Which one of you guys won this? 0

[Hollywood1892]

Sad

[Ken Aldred]

To be fair, I wasn't aware of certain titles being reprints when I started collecting as a kid.

I'd read names such as Marvel's Greatest Comics, Marvel Tales and Fantasy Masterpieces, and it wouldn't necessarily explicitly indicate to me that these were reprints, anymore than partial reprint books such as the extremely generic-sounding Marvel Super-Heroes would.  This would either be because I didn't have much access to Silver Age books, or the titles simply weren't being distributed to the UK at the time.

Luckily, even though I 'hadn't done the research', I never put myself in a situation where I was gouged like this, even for just a £ or two at the time.  Much more important to educate and protect yourself now if getting involved with the current, highly-inflated back issue market.  

Edited September 17, 2019 by Ken Aldred

[speedcake]

9.8 for this reprint sells for a decent amount.  But that price for a raw that isn't even close to 9.8 is clearly either a case of mistaken identity, drunken bidding, or a combo of both.

Seller has listed it as if it is the original book, that seems sketchy but the buyer should really do a little googling before dropping hundreds of dollars as the differences between the two books are very obvious. So *shrug*

[kav]

This is a case of a little knowledge is dangerous.  Buyer knew that "SS #1 is valuable" however he did not how to recognize a SS #1.

[The Lions Den]

2 hours ago, Krishosein said:

is that because the title is different so its not really a exact cover reprint more of a retold in another series? 

Yep.

 

[The Lions Den]

4 hours ago, namisgr said:

I know you're referring to reprints of more recent vintage, but this older and cooler classic commands impressive prices in high grade:

Notice how the only art or key comment on the label is about the bullpen photos...

[Krismusic]

19 minutes ago, kav said:

This is a case of a little knowledge is dangerous.  Buyer knew that "SS #1 is valuable" however he did not how to recognize a SS #1.

I have a feeling this is exactly what happened and they were careless enough not to look up a SS #1 and look to make sure its not a reprint.

[kav]

21 minutes ago, Krishosein said:

I have a feeling this is exactly what happened and they were careless enough not to look up a SS #1 and look to make sure its not a reprint.

There's also the fact they didnt know a 75c cover price book is not I repeat not silver age or old really.  
So we got a guy spending big bucks for SA keys but he doesnt even know the cover price for SA books.  This is comics 101.

Sorry, 'guys'.  There were several bidders.

Edited September 17, 2019 by kav

[Hollywood1892]

12 minutes ago, kav said:

There's also the fact they didnt know a 75c cover price book is not I repeat not silver age or old really.  
So we got a guy spending big bucks for SA keys but he doesnt even know the cover price for SA books.  This is comics 101.

Sorry, 'guys'.  There were several bidders.

Do you think the seller had full knowledge of what he was selling and just took advantage of someone.

[kav]

Just now, Hollywood1892 said:

Do you think the seller had full knowledge of what he was selling and just took advantage of someone.

Yes.  Sellers always want the most for their books so the first thing he would have done is check ebay prices.  There he would quickly see the covers had many obvious differences.

[kav]

This is if he was a clueless seller.  A clued in seller definitely.

[speedcake]

Money is on the seller knowing exactly what they were doing. Not that it should have worked, but still

[seanfingh]

23 minutes ago, speedcake said:

Money is on the seller knowing exactly what they were doing. Not that it should have worked, but still

He did say "1979" in the listing.  So anyone that did even a rudimentary review should have noticed the disconnect.  My money is that the Buyer and Seller are equally stupid. But the Seller was the lucky kind of stupid. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 hours ago, Spidey 62 said:

Granted, it is not their "responsibility" but wouldn't it be helpful if cgc put "reprint" or some such thing in the note area?   Do they think that everyone would know because there are no credits listed? 

It's not a reprint. It's a unique title that contains reprints. Generally, CGC doesn't note which book is being reprinted in a reprint title, unless it's a key issue.

[kav]

We call em reprints around here.

[Raze]

12 hours ago, Buzzetta said:

Don’t see anything...

What are we talking about here ?

Hit the “x” to close it and you can see it...I did the same thing!

[westerberg14]

44 bids!  Someone is kicking themselves that they missed out on this "masterpiece" with their $250 bid when they should be thanking their lucky stars!

[Ken Aldred]

16 minutes ago, westerberg14 said:

44 bids!  Someone is kicking themselves that they missed out on this "masterpiece" with their $250 bid when they should be thanking their lucky stars!

Not to worry. Perhaps they might get a ‘second chance offer’ for another copy. 

Edited September 18, 2019 by Ken Aldred

[kav]

1 minute ago, Ken Aldred said:

Not to worry. Perhaps they might get a ‘second chance offer’ for another copy.

"Hello I see you were sadly outbid on the SS #1-I just so happen to have another copy in the same high grade condition-"

[Kahnadah]

I think Mr. and Mrs. Shill got that one.