THE AMAZING FANTASY #15 CLUB 39 39

[namisgr]

Two-thirds of copies does not equal "quite uncommon".  Sorry!

[mysterio]

1 hour ago, namisgr said:

Heritage has auctioned a lot more than 25 examples - I just stopped at the first page of the archive from a lack of interest in going through the whole lot of them.  And I completely agree that a sampling of 25 examples is small.  But I don't see how the identity of the auction house may have skewed the numbers.

To be fair, a miswrap is in the eye of the beholder. I likewise don’t have the time or interest to dig too deeply into this, especially since it’s something I’ve kept an eye on for 30+ years. 

[namisgr]

2 hours ago, VintageComics said:

And if I was auctioning a million dollar book and some randoms on the internet were posting misinformation that my book looked improperly pressed (when in fact the book looked the same raw before it was pressed) I wouldn't be happy.

Please identify my quote that the AF15 in cgc 9.4 shape currently being auctioned was or looked improperly pressed.  Good luck finding what doesn't exist.  But that's a thing of yours, to misrepresent what somebody posts through a lack of comprehension, and then slam them for the stuff you made up out of thin air.

Here again is my lone post on the AF15 currently being auctioned.  This random on the internet stands by his comment that among the factors to consider in guessing what the copy will sell for is the appearance of the pages sticking out from the front cover:

Posted Friday at 07:05 PM

  

We'll see how it goes for the 9.4 copy. Here are a few factors to consider:

1) there are around 6 copies (possibly more out there) in 9.4 and the pool of buyers looking to add one in their collection is very small

2) will there be new bidders entering? I have a feeling that a few of the bidders with deep pockets already have a copy they own so would result in less bidding perhaps.

3) let's face it, SA books have been down in value for the most part last year and early this year or stayed the same price range for the past few years which typically would translate to a lower hammer price. Who knows when it will pick up again. Now is more of a buyer's market.

I'd add a fourth factor: the pages sticking out so much from the cover may dissuade some interested parties from bidding.

Edited February 26, 2020 by namisgr
formatting the quoted post the right way

[namisgr]

4 hours ago, VintageComics said:

1st, the chances that the Pacific Coast ASM #11 CGC 9.6 WASN'T PRESSED is slim.

One look at the comic shows it wasn't pressed.  There's an area along the top edge that still contains a natural bent overhang.  That would've been flattened by pressing.  But there are some in the pressing business aware of the tendency for early SA Marvels to show characteristic signs of pressing who take the time and use methods sufficiently gentle that minimize the common pressing defects, and such defects are not invariable consequences of pressing.

Few if any of the Pacific Coast SA Marvels that still reside in old blue labels show any of the stigmata of pressing.  The ASM run is one of several purchased initially en masse by a single buyer who then had the run slabbed shortly after CGC established its business.

Edited February 26, 2020 by namisgr

[sledgehammer]

I'll never be in the league of shoppers for an AF 15 like this, but I've never liked the look either.

There's an old label ASM 9 in the CGC Gallery with the look too.

i would say yuk, but I don't need the abuse.

 

[Dark Knight]

9 hours ago, Krismusic said:

 

I thought pressing existed before CGC but not as popular as it is now? so wouldn't those books still have a chance to have been pressed and cleaned?

Yes that is true that pressing existed before CGC but it is much much more mainstream now.  All I'm saying is that there is likely a higher probability that a book with its older 1st gen. holder was never pressed than one coming from a newer holder, that is all.  Not saying that all books in a 1st gen holder is unpressed.

[peewee22]

9 minutes ago, Dark Knight said:

Yes that is true that pressing existed before CGC but it is much much more mainstream now.  All I'm saying is that there is likely a higher probability that a book with its older 1st gen. holder was never pressed than one coming from a newer holder, that is all.  Not saying that all books in a 1st gen holder is unpressed.

Didn't some of the first holders note "cleaned & pressed" on the label?

[DT0428]

Didn’t know a AF15 1999 German reprint was worth this much
 

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F183645599006

 

[namisgr]

1 hour ago, peewee22 said:

Didn't some of the first holders note "cleaned & pressed" on the label?

Only if a book received a wet/solvent cleaning, followed by a pressing to re-flatten the cover.

[peewee22]

6 minutes ago, namisgr said:

Only if a book received a wet/solvent cleaning, followed by a pressing to re-flatten the cover.

In Blue or PLOD holders?

[lou_fine]

9 hours ago, VintageComics said:

11 hours ago, Krismusic said:

 

I thought pressing existed before CGC but not as popular as it is now? so wouldn't those books still have a chance to have been pressed and cleaned?

Correct.

Although technically correct from a pure mathematical point of view, your answer would appear to be a bit misleading here.  

Especially in the sense that pressing prior to CGC was normally only done as the final step after other restoration activities had already been performed on a book.  Standalone pressing with no other restoration work done on a book was not a common activity since it was simply not worthwhile as differences in price points between grades in the old grading system were just not as significant as they are in today's so-called "more refined and developed" grading system.  

Especially since the focus of today's grading system is really geared much more towards ensuring the maximization of the top and bottom lines for the grading companies. 

 

 

[lou_fine]

44 minutes ago, peewee22 said:

51 minutes ago, namisgr said:

Only if a book received a wet/solvent cleaning, followed by a pressing to re-flatten the cover.

In Blue or PLOD holders?

These books would have been in a PLOD during the first 15 years or so of CGC's existence, but have since been upgraded to reside in the quasi blue/grey Conserved holders with their last revamp of their Restoration grading system.  

[NoMan]

Judas Priest do I have a headache. Kids must be having a blast. 

[Glassman10]

14 hours ago, NoMan said:

Judas Priest do I have a headache. Kids must be having a blast. 

I feel your pain. I think now would be a good time to print maps of how to get to that old abandoned school bus..

[NoMan]

2 hours ago, Glassman10 said:

I feel your pain. I think now would be a good time to print maps of how to get to that old abandoned school bus..

draw map please. seems like a fun adventure.

Edited February 27, 2020 by NoMan

[Glassman10]

2 hours ago, NoMan said:

draw map please. seems like a fun adventure.

How about a nice Geocache? They are so fun in winter..

[VintageComics]

On 2/26/2020 at 2:26 PM, namisgr said:

Please identify my quote that the AF15 in cgc 9.4 shape currently being auctioned was or looked improperly pressed.  Good luck finding what doesn't exist.  But that's a thing of yours, to misrepresent what somebody posts through a lack of comprehension, and then slam them for the stuff you made up out of thin air.

 

I actually didn't single you out but you do have a history of talking about pages peeking out and pressing negatively and all I am trying to do is balance the conversation and show that just because a book has pages sticking out it does not mean it was pressed.

 

[namisgr]

3 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

I actually didn't single you out but you do have a history of talking about pages peeking out and pressing negatively and all I am trying to do is balance the conversation and show that just because a book has pages sticking out it does not mean it was pressed.

Nonsense, Roy.  You wrote the following and quoted me:

Posted yesterday at 11:16 AM

You're drawing attention to defects THAT EXIST ON  UNPRESSED BOOKS and stating that they are because of pressing.

It's ridiculous.

[VintageComics]

13 minutes ago, namisgr said:

Nonsense, Roy.  You wrote the following and quoted me:

Posted yesterday at 11:16 AM

You're drawing attention to defects THAT EXIST ON  UNPRESSED BOOKS and stating that they are because of pressing.

It's ridiculous.

I responded to you about people bad mouthing a 9.4 but didn't single you out on that later post.

I did 'single you out' when I quoted you and the list of defects that you attributed to pressing much earlier, all of which can and do exist on unpressed books.

But we're all over the road now.

The single point I've been trying to make through all of this was meant to be that just because pages are peeking out (even all the way down the book) does not automatically mean a book was pressed.

 

[lou_fine]

22 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

 

The single point I've been trying to make through all of this was meant to be that just because pages are peeking out (even all the way down the book) does not automatically mean a book was pressed.

 

So, are we then to assume the corollary to your above statment would be that "just because pages are NOT peeking out (even all the way down the book) does not automatically mean a book was NOT pressed?