same and have the same marks in the black are on top left.

Has to be a printing defect. I checked HA archives and I see no other 29s with this defect. Maybe mine and the CC 29 were twins separated at birth and mine lived a harder life in the inner city while the CC 29 was a country boy and grew up big and strong...

 

10 hours ago, lou_fine said:

 

Is it just me or does the 3.0 copy in the CC auction appear to be quite a bit nicer from just a front cover visual point of view, as compared to the CGC 3.5 graded copy posted up above?   

It's not just you the 3.0 CC copy has better eye appeal and I knew this when I went after mine. I saw potential in mine for some improvement and I'm happy how it turned out. Both 29s have Tape notes so when I bought mine it said "small amount of tape on interior cover and centerfold"  while the CC 29 says "tape on interior cover". I had the tiny, tiny, tiny piece of tape at CF that seemed to serve no purpose removed. The  tape on interior cover was going to prove difficult to remove so I left it.

One plus for my comic is PQ. Mine has OW/W and I'm telling you they are nice looking interior pages! The CC 29 has CR/OW and while on GA comics I'm not a PQ snob (except some kind of brittleness) is the CC 29 a CR/OW that look like a nice CR/OW or one of those CR/OW that look ugly? If you ever submitted some comics in the past that had nasty looking interior pages and they came back CR/OW and you felt like you just hit a small jackpot then you know what I'm talking about.

7 hours ago, lou_fine said:

 

Interesting........this pressed version of the book as shown above definitely looks a lot better, especially along the spine, than in its previous unpressed stage:

http://www.comicconnect.com/bookDetail.php?referral=EAlist&id=685980&title=DETECTIVECOMICS

and yet, CGC decided to only give it the exact same 3.5 grade for a superior looking version of the exact same book.     

When I bought mine I didn't feel it looked the part of a 3.5 so after the press and dry clean if it got a 3.0 it would have been OK with me. Since it stayed 3.5 that was a bonus. I never was trying to get 4.0 I just wanted a much nicer looking 3.0/3.5

Because of eye appeal I totally expect the 3.0 CC 29 to sell for more than what I paid for my 3.5 and had someone bid another $1500 back on Dec 15 I would not have won mine.

FYI you will never tremble or perspire any more than when trying to remove an expensive comic from the CGC inner well.

Leroy

 

[lou_fine]

3 hours ago, lhcomics said:

When I bought mine I didn't feel it looked the part of a 3.5 so after the press and dry clean if it got a 3.0 it would have been OK with me. Since it stayed 3.5 that was a bonus. I never was trying to get 4.0 I just wanted a much nicer looking 3.0/3.5

Leroy;

Mission fully accomplished as your current copy is most definitely much nicer after the dry clean and press.  Very well done on your part here.    

3 hours ago, lhcomics said:

Because of eye appeal I totally expect the 3.0 CC 29 to sell for more than what I paid for my 3.5 and had someone bid another $1500 back on Dec 15 I would not have won mine.

Yes, although the 3.0 copy on CC definitely has better eye appeal, it's quite possible that there might be some hidden technical flaws in the book that is not evident with just a scan of the covers.  So, it's not necessarily a sure thing that the CC 3.0 copy will go for money than your copy.  Although I guess it would be a good thing because it would then mean increasing value in your own copy. 

Bottom-line is that you got yourself a real winner in "Tec 29 with a ton of upside going forward.  After all, it is only the second Batman cover and a book that has been in the shadows of the much more highly acclaimed 'Tec 31, but probably not for much longer.   

Lou