• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Ninja Turtles - Differences Between Printings?
8 8

Started by USArmyParatrooper,

370 posts in this topic

DiceX

DiceX

Posted
Posted
I just looked at every identified TMNT 1 1st and 2nd print on eBay and Heritage. This seems to hold up.

 

Same here. Go have a look through the registry. I didn't get a chance to check those.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
Well at least every 1st print won't have to be cracked out to verify if it's really a 1st print.

 

AMEN to that.

 

Now, who would like to be a fly on the wall with the person that is calling the $23K buyer?

 

:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
maloney414

maloney414

Posted
Posted

I believe it's definitely not a 1st print.

 

It could be a counterfeit made from an image of the outside cover of a 3rd print and a 1st print interior cover image. Thus "fooling" CGC. The only way to know if it's a counterfeit would be to crack it open and check.

 

Or the simple answer is that it was mislabeled. It happens. More often than you think. It could have been an honest mistake. It's just that this time it was on an expensive book.

 

If this is the case it brings up the question of who the original submitter was. If I worked at CGC the 1st thing I would do is try to find the original invoice and see if the book was submitted as a 1st or 3rd print by the original person. I'm not a lawyer, but If they submitted it as a 3rd print it may put the fraud aspect on the submitter. If it can be shown they submitted a 3rd print, then received a mislabeled book, and then proceded to cash in on the mistake to an unsuspecting buyer. (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TMNT

TMNT

Posted
Posted
Or the simple answer is that it was mislabeled

 

I tend to agree with this. While its obviously not impossible, I think that the likelyhood that a frankenbook got past the screeners is more slim than a simple label error. I have no idea what sort of recourse there might be, but somebody needs to let the new owner know that their 23K book is worth a couple hundred.... :tonofbricks:

 

The good that has come out of this thread, however, is pretty tremendous. I had no idea on that spot tell b/w 1st & 2nd printings. And I think that alot of people have been, and will be, greatly informed as to a quick and painless way to the different b/w 1,2,3 printings which can be super important when looking at a crappy scan on ebay

Link to comment
Share on other sites
USArmyParatrooper

USArmyParatrooper

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I wonder how their process works for identifying and labeling comics. I know the comics get checked by a resto expert and then it moves on to three graders. I don't know who is responsible for identifying it, labeling it and imputing the data into the census.

 

But... it looks like 9.8 copies just became more rare.

Edited by USArmyParatrooper
Link to comment
Share on other sites
aggr1103

aggr1103

Posted
Posted

Or the simple answer is that it was mislabeled. It happens. More often than you think. It could have been an honest mistake. It's just that this time it was on an expensive book.

 

If this is the case it brings up the question of who the original submitter was. If I worked at CGC the 1st thing I would do is try to find the original invoice and see if the book was submitted as a 1st or 3rd print by the original person. I'm not a lawyer, but If they submitted it as a 3rd print it may put the fraud aspect on the submitter. If it can be shown they submitted a 3rd print, then received a mislabeled book, and then proceded to cash in on the mistake to an unsuspecting buyer. (shrug)

 

I get what you're saying here. Its a possible folly of mistakes and dishonesty. Should fault be shared by the grading service, the original submitter, or both? What about the consignment company? Looks like its been almost a year since that price was paid. People put a lot of trust in that label because it says CGC and not another company.

 

Which brings me to something I've thought about for a long time now. I'm putting on my flame suit just in case, but I wanted to share. I've never felt comfortable with the video of the guy cracking his PGX slabbed TMNT on youtube. He shows the time and date, then the label and how it says "1st print". Its then cracked out and he spazzes out at the sight of it not being a 1st print because there's no gobbeldygook ad. The first time I saw the video I had no understanding of PGX or their shady dealings, but my first thought was "what if they mislabeled it and he is trying to profit from it?" There was no video of him sending his 1st print book to PGX, how were we to trust that he actually sent a 1st print and not a later printing?

 

Again, I'm not condoning or supporting PGX in saying all that. I've just never felt that easy about it, especially if it could have been a mislabel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
Which brings me to something I've thought about for a long time now. I'm putting on my flame suit just in case, but I wanted to share. I've never felt comfortable with the video of the guy cracking his PGX slabbed TMNT on youtube. He shows the time and date, then the label and how it says "1st print". Its then cracked out and he spazzes out at the sight of it not being a 1st print because there's no gobbeldygook ad. The first time I saw the video I had no understanding of PGX or their shady dealings, but my first thought was "what if they mislabeled it and he is trying to profit from it?" There was no video of him sending his 1st print book to PGX, how were we to trust that he actually sent a 1st print and not a later printing?

 

This has been brought up before as a possible situation, so don't feel bad. But without the prior pictures or video before the book was slabbed, it's hard to prove anything.

 

I don't think he ever posted photos of the book before PGX handled it, but maybe I am wrong. He definitely posted plenty of content afterwards, including the check that PGX sent him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stronguy

Stronguy

Posted
Posted

I think the smart money, regarding that PGX video, is the guy knew he sent in a 3rd print, saw they messed up on the label and then capitalized on PGX's incompetence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
8 8
Go to topic listing