The NEW Overstreet 2019 w/TOP Golden Age Horror/Romance/Sci-Fi is Here 4 4

[bronze johnny]

8 hours ago, Cat-Man_America said:

Not being a Fiction House collector I haven’t taken the pulse of Planet Comics recently.  Obviously this title isn’t on life support, but based on my recollection of raw books for sale Planets didn’t seem noticeably higher at regional shows the last few years.  That said, since I don’t collecting Planets my perception of pricing may be off so I’ll yield to your experience with this title. 

I dropped GPA years ago as the service only covered auction sales of one third party grading company. GPA misses a lot of private sales while big auctions tend to inflate values.  That doesn’t mean I’m disagreeing with your assessment, but prefer to defer to OSG’s more conservative analysis based on broad dealer input.  I’m sure that you’re correct about the current spate of high dollar sales not being outliers, but my inclination is remaining mildly dubious of trends primarily supported by GPA and big auction sales.  

Well stated

Overstreet can be viewed as anomaly in today's age of instant gratification and cycle of information that fluctuates at a rate of speed unseen in the history of the world. There are those who subscribe to these trends as the true definition of a permanent change. Short term changes in most cases lead to what degree of long term changes (not to mention the shenanigans that we regularly see with books selling for a record price?)? This is a question for the collector who has followed the hobby for decades and witnessed times when Adventure Comics 247 was the number one Silver Age key or Tarzan on the cover of the one time most significant Golden Age comic book. Overstreet has captured these trends and provides perspective as a guide (emphasis on the word guide where room for insight on the part of the guide's user is an option). 

There's no question Planet Comics 1 is one of the great sci-fi books to hit the newstands during the 20th Century and deserves it's place among the most valuable comics in the sci-fi genre as the Overstreet 24th Edition demonstrated. That said, Overstreet has followed the long term trend of the rise of character led comic books and the impact the superhero genre has had on the long term history of the American Comic Book. Showcase 17, like Our Army at War 83 (Sgt. Rock for the War genre that also happens to be the most significant and valuable War comic book ever), introduced the greatest original sci-fi character creation of the Silver Age and Adam Strange (not our insightful friend on the boards!) also happened to be one of DC's greatest original creations of the era. Gil Kane, one of the greatest comic book artists of the 20th Century, could hold his own with any of the artists drawing the awesome Golden Age Sci-Fi books. The single highest graded copy of Showcase 17 would sell for a price that's competitive with any Golden Age sci-fi classic- and that says a great deal given the relative scarcity of the Showcase 17's Golden Age predecessiors.

The real issue here is whether Overstreet should continue to categorize Golden Age books with those originating in Silver in the same top Sci-Fi list.   

john

 

Edited July 20, 2019 by bronze johnny

[Robot Man]

I have collected comics since before there was a guide... I have seen the prices rise every year since it came out. I never in my wildest dreams thought they would be worth what they are today. Overstreet’s opinion has always been to take a conservative approach to pricing. It has been good for the hobby overall. This approach has always been supported by dealers and collectors alike. Is it always accurate? No, but healthy for the market. 

I will approach just one current example... LB Cole books. I remember probably 35 years ago when I was introduced to them by Redbeard. Never really noticed them before and boy were they cool (and cheap too), They were off the radar to most collectors. I bought as many as I could find. Then the prices started to rise as people discovered them. The prices started to climb very fast and soon they just wern’t affordable anymore. I moved on for a while. A lot of people were left holding the bag when they stopped selling at (for that time) for nose bleed prices. Eventually, the market crashed and when they did, I was back in. In the past year or so they have started to spike drastically again to a level I have never seen. This seems to have come from a few opportunistic individuals and like rats to the cheese, the lemmings have swarmed to them. I ain’t buying the hype. I will wait until the swarm clears to start buying them again. And if you want you can slip in Matt Baker, Planets, and PCH in place of LB Cole if you want. They have all followed similar patterns as long as I’ve been collecting them.

My question is, is this accurate or good for the hobby? I say no. People are going to lose a lot of money and many will leave the hobby. It has historically been the case for as long as I’ve been in it. 

Should Overstreet be caught up in this fury? As fast as they go up, they WILL come down as the market adjusts. 

We all agree that the Overstreet guide is out of touch with our ever changing market. LB Cole books are just a microcosm of our hobby. How on earth can we expect a yearly guide with thousands of books be completely up to date? I for one, (maybe old school) still believe that a conservative approach is much more healthy to our hobby. I think that prices in the “guide” (the word is after all guide) should go up AND down at reasonable levels to protect it’s self. 

And, no matter what you think about the pricing (which seems to be the most important aspect of this hobby to many), there is, and will never be, any more important book ever produced for information and history in our hobby...

 

Edited July 20, 2019 by Robot Man

[Sqeggs]

On 7/17/2019 at 8:52 PM, sagii said:

..As far as Romance goes, while i'm a huge fan of the Forbidden Love run, it has lost luster in recent years, so I don't think it's a Top 10 book anymore.

There are other Baker Romance  books that would bring higher prices than GCE #'s 9, 13 and 15

And though none of the Negro Romance issues come to market often the series is still a seminal entry in the genre and deserves it's hallowed status 

 

In NM- (9.2), those issues would go for the proverbial "multiples of guide."

[Sqeggs]

On 7/19/2019 at 2:17 PM, telerites said:

I remember when Cheetah bough the Denver Planet #1 (9.4).  I drooled over it as it sat on I think Metro's site? I don't think the GPA sale is when he bought it but maybe so.  I think he sold here when he liquidated but again I am unsure on that.  Looking back, it was such a bargain but hindsight is 20/20.  

Didn't he sell his run on Heritage (not too long after completing it, iirc)? But I may be mixing up his Planet run with another of his runs. 

[telerites]

1 hour ago, Sqeggs said:

Didn't he sell his run on Heritage (not too long after completing it, iirc)? But I may be mixing up his Planet run with another of his runs. 

That could be.  I thought he bought the Denver on Metro so that sale wouldn't show in GPA but it show selling in 2014 for almost $33.5K.  I did find his journal entry commenting that he bought it and that in 2011.  I had forgotten Nic Cagr owned it before.

Also when I was searching, I stumbled on his Cheetah Runs thread.  fun to go back through and see the magnitude of his collection.  I posted that link belo also if anyone is interested.

 

[october]

Overstreet mutliples have been a thing since I started collecting in earnest 15 years ago, and was around longer than that. That's a minimum of a decade and a half of poor valuation on dozens, if not hundreds, of the most popular golden age books.

That's not conservative, it's deceased.

And even if the values do fluctuate from year to year, so what? Move them up one year and down the next. The market isn't underpinned by the OSPG anymore and most every serious buyer I know uses an online real data service for pricing anyway. The hobby doesn't lose its collective mind when downward trends show up on GoCollect and GPA for books like Walking Dead 1 or Hulk 181, it would survive movement in OSPG as well. In fact, by NOT doing that the OSPG has contributed to it's own diminished status.

[rjpb]

I am reminded once again why I haven't bought an OSPG in twenty years.

[KirbyJack]

9 hours ago, Robot Man said:

 

And, no matter what you think about the pricing (which seems to be the most important aspect of this hobby to many), there is, and will never be, any more important book ever produced for information and history in our hobby...

 

Absolutely true.

[lou_fine]

On 7/19/2019 at 11:23 AM, sfcityduck said:

Strongly disagree with this list.  Overstreet's list is of Sci-Fi comics, NOT SF covers!  While the omission of Planet is unforgiveable, I can't agree with a number of books on this list.

Now, this is exactly my line of thinking also.  

Planet 1 should most definitely qualify since the entire Planet run is all about si-fi and nothing else, whereas virtually all of the other books in the list are what I would call classic si-fi covers interspersed in a run of what would generally be considered as a non si-fi title.  

[Dreamtoreal1]

1 hour ago, lou_fine said:

Now, this is exactly my line of thinking also.  

Planet 1 should most definitely qualify since the entire Planet run is all about si-fi and nothing else, whereas virtually all of the other books in the list are what I would call classic si-fi covers interspersed in a run of what would generally be considered as a non si-fi title.  

thanks for the input. So you would agree with the Overstreet from 1993? Which had 13 of the Planet comics in the top 19 most valuable sci-fi books right?

I wonder why/when they stopped that

[Howling Mad]

At this point I think OSPG would be more valuable as yearly market check-in. I like seeing what major players in the industry are the next big thing, even if they're pushing their own agenda. The market is large, do we really need a relative price guide?

[lou_fine]

15 hours ago, Howling Mad said:

At this point I think OSPG would be more valuable as yearly market check-in. I like seeing what major players in the industry are the next big thing, even if they're pushing their own agenda. The market is large, do we really need a relative price guide?

That's actually pretty dead on to use the word "relative" because that's exactly how I use the price guide, as opposed to the actual dollar valuations themselves.  

I guess that's why it bothers me when they make clear "relative" valuation errors like having Captain America 2 at a higher valuation than Cap 3 when the entire marketplace has placed a far greater relative value on Cap 3 for well going onto a full decade already.  

[Zolnerowich]

On 7/19/2019 at 7:13 PM, bc said:

Here ya go - from OSPG 24 (1994)

 

 

18 hours ago, Dreamtoreal1 said:

thanks for the input. So you would agree with the Overstreet from 1993? Which had 13 of the Planet comics in the top 19 most valuable sci-fi books right?

I wonder why/when they stopped that

Regarding the Planets, this 1994 list really underscores the concept put forward by @sfcityduck and a few others in this thread that "Science Fiction Comics" should be/was about the contents of the book, not the cover. This explains why the 1994 list simply ranks the Planets in order of their issue number. This was true in 1994 and also 1993. The thinking being that issue #1 is more valuable than issue #2 is more valuable than issue #3 etc. There is the one exception with the Planet #15, which I guess must have been singled out way back when as the "low distribution" cult () Planet issue. Though we all "know" now that #14 is just about as scarce as #15. In other words, the cover itself played minimal (if not zero) role in assembling the 1994 list.

If the cover had counted at all (and of course which counts for SO MUCH today), I expect the list from Planet #1 to Planet #12 plus Planet #15 would have looked like this, based on the collective opinions expressed by the Planet boardies, the dollars spent by the Planet boardies (), and a bit of my own preference:

Planet 1
Planet 2
Planet 15
Planet 5, Planet 8, Planet 10 (tie)
Planet 6
Planet 11
Planet 3
Planet 4
Planet 7
Planet 9
Planet 12
 

 

[sfcityduck]

1 hour ago, Zolnerowich said:

 

Regarding the Planets, this 1994 list really underscores the concept put forward by @sfcityduck and a few others in this thread that "Science Fiction Comics" should be/was about the contents of the book, not the cover. This explains why the 1994 list simply ranks the Planets in order of their issue number. This was true in 1994 and also 1993. The thinking being that issue #1 is more valuable than issue #2 is more valuable than issue #3 etc. There is the one exception with the Planet #15, which I guess must have been singled out way back when as the "low distribution" cult () Planet issue. Though we all "know" now that #14 is just about as scarce as #15. In other words, the cover itself played minimal (if not zero) role in assembling the 1994 list.

If the cover had counted at all (and of course which counts for SO MUCH today), I expect the list from Planet #1 to Planet #12 plus Planet #15 would have looked like this, based on the collective opinions expressed by the Planet boardies, the dollars spent by the Planet boardies (), and a bit of my own preference:

Planet 1
Planet 2
Planet 15
Planet 5, Planet 8, Planet 10 (tie)
Planet 6
Planet 11
Planet 3
Planet 4
Planet 7
Planet 9
Planet 12
 

 

Where would you put Jumbo 10 on a list of such FH sci-fi covers of that period?  After all, it's basically a Planet try out cover (Oct-Nov. 1939) as (correct me if I'm wrong) it was the first FH sci-fi cover.  Jumbo 11 was also sort of a sci-fi cover, and Jumbo never had any more - presumably because Planet came on the scene.

[Zolnerowich]

Yes, the Planet "try-out" books!! Top-of-the-long-box books!

Based on scarcity, coolness, and historical, I'd put Jumbo 10 just after Planet 15, and Jumbo 11 just after Planet 6. But that's just one Planet completist's opinion!

 

[Rip]

OSPG is a great read for the market reports. Not so much for the prices. I wish I could find an old want list from 91-92 where I was offering to buy numerous books at 2-6 X guide. I would say its actually a bit closer now.

[Dreamtoreal1]

On 7/22/2019 at 12:12 PM, Zolnerowich said:

Yes, the Planet "try-out" books!! Top-of-the-long-box books!

Based on scarcity, coolness, and historical, I'd put Jumbo 10 just after Planet 15, and Jumbo 11 just after Planet 6. But that's just one Planet completist's opinion!

 

Do Jumbo #10 and #11 Have all sci-fi stories inside? or a mix with jungle stories?

[sfcityduck]

3 hours ago, Dreamtoreal1 said:

Do Jumbo #10 and #11 Have all sci-fi stories inside? or a mix with jungle stories?

Jumbo was an anthology, a variety of genres - not just jungle at that point.  

[lou_fine]

On 7/22/2019 at 11:40 AM, sfcityduck said:

Where would you put Jumbo 10 on a list of such FH sci-fi covers of that period?  After all, it's basically a Planet try out cover (Oct-Nov. 1939) as (correct me if I'm wrong) it was the first FH sci-fi cover.  Jumbo 11 was also sort of a sci-fi cover, and Jumbo never had any more - presumably because Planet came on the scene.

 

On 7/22/2019 at 12:12 PM, Zolnerowich said:

Yes, the Planet "try-out" books!! Top-of-the-long-box books!

Based on scarcity, coolness, and historical, I'd put Jumbo 10 just after Planet 15, and Jumbo 11 just after Planet 6. But that's just one Planet completist's opinion!

 

Oh wowza, definitely good to know as I never realized that Jumbo 10 and 11 could be deemed as Planet try-out cover books.    

Being the contrarian as per usual, I've always preferred the bright pinkish red colored Jumbo 11 cover over the more muted yellow colored Jumbo 10 cover:

Also much more in the classic Fine artwork in terms of the details in the back ground similar to some of his other classic covers such as National 7, Hit 1, etc.  

What I've never been able to figure out is why Overstreet has never gotten around to breaking out this particular issue and simply has it lumped in with the other not as well crafted Eisner cover issues that came after this one.  Especially since I still remember Fishler having one way back in the day about 25 years ago and charging a huge premium for it at the time, given the apparent scarcity of this particular issue in grade along with the classic Fine cover artwork.  Looking back now, definitely another missed opportunity.    

[eschnit]

My initial thought would be to confirm with Overstreet what criteria they use to come up with these lists.  There are any number of reasons why their lists are way off.  Any subjective list will have room for criticism.  But in this case, people look to them as a trusted guide.  Certainly a list produced from the aggregated opinion of top dealers in brick and mortar stores had a heck of a lot more value in 1989 than 2019.   A list equal part GPA and polls voted on on this site would produce far more accurate results.  Books are bought and sold online and recorded on GPA, online and not recorded on GPA, in private sales, and at conventions way way way more than in stores.  When Overstreet established their relevance, there was no internet, conventions were far less popular, and private sales took place much less as we were less connected.  On top of that, there was no CGC.  No one can take away the positive impact the guide had on the hobby, nor should they view it without that context.  Brick and mortars utility of the guide and that  trusted resource filtering through the hobby from readers and collectors at their lcs helped make the hobby what it would become.  But they're old news.  Yesterday's story.  And they haven't kept up with the times.  They are a relic.  They haven't been remotely relevant for at least 20 years, and in my opinion they were only marginally relevant 30 years ago.  Certainly Gerber's Guide is of more consequence today, even if the overall impact of Overstreet was greater, it's very much past tense.  The hobby was messy circa 1990, but there's a reason that even then, a Wizard, more flash than substance, was more relevant when it came to the pulse of anything.  

They could also just come up with a committee to discuss once a year or vote once a year to come up with a list.   It's easy enough to come up with good people for that.  Just top of mind,  Gator Rick, Bedrock Richard, Harley Yee, RicksNeatStuff, FilterAdam, Metro Vincent, Guru Jeff, Heritage Jim, a handful of others on this board.

One thing is certain, the list they came out with this year is completely bunk.  There's zero argument for it having any validity at all.  Two reasons.  First off, where is Planet Comics 1 on the list?  Did they come up with a new explanation that somehow Planet Comics are not sci-fi?  If so, I'd love to hear an explanation on that one.  How did Planet Comics #1 go from being #1 on their own list years ago to no longer in the top 10 in the same year that the loudest sci-fi sales were the Church Planet copies?   Planet Comics #1 has to be on the Sci-Fi list, and really, it has to be #1.  The fact that Startling Comics #49 isn't there is also absurd.   It should probably be #2.

The other is Cinderella Love #25.  There are likely more fans, collectors, sales, and "experts" of the Romance genre on this forum than anywhere.  Any vote would have Cinderella Love 25 #1, and in fact among Baker books in a poll with scores of voters it finished #1 without a close second.  To boot, removing private sales, just public sales reflect as much.  Whether it's #1 or not is not the issue.  One could make an argument for a couple of others.  But for it to be left off the top 10 is as egregious as leaving Planet 1 off of the sci-fi list.  Giant Comics Edition #9 and #13, Negro Romance #2 and #3?  Then with Sci-Fi Showcase #17 is ranked ahead of Starling #49 and Planet #15?  In what universe?  Then you have the horror list which may be the worst of all of them.  No LB Cole, or Suspense 3, or Punch 12, Mask 1, Startling 11.  Even just ranking EC books, their list isn't remotely accurate.  It's almost like they were intentionally trying to produce a list with no merit whatsoever.    

 

 

Edited August 1, 2019 by eschnit