pemart1966 Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 If this cover IS fake, it's certainly an elaborate fake. Bidding would certainly be interesting but I think that it's important to differentiate between the comic book and the art. We all know about the comic: Galactus, Surfer, Inhumans etc - a highly sought issue - but the cover itself doesn't show any of these 3 - there's a large image of the Watcher; smaller images of the FF standing but not in action; and detailed background. So strictly from an image point of view, is it a great cover? Granted, It's a mid-60s cover and we all know how rare those are...in the market. I suspect that bidders would in some regards ignore the image and bid based on the contents of the comic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronty Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 53 minutes ago, pemart1966 said: I suspect that bidders would in some regards ignore the image and bid based on the contents of the comic. Yes, because its been such a well known key for such a long time. It would get big bucks for sure. That being said I can't help but think the cover for 49 would sell for more, despite not being the first appearance. Now if the image for 49 was the image for 48, look out, that would do incredibly well. Twanj and NinjaSealed 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronty Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 1 hour ago, pemart1966 said: If this cover IS fake, it's certainly an elaborate fake. CAn't imagine this being fake given the fact that its the buyer of the FF52 cover. Someone with the means to buy that is unlikely to try and pull a fake IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronty Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 In the other thread, Felix made a point of saying a significant 1963 cover had surfaced. In this thread, Felix says NO COMMENT!! Fantastic Four 48 is 1966.... Makes me wonder what else this gentleman owns! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delekkerste Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 17 minutes ago, Bronty said: CAn't imagine this being fake given the fact that its the buyer of the FF52 cover. Someone with the means to buy that is unlikely to try and pull a fake IMO Someone like that would definitely not try to PULL a fake, but, that's not to say that he couldn't have been the VICTIM of a fake. In light of Felix's recent podcast, is it possible that he saw that Sinnott was going to be at a nearby show and wanted Joe to try and authenticate some covers he owns? I have zero inside information about this person or either cover...I just find the timing to be curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delekkerste Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 2 hours ago, jjonahjameson11 said: If this cover is actually the original art and in decent shape and not altered by the Donnelly brothers in anyway, what would it be worth? I don't know, but, would it be worth more or less than, say, ASM #50 and SS #4, which are of the same general vintage and are also key issues (and are known to have sold privately in recent years?) I believe Burkey posted recently in the ASM #100 discussion here that he sold the ASM #50 for $550K (IIRC)? I was never wowed by the FF #48 cover, but, given the interior content, the image is much better known than the superior #49 cover which followed. Not sure how it would all play out in the price, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronty Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, delekkerste said: Edited April 28, 2018 by Bronty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buyatari Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 3 hours ago, tth2 said: Is this a serious question? The cover of FF 48 would be on a different planet than the FF 52, which isn't even the published cover. The main reason that FF 52 is much more valuable than FF 48 is that FF 52 is relatively scarce in high grade, particularly compared to FF 48, which is one of the most common SA books in high grade. My first assumption was that yes 48 would be much better than 52. The 9.8 #52 that recently sold on HA threw me for a loop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pemart1966 Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 45 minutes ago, delekkerste said: Someone like that would definitely not try to PULL a fake, but, that's not to say that he couldn't have been the VICTIM of a fake. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buyatari Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 Be fun to walk around the convention with this under your arm as if it was common comic art. Mr. Machismo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pemart1966 Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 1 hour ago, Bronty said: In the other thread, Felix made a point of saying a significant 1963 cover had surfaced. In this thread, Felix says NO COMMENT!! Fantastic Four 48 is 1966.... Makes me wonder what else this gentleman owns! I've never understood people that "press buttons" and then walk away. He makes a point of saying that a "significant 1963 cover" has surfaced and then in the next breath says "No Comment"? If you're going to make the statement in the first place be prepared to divulge the details - especially if it's "surfaced"... wurstisart 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pemart1966 Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 2 minutes ago, buyatari said: Be fun to walk around the convention with this under your arm as if it was common comic art. You may walk "around" with it but you may not walk "out" with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjonahjameson11 Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 14 hours ago, Nexus said: Getting other e-mails about this, so just to repeat: Not in Seattle. Emerald City Comic Con was last month. Beyond that...no comment. Not sure why the no comment, Felix. I just got off the phone with someone who spoke with Sinnott about the cover and Joe didn’t sign the cover williamhlawson and delekkerste 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delekkerste Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 3 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said: Not sure why the no comment, Felix. I just got off the phone with someone who spoke with Sinnott about the cover and Joe didn’t sign the cover Because it was a fake? Or because it was never returned to him and Jack? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexus Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 1 minute ago, jjonahjameson11 said: Not sure why the no comment, Felix. I just got off the phone with someone who spoke with Sinnott about the cover and Joe didn’t sign the cover "No comment" because certain parties involved asked that I make no comment. I didn't know much before (beyond the broad strokes). I know a little more now. That's all. 1webslinger 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjonahjameson11 Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 1 minute ago, delekkerste said: Because it was a fake? Or because it was never returned to him and Jack? Because Joe identified a few things that were wrong with artwork, therefore he did not sign delekkerste 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post jjonahjameson11 Posted April 28, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted April 28, 2018 Honestly, folks, if this is a board for us to discuss comic art, then let’s have these discussions in the open, instead of little snippets here and there that serve no purposes other than to raise eyebrows, suspicion, and hearsay! dirtymartini1, NelsonAI, pemart1966 and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wurstisart Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 Totally agree ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexus Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said: Honestly, folks, if this is a board for us to discuss comic art, then let’s have these discussions in the open, instead of little snippets here and there that serve no purposes other than to raise eyebrows, suspicion, and hearsay! This wasn't a public transaction. It was a private one. Until the parties involved decide to talk about this, all the rest of us can do is speculate. Edited April 28, 2018 by Nexus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wurstisart Posted April 28, 2018 Share Posted April 28, 2018 Showing it at a convention or handing it to an artist ain’t necessarily a private transaction. Just saying... NelsonAI and williamhlawson 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
