Overpriced 1st appearances 3 3

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 hours ago, MadJimJaspers said:

While I agree with your point, you can definitely use it for meaningful comparison. 

So long as you constantly qualify what you're saying..."the census is not an accurate count, but only an indication, and represents nothing but what has passed through the doors at CGC"...sure. Lots of people lost a LOT of money relying on the census in the 00s, not understanding what it was, or how it should be used. Nearly 20 years on, the census is filling out, but...it's just a fraction (books graded by CGC) of a fraction (books graded) of what actually exists.

[Naphtha]

41 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

So long as you constantly qualify what you're saying..."the census is not an accurate count, but only an indication, and represents nothing but what has passed through the doors at CGC"...sure. 

Nothing to qualify and I appreciate the jab. Accuracy and meaning are different words. As I said, I agree with your point, but you can't state with certainty that no measurable amount of meaning can be derived from the census. In fact your point confirms this.

In the early years of CGC, buyers paid big money for bronze age 9.8s believing that the accuracy of the census indicated only a few copies in existence. They lost their money because the census eventually showed that there were in fact hundreds to thousands. Case in point...

[HuddyBee]

The census doesn't give population yes. But it can be known that if there are a ton of copies graded on the census, said book is even more so common. Maybe the census can't gage rarity, but it sure can gage how common a book is.

Edited March 2, 2019 by HuddyBee

[jjonahjameson11]

41 minutes ago, HuddyBee said:

The census doesn't give population yes. But it can be known that if there are a ton of copies graded on the census, said book is even more so common. Maybe the census can't gage rarity, but it sure can gage how common a book is.

Yes, and no.  Sometimes more difficult depending on the value of a book.  If the book is pricey, I know of many folks who will resubmit multiple times to get a 9.4 or 9.6 or 9.8, and I don’t believe the census takes that into consideration 

Edited March 2, 2019 by jjonahjameson11

[Lazyboy]

4 hours ago, HuddyBee said:

That's just my estimate of how many copies there are. I guess I could be wrong on the exact number of copies. I'm confused are you just looking for things to say, "actually" to? 😕

I'm trying to ascertain how much you actually know and understand, so I can figure out whether it's worth the effort to try and dispel your misconceptions.

5 hours ago, HuddyBee said:

The census doesn't give population yes. But it can be known that if there are a ton of copies graded on the census, said book is even more so common. Maybe the census can't gage rarity, but it sure can gage how common a book is.

  You must be the first person ever to say that you need the census to know that a common book (like ASM 300) is common. And even then, you still don't understand how common it actually is.

I guess I have my answer. Apparently it's going to take a lot of time and work.

Seriously, do you know anything about comics?

You don't actually have to post. You can just read and learn.

[HuddyBee]

8 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

I'm trying to ascertain how much you actually know and understand, so I can figure out whether it's worth the effort to try and dispel your misconceptions.

  You must be the first person ever to say that you need the census to know that a common book (like ASM 300) is common. And even then, you still don't understand how common it actually is.

I guess I have my answer. Apparently it's going to take a lot of time and work.

Seriously, do you know anything about comics?

You don't actually have to post. You can just read and learn.

Did you read my post?

I never said you "need" the census. I said it is a "useful tool." I know a thing or two about comics. (aquaman...cough cough) Maybe not as much as you. I'm only refuting people's comments that the census isn't useful. My point is completely valid. Its a useful tool for comparison and to judge the commonality of a book compared to others. If you disagree with that statement, I'd love to here an actual response or retort.

Edited March 2, 2019 by HuddyBee

[Lazyboy]

The census is not useful in the way you think it is. It is very limited, narrow data.

There are many factors that can't be ignored when trying to compare different issues. While you can reasonably account for some of them, others are much more difficult. Regardless, it's all extra work that involves far, far more than just looking at the current numbers.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

16 hours ago, MadJimJaspers said:

17 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

So long as you constantly qualify what you're saying..."the census is not an accurate count, but only an indication, and represents nothing but what has passed through the doors at CGC"...sure. 

Nothing to qualify and I appreciate the jab

There was no jab there, and if you see one, I would suggest that you are taking the conversation more seriously than you ought. This is an intellectual exercise, not a personal argument.

16 hours ago, MadJimJaspers said:

Accuracy and meaning are different words.

Obviously. "Meaning" (in census numbers) is also a word that is vague, and means different things to different people.

16 hours ago, MadJimJaspers said:

As I said, I agree with your point, but you can't state with certainty that no measurable amount of meaning can be derived from the census. In fact your point confirms this.

I didn't say you could find no meaning. I said any meaning you find will be, at best, overly broad and not of much use. Not no use...just not much.

16 hours ago, MadJimJaspers said:

In the early years of CGC, buyers paid big money for bronze age 9.8s believing that the accuracy of the census indicated only a few copies in existence. They lost their money because the census eventually showed that there were in fact hundreds to thousands. Case in point...

That's close, but not quite accurate. Buyers paid big money for BA 9.8s (and many other books) because they didn't understand what was really out there. Whether they were aware of the census or not...and some were not...they saw a "9.8 Comic X #Y" and had to own it, because they had never seen one before, and weren't sure if they were going to see one again. It wasn't a question of "accuracy"...it's hard to be inaccurate when you're discussing a handful of copies in any specific grade....it was a question of population, and lack of knowledge about that population.

In other words, they lost their money not because the census eventually showed that there were hundreds to thousands...but because those copies became available on the market. Had those hundreds to thousands not been available, had they all been slabbed by collectors with no intention of selling them, with maybe only 5-10 such copies becoming available over the last 10 years, that value would have been sustained. The census, in that case, wouldn't matter one bit. 

The bigger census numbers get, the more inaccurate it will be. That's simply the nature of such a statistical device.

The same thing...almost exactly the same thing...happened in coins in the late 80s and early 90s: people (mis)used the census, not understanding what really existed, and wildly underestimated what was out there, ending up paying ridiculous premiums for high grade coins that turned out to be common in those grades...some of which have still never recovered their highs from that time period, 30 years on.

Here's a great article about that:

https://www.nationalsilverdollarroundtable.org/the-market-crash-of-‘90/

 

Edited March 2, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[RockMyAmadeus]

Nobody is saying the census is useless. If that is your takeaway (whoever you might be), you are debating a point that no one is arguing.

[HuddyBee]

38 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

The census is not useful in the way you think it is. It is very limited, narrow data.

There are many factors that can't be ignored when trying to compare different issues. While you can reasonably account for some of them, others are much more difficult. Regardless, it's all extra work that involves far, far more than just looking at the current numbers.

 

Allright. Got it, its useful, but should be taken lightly.  

[miraclemet]

On 2/23/2019 at 4:33 PM, mysterymachine said:

Marvel Spotlight #2 Werewolf By Night. I don't get it. I know it lasted 43 issues, but werewolves were around way before marvel created one. 

agreed, never made sense... especially since the character hasnt been relavant to the MCU for 30+ years

[batmiesta]

Apart from Wolverine and the Punisher, all Bronze age first appearances are over priced and getting sillier by the day.  

[ThatNerdyCanuck]

Uncanny X-Men #266 1st Gambit - All the hype from the potential of a movie is keeping this book inflated pretty high

[batmiesta]

Amazing Spider-man #194 , the Black cat .... I mean, who gives a ? 

[Lazyboy]

2 hours ago, batmiesta said:

Apart from Wolverine and the Punisher, all Bronze age first appearances are over priced and getting sillier by the day.  

You think there are exceptions? That's cute.

[batmiesta]

Sure is. 

[Naphtha]

4 hours ago, batmiesta said:

Apart from Wolverine and the Punisher, all Bronze age first appearances are over priced and getting sillier by the day.  

Please explain...the Punisher part, not Wolverine.

Edited March 3, 2019 by MadJimJaspers

[batmiesta]

Well! I think the Punisher is a pretty decent character and that his first appearance is of some importance, not saying it is worth some of the crazy prices HG copies fetches , but this is a crazy hobby.

[Dark Knight]

All HG BA keys it seems