Canadian Mark Jewelers Copy
2 2

138 posts in this topic

54,833 posts
7 minutes ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

I hear you, i just don't want to be guilty of misrepresentation... :foryou:

Cgc's reputation is all I have to go on, well that and any info in this thread....

Wouldn't you think that cgc would check for manipulation? The only way I would doubt cgc is if they said the light bulb didn't go off when they saw the Canadian price Mark jeweler.  But imo they wouldn't be able to autofill the cert withought making a connection :wishluck:

Imo of course I feel I "should" know what to think, but meh

 

Absolutely, but CGC is composed of people who can make mistakes, too. The only thing that would separate legitimate from illegitimate is where it happened. If it happened at World Color, as a result of mixed plates...it's legit. If it happened anytime after that, it's not. The difficulty is in proving it. Because it's so difficult to prove, and so easy to fake, I wouldn't place any premium on it. As others have said, in the normal course of things, such a book wouldn't even be possible, so it's interesting that it exists, especially so late in Marvel's Canadian price version days (the program would be over by DD #234.)

The MJs were for distribution to US servicemen. The CPVs were for distribution to the Canadian newsstand. In the normal course of things...and why we don't see more of such hybrids...these shouldn't exist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54,833 posts
8 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:
23 minutes ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

I hear you, i just don't want to be guilty of misrepresentation... :foryou:

Cgc's reputation is all I have to go on, well that and any info in this thread....

Wouldn't you think that cgc would check for manipulation? The only way I would doubt cgc is if they said the light bulb didn't go off when they saw the Canadian price Mark jeweler.  But imo they wouldn't be able to autofill the cert withought making a connection :wishluck:

Imo of course I feel I "should" know what to think, but meh

 

Absolutely, but CGC is composed of people who can make mistakes, too. The only thing that would separate legitimate from illegitimate is where it happened. If it happened at World Color, as a result of mixed plates...it's legit. If it happened anytime after that, it's not. The difficulty is in proving it. Because it's so difficult to prove, and so easy to fake, I wouldn't place any premium on it. As others have said, in the normal course of things, such a book wouldn't even be possible, so it's interesting that it exists, especially so late in Marvel's Canadian price version days (the program would be over by DD #234.)

The MJs were for distribution to US servicemen. The CPVs were for distribution to the Canadian newsstand. In the normal course of things...and why we don't see more of such hybrids...these shouldn't exist. 

For the record...Dan (FlyingDonut) knows as much about these types of variants as anyone I know, so if he's convinced that these are legit, that's good enough for me.

He and Al Stoltz (Basement Comics) are more than experts in these fields.

Edited by RockMyAmadeus
typos...the bane of all existence...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,072 posts
2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

For the record...Dan (FlyingDonut) knows as much about these types of variants as anyone I know, so if he's convinced that these are legit, that's good enough for me.

He and Al Stoltz (Basement Comics) are more than experts in these fields.

Well I appreciate that update, relieves some of the pressure for me lol hopefully he'll report back :) when/if ever with a blue label as well...

I'm here to learn, and I didn't do it to flip (no one said I did it's just an fyi :foryou:), but I don't want to seem too clueless about something that I own....

one day at a time I guess... :wishluck:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,744 posts
39 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Absolutely, but CGC is composed of people who can make mistakes, too. The only thing that would separate legitimate from illegitimate is where it happened. If it happened at World Color, as a result of mixed plates...it's legit. If it happened anytime after that, it's not. The difficulty is in proving it. Because it's so difficult to prove, and so easy to fake, I wouldn't place any premium on it. As others have said, in the normal course of things, such a book wouldn't even be possible, so it's interesting that it exists, especially so late in Marvel's Canadian price version days (the program would be over by DD #234.)

The MJs were for distribution to US servicemen. The CPVs were for distribution to the Canadian newsstand. In the normal course of things...and why we don't see more of such hybrids...these shouldn't exist. 

It has nothing to do with mixed plates. Covers, guts, and inserts were all printed separately and put together to make a comic. This was an error in assembly, simple as that. It came from a collection with many other MJ inserts, so I suspect that it should have been a normal price with an insert and the incorrect cover was used. 

I would also say this would be extremely difficult to fake; manipulating the staples and either adding in the insert or switching out a cover without detection from CGC. I also don't know why anyone would do it. It certainly wasn't for value, as I paid probably 5 cents for it and sold it for $3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54,833 posts
10 minutes ago, RCheli said:

It has nothing to do with mixed plates. Covers, guts, and inserts were all printed separately and put together to make a comic. This was an error in assembly, simple as that.

Ok. Mixed plates, assembly, whatever it was, the point was that to be legitimate, it had to have happened during the printing process...not after.

Edited by RockMyAmadeus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,744 posts
2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Ok. Mixed plates, assembly, whatever it was, the point was that to be legitimate, it had to have happened during the printing process...not after.

I think you need to stop questioning its legitimacy. It was an error in assembly, no different than multiple covers or comics inserted upside down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54,833 posts
Just now, RCheli said:

I think you need to stop questioning its legitimacy. It was an error in assembly, no different than multiple covers or comics inserted upside down. 

 

56 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

For the record...Dan (FlyingDonut) knows as much about these types of variants as anyone I know, so if he's convinced that these are legit, that's good enough for me.

He and Al Stoltz (Basement Comics) are more than experts in these fields.

Your opinion is noted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
279 posts
5 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That is not an accurate summation of the events in question. 

The "price guide blog", run by a Mr. Benjamin Nobel, contains multiple errors and false claims which, heretofore, Mr. Nobel has been entirely unwilling to address, When he was politely challenged on his blog, rather than respond, he simply blocked those challenging him from being able to post there.

Those are not the actions of a person interested in getting at the truth. Those are the actions of someone with an agenda.

When that was pointed out on THIS board, where Mr. Nobel had a single post from 2011, and was therefore not a member, a member by the user name of "The_Investor", who is, apparently, the "Angelo" person mentioned as a co-contributor on the "Canadian Price Variant" price guide, notified Mr. Nobel about what was being said, and the both of them (and perhaps others) decided to call CGC and complain that they were being "cyber bullied"...and, those at CGC took them at their word, and suspended me for three weeks, despite the fact that there was no "cyber bullying" of any kind going on, and Mr. Nobel was free to post the things that he posted, including his ridiculous "offer", that Lazyboy linked above.

It's rather difficult to "run someone off" when you can't post, wouldn't you agree...?

The "price guide" is now "voldemort around here" because in the year and a half since this disgraceful event, Mr; Nobel has made absolutely zero effort to fix the multiple errors and false claims on his website, which renders it another of a series of "hype" sites with an agenda to push. When and if Mr. Nobel decides to take these issues seriously, I have no doubt he would be welcomed with open arms by the members of this community.

Thank you for the opportunity to correct the record.

We can agree it was a disgraceful event I guess.  With the way the conversation devolved I think bridges were burned before they were built. 

I’m no fan of nontransparency but with overstreet virtually awol on the subject and the internet being what it is, it’s the top hit for searches.  Definitely not cool to shut down debate. If there are problems with some of the facts state them clearly here where you’re a respected member, and people can cross reference.

I don’t really get the sense there’s an agenda going on, beyond the usual collector enthusiasm.  Contributors are obviously fans for the niche but the market reports seem grounded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,468 posts

The thread has become quite illuminating on a number of fronts. Here's a few last thoughts from me.

Firstly, I did a lot of work investigating inserts when I was an ASM collector. I wanted to make sure I had every known copy, so spent a long time researching them. What became clear to me fairly quickly is that MJI's / NDS inserts were only placed in standard US priced newsstand books. There were no examples of MJI's in direct editions, or price variants (US, pence, Canadian, Australian). So when I first saw the copy in this thread I was sceptical. As far as I know, MJI's should not be in Canadian copies by design and the DD 231 is the only example I've ever seen. 

But it does now look like it is legitimate, i.e. that it has not been created after the original production event. Here's an obvious example of one which has - an ASM #121 post production construct which anyone who has spent enough time researching will know should not legitimately exist:

331658138_121MJI3.jpg.9eb88524d092281cc106f1b183b220b9.jpg

It's quite easy to see the crude attempt to pass it off. Again, if you have spent any significant time looking for MJI's in the wild, you become quite adept at spotting them and can easily spot ones which 'don't look right':

1365788452_121MJI.PNG.fc7fecca56de4427f162e45ca2faa833.PNG

But the Daredevil 231 does indeed look legitimate so well done to @RCheli for finding it and @ADAMANTIUM Mark for sending one to CGC. Mistakes happen and I agree with RCheli that the likely explanation here is that the wrong cover was attached during production.

That brings me to my second point. I think CGC have made a mistake by grading the book as a blue label with no reference to the fact that the book should not exist in this way by design. To hold up the highest standards, I think they should have made it clear that this book is effectively a production error. Otherwise, it could over time lead new collectors down the wrong path should they become interested in MJI books and start collecting. If I started out as a newbie now, and found the image of Marks book on Google, I would assume MJI's existed in Canadian copies and would search accordingly. I would like CGC to be more on top of these things. They have a superb resource at their disposal - the members of this board - but often seem unwilling to use that expertise. I flagged what was clearly a pence ASM #1 graded as a US copy to them recently and got no substantive response. I have sent a number of similar scenarios to them and in each case was ignored. So CGC here have commenced what may perpetuate as a myth. A bit like Overstreet and their insistence that the ASM mini copy appeared in Esquire Magazine.

Mark - I would contact CGC if I were you, and run this by them. The right response for me would be a free reholder but with the label clearly noting what the book represents. You're not in it to flip as you say, so it would be a service to the community and would still result in you having one hell of a cool production error. That would be a great result for me.

My final point is the commentary in the thread about Ben Noble and John McClure. There are always two sides to every story and my experience with them both has been extremely positive. I haven't met either in person, but have collaborated on variant related work by email extensively. I can say that I found both to be intelligent, decent people who have a clear love of comics and an enthusiastic desire to seek out the wonderful variations and, crucially, to post those findings for others who share their interests to see.  It saddens me to see their names traduced here in this way. During our collaborations both parties accepted every suggestion I gave them with thanks and good grace, as did I in return. There was no issue at all accepting mistakes and correcting them. We had disagreements on non-factual matters, but managed them respectfully, never losing site of the bigger picture - we all love the same thing. Online disagreements can go badly as we all know, and often decent people can come away tarnished with one poorly placed response, posted in anger or frustration. But we are all human, and we all make mistakes. I look at what Ben and John have contributed to the hobby as a whole, and judge them on that. I also make my own mind up about them, by basing it on my own interactions with them. CGC make mistakes. Overstreet make mistakes. Winston Churchill made mistakes. Even I make mistakes once or twice a century :whistle:

I wish people would be a little kinder to each other, especially when we are all playing in the same arena.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,744 posts

@Get Marwood & I You think it should be a green label? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,468 posts
13 minutes ago, RCheli said:

@Get Marwood & I You think it should be a green label? 

Not sure RCheli.

Blue doesn't fit the bill in my view:

blue.thumb.PNG.d1ba4bcbe09fa7174a18866462afab54.PNG

A book with a MJI which is in place legitimately, but against design, can't have 'no qualifiers or special considerations', can it? It exists because of a production error.

The green label definition says:

green.thumb.PNG.db0e1067465b55c931b68d4fcc862827.PNG

The description seems to focus exclusively on defects. Is an MJI in a book that it shouldn't be in a 'defect'? I don't think so.

Unless they expand the definition of 'Qualified' to include anything that isn't 'normal' it doesn't seem appropriate either does it. As it stands, if these are the official definitions, I would go for blue label with a note - something like "MJ insert copy manufactured with a Canadian priced cover in error". Then add additional data to the grading notes to clarify, e.g. "MJI's do not exist in Canadian copies by design. Book appears legitimate however, so is judged to be a manufacturing error".

What do you think?

 

 

Edited by Get Marwood & I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,744 posts

@Get Marwood & I You seem much more informed than I so I'm not sure if I would have any great input. I can't imagine CGC wanting to put that much copy on a label for what likely is a book not even worth its grading fee. 

I can easily see how this happened in the printing and binding process, and I suspect that it's merely a perfect storm of errors. I would keep it as a blue because it doesn't negatively affect the comic or its grade. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,468 posts
4 minutes ago, RCheli said:

@Get Marwood & I You seem much more informed than I so I'm not sure if I would have any great input. I can't imagine CGC wanting to put that much copy on a label for what likely is a book not even worth its grading fee. 

Not at all, it's not rocket science and you're opinion is just as valid. You're probably right about the wording - too much for the label probably

4 minutes ago, RCheli said:

I can easily see how this happened in the printing and binding process, and I suspect that it's merely a perfect storm of errors. I would keep it as a blue because it doesn't negatively affect the comic or its grade. 

That's probably how it will remain. For me, it's less about the impact on the worth of the comic and more about accuracy / consistency. People were fairly united in their view that MJI's don't appear in Canadians. Now CGC have muddied the water. No one dies of course, but there's nothing wrong with precision in these matters, if the knowledge is already out there. I would prefer for CGC to be accurate so flagging this up to them gives them a chance to make a note in their procedural bible so that future books are correctly identified too. It's not realistic to expect the graders to appreciate every nuance, but if you don't help them in situations like this by bringing it to their attention, they can't learn / improve.

@ADAMANTIUM Mark - you love a call to CGC - see what they say mate. I'm not paying international rates  (thumbsu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,072 posts
1 hour ago, Get Marwood & I said:

Mark - you love a call to CGC - see what they say mate. I'm not paying international rates  (thumbsu

I'll send an email to Brittany Monday or soon, I'm ecstatic that it IS in a blue label tbh, but am willing to get clarification on reasoning for the blue label. Perhaps flyingdonut is already doing the same, idk, but it may be worth clarification. I technically wouldn't mind if it said error though :foryou:

Sincee we don't have a way to look it up in the census, imo, there is the long shot that it's happened before, but it probably hasn't.

I figure an email to Brittany McManus would be more efficient, that way she could gather info and get back to me, rather than a quick phone call...

It might not be worth the time effort, if we're only talking label clarification rather than legitimacy, but is definitely worth inquiring about (thumbsu

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,072 posts
On 2/16/2019 at 9:28 AM, ADAMANTIUM said:
On 2/16/2019 at 8:04 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Mark - you love a call to CGC - see what they say mate. I'm not paying international rates  (thumbsu

I'll send an email to Brittany Monday or soon, I'm ecstatic that it IS in a blue label tbh, but am willing to get clarification on reasoning for the blue label. Perhaps flyingdonut is already doing the same, idk, but it may be worth clarification. I technically wouldn't mind if it said error though :foryou:

Sincee we don't have a way to look it up in the census, imo, there is the long shot that it's happened before, but it probably hasn't.

I figure an email to Brittany McManus would be more efficient, that way she could gather info and get back to me, rather than a quick phone call...

It might not be worth the time effort, if we're only talking label clarification rather than legitimacy, but is definitely worth inquiring about (thumbsu

ahem, I guess you want me to report back about the email to Brittany lol She clarified, but only to say:

Yes, a Canadian Mark Jeweler is interesting, due to the fact that no other Mark Jeweler is "broken out" in the census, this means it doesn't classify as a variant.... :foryou: 

So maybe someday Steve :) and perhaps when there is more of a fervor for MJI's and the like, it will be classified as an "error" copy :foryou: 

As of now, I'm thankful to get a universal label and not a qualified. I'll take what I can get! But I could follow up at a later date if, seemingly, things have changed.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54,833 posts
On 2/16/2019 at 4:28 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

My final point is the commentary in the thread about Ben Noble and John McClure. There are always two sides to every story and my experience with them both has been extremely positive. I haven't met either in person, but have collaborated on variant related work by email extensively. I can say that I found both to be intelligent, decent people who have a clear love of comics and an enthusiastic desire to seek out the wonderful variations and, crucially, to post those findings for others who share their interests to see.  It saddens me to see their names traduced here in this way. During our collaborations both parties accepted every suggestion I gave them with thanks and good grace, as did I in return. There was no issue at all accepting mistakes and correcting them. We had disagreements on non-factual matters, but managed them respectfully, never losing site of the bigger picture - we all love the same thing. Online disagreements can go badly as we all know, and often decent people can come away tarnished with one poorly placed response, posted in anger or frustration. But we are all human, and we all make mistakes. I look at what Ben and John have contributed to the hobby as a whole, and judge them on that. I also make my own mind up about them, by basing it on my own interactions with them. CGC make mistakes. Overstreet make mistakes. Winston Churchill made mistakes. Even I make mistakes once or twice a century :whistle:

I wish people would be a little kinder to each other, especially when we are all playing in the same arena.

Since you are referring to me and my comments, I will respond.

That is wonderful that you have had such a nice experience with them. Truly.

However, there are facts which are indisputable, and those facts should not be glossed over or brushed under the rug, just because your own personal dealings with them have been positive.

Jon McClure did not discover the 30/35 cent variants. Many collectors knew of these books, long before McClure's purported discovery. Overstreet printed examples of these books in the price guide, going back to about 1979.

Claiming credit for a discovery you did not make calls your integrity into question.

Irrespective of any other contribution someone may make to a field, claiming credit for a discovery you did not make taints the whole thing.

Ben Nobel, and I assume "Angelo" ("The_Investor") called CGC, said they were being "cyber bullied", and CGC suspended me for three weeks, without anything beyond a cursory investigation, did NOT even bother with "my side", and when I pursued the matter with higher ups at CGC, the only response I was given was that "multiple people made the accusation"...as if the number of accusers is proof of the crime.

As you, yourself, have vociferously complained, silencing people isn't the way to make your points.

As well, Mr. Nobel's blog continues to contain errors and falsehoods which were brought to his attention, which he has refused to fix. 

This article is one of them, filled with errors, and unprofessional, immoderate gushing:

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/newsstand-vs-direct-edition-comics/

The Direct market started in 1973-1974...NOT 1979. He cites both Jim Shooter and Chuck Rozanski about it, who bother get critical details wrong, such as Rozanski's claim "only the most dedicated newsstands chose to keep comics available after 1987", which is not even remotely true. Comics could be found on newsstands and spinner racks throughout the country, well into the 90s. He cites Chuck's made up "Direct vs. newsstand sales" chart as gospel, when it is complete fabrication from a man who had nothing to do with the newsstand market past the mid 70s. He puts far, FAR too much emphasis on people's credentials..."the fallacy of the appeal to accomplishment or authority"...than whether what they're saying is true.

And that's just the surface. 

So, the question comes back to the same thing it always does: "are you interested in actual scholarship, wherever that may lead you, or are you only interested in advancing your own beliefs, ideas, and agendas?"

Until Mr. Nobel makes a serious effort to listen to (rather than attempt to silence) differing perspectives, he falls solidly into the latter camp.

There are, indeed, two sides...and more...to the story. Someone once complained to me that a person "ought not be judged based on one bad decision." And that's absolutely true, but there's a caveat: if the bad decision is never resolved, never fixed, never even admitted...then that bad decision is still in effect. You steal from someone, even one time, you're a thief. It doesn't matter the good you may otherwise do, if you never make restitution, if you never pay back that theft, if you never even acknowledge that you did it or attempt to fix it...you're still a thief. 

All the good deeds in the world won't change that. They want to change that? They can start by acknowledging these things, and working to make restitution. They can make a serious effort to question their conclusions and not be so proud as to be willing to admit, then discard, where they are in error. 

Edited by RockMyAmadeus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54,833 posts

And yes, if the book is legitimate, it belongs in a green label, just like every other error should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,072 posts

"Should"?

Of course not all do... but I'm wondering how the opinion "should" comes about with cgc. I know some don't and some do, but cgc's stance on who made who and what is an error or variant isn't on paper to my knowledge.

I reflect that since it isn't on paper, then it isn't in stone either and can change :foryou: good or bad (thumbsu

 

Share this post


Link to post
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
2 2