Has Interest In Batman #232 Dropped? 2 2

[Number 6]

Think the above discussion is delving into and dissecting the “WHY” of the CGC / Shall-Not-Be-Named competitor comparison.  
 

However, I think when you are contemplating selling a graded comic book you have to chiefly concern yourself with the “WHAT”...specifically what is the market is actually doing in this regard?
 

Do CGC graded comics and identical comics in comparable grades graded by the competitors sell for roughly the same amount?

What do eBay/HA/Clink completed listings show?  When 2 books graded by two competing grading companies are listed side-by-side (such as sometimes happens in Clink auctions) are the results similar or is there a disparity?  How much of a disparity?  Are these results an outlier or is there a pattern that occurs with regularity? Regular enough that I can view results on GPA as comparable or do they have to be viewed as distinctly separate?

When you answer those type of ‘WHAT is the market actually doing?’ questions then you’ll have the answers you need with regard to selling.

(Those questions also deal in specifics; generalizations like ‘this company grades looser/tighter’ ...which veer into the supposed “WHY”..aren’t going to get you the specifics you need)

I’m not saying I agree or disagree with what the market is doing, I’m not talking about the “rightness” or “wrongness” of it, that’s getting into the “WHY” question.  Which would be fine...if we were talking about our general collecting philosophy.  Heck, there’s A LOT of things the market is doing right now that I personally don’t agree with and don’t understand.  
 

But if I’m contemplating selling a book I kind of have to set my personal collecting philosophy aside and strictly concern myself with what the market is  actually doing...like it or not.  Sitting back and demanding the market perform the way I think it should isn’t going to get me anywhere when it comes to selling. 

[Rip]

Ultimately if you are selling a CBCS book you should provide more detailed photos. Those books will get more scrutinized because of certain periods of loose grading.

I own some CBCS 9.8's and they are graded very tightly, but I cannot say that is always the case. 

[Number 6]

On 2/6/2021 at 10:28 PM, kimik said:

No. It is general business practices everywhere. No company is going to feature a competitor's product or service on their own website. Why should CGC be any different? These are their message boards, not ours.

 

2 hours ago, D2 said:

That is untrue. 
CBCS forums have no problem with others posting up their CGC graded books. 

I think is business advertising there is precedent for both approaches. 
 

When I was a kid, Pepsi started a taste-test advertising campaign that actually featured Coke alongside Pepsi.  But Coke advertising did not, it was just Coke. 
 

The reason being is that Coke was the #1 selling cola drink at the time. Pepsi wanted to gain market share and they knew they would be compared to the #1 selling cola. So for Pepsi it made sense to acknowledge the comparison. They were the up-and-comer, they were gunning for the #1 spot and they felt they had everything to gain and nothing to lose by acknowledging their competitor and the comparison that was already being made.  
 

Coke, on the other had, didn’t acknowledge and feature Pepsi in their advertising.  They didn’t feel they had to.  They were #1.  They knew they were being compared to ALL other cola drinks (not just Pepsi) but since they held the majority of market share the purpose of their advertising was to chiefly reinforce their brand...and if they could grow their already #1 market share well, that would be great too.  
 

I don’t think these differing advertising strategies have to do with whose ‘more enlightened/confident’ or more ‘fearful/conceited’.  I think it’s simply a matter of what position each company saw themselves in and what they thought would work best for them.

(Note: Pepsi didn’t feature Shasta or RC Cola in their ads...because, like Coke, they didn’t feel they had to)  

That’s a lot of words to say I think there’s precedent for both approaches,  I understand why both approaches are used, and I don’t necessarily see one approach as being “better” than the other.  This is what competing companies do, it’s nothing new  

 

[Randall Ries]

23 minutes ago, Number 6 said:

 

I think is business advertising there is precedent for both approaches. 
 

When I was a kid, Pepsi started a taste-test advertising campaign that actually featured Coke alongside Pepsi.  But Coke advertising did not, it was just Coke. 
 

The reason being is that Coke was the #1 selling cola drink at the time. Pepsi wanted to gain market share and they knew they would be compared to the #1 selling cola. So for Pepsi it made sense to acknowledge the comparison. They were the up-and-comer, they were gunning for the #1 spot and they felt they had everything to gain and nothing to lose by acknowledging their competitor and the comparison that was already being made.  
 

Coke, on the other had, didn’t acknowledge and feature Pepsi in their advertising.  They didn’t feel they had to.  They were #1.  They knew they were being compared to ALL other cola drinks (not just Pepsi) but since they held the majority of market share the purpose of their advertising was to chiefly reinforce their brand...and if they could grow their already #1 market share well, that would be great too.  
 

I don’t think these differing advertising strategies have to do with whose ‘more enlightened/confident’ or more ‘fearful/conceited’.  I think it’s simply a matter of what position each company saw themselves in and what they thought would work best for them.

(Note: Pepsi didn’t feature Shasta or RC Cola in their ads...because, like Coke, they didn’t feel they had to)  

That’s a lot of words to say I think there’s precedent for both approaches,  I understand why both approaches are used, and I don’t necessarily see one approach as being “better” than the other.  This is what competing companies do, it’s nothing new  

 

Well, a couple of things: Although Coke and Pepsi were rivals, the CEO's of each company were pals at the time and golfing buddies. Neither one of them were worried about being "No. 1" when they were BOTH making money hand over fist. What seemed like rivalry was actually a genius business move. Nothing sells more product than perceived enmity among products so it causes the buyers to break down into little camps and root for their favorite brand. Coke seemingly shot themselves in the face by introducing "New" Coke. It was compared to Pepsi. And universally panned. The way marketing goes, I wouldn't be surprised if it WAS Pepsi. At any rate, the dislike for "New" Coke became a fever pitch thingy and when it was pulled, more people than ever bought the regular Coke. And a lot more Pepsi. In fact, around that time, they started selling it in bigger containers as well. From 16oz > 20oz > 1 Litre then 2 Litre bottles. THEY got filthy rich and WE got type 2 diabetes. That's also around the time adult onset type 2 diabetes and the Fatty fat fat crisis began in the US as well. We began a diet of McDonald's and Burger King, Pizza Hut pizza, Ben and Jerry's and washing it down with Coke and/or Pepsi

The other thing is that CBCS actually allows books to be shown off from other grading companies. It shows style and class to me. Not sucking up. If CGC is so confident, why the big fuss about featuring other grading companies as well? I'm sure I'm not the only comic book fan that wouldn't give a rusty doodle if CBCS books were featured along side CGC and PGX books. I KNOW I'm not the only collector with CBCS books in their piles, either. Unless THAT'S against the law as well? ("WHAT? You own CBCS graded books? DELETED!") I think the answer is LESS "Well, we don't HAVE to" and more "We aren't going to threaten our public perception of being Numero Uno even though we say no one is a threat". Sometimes we business people need to be reminded that no one is too big to fail. Like I said before concerning Pillsbury and Ben and Jerry's: "What's the doughboy afraid of?" It's about the books and the people who own them. Not some clenched behind belief that others are inferior. They aren't.

I could post example after example of CGC graded books that are obviously not the grade purported. Excuses would vary from "Well, the grader had a bad day. Yeah, but it was graded on a curve! The INSIDE probably twinkles!" THE CBCS grades would be "Well, they STINK! Their graders know NOTHNG. Someone could rip a comic in half and it's still get a 9.6! Yar har har!" I mean come on. They have Beckett on payroll. Do they suck as well? I don't think so.

Well, whatever. Hats off to the collectors of this fine medium. No matter raw or graded by whoever, it's an awesome hobby. I love the things.

[Randall Ries]

1 hour ago, Number 6 said:

Think the above discussion is delving into and dissecting the “WHY” of the CGC / Shall-Not-Be-Named competitor comparison.  
 

However, I think when you are contemplating selling a graded comic book you have to chiefly concern yourself with the “WHAT”...specifically what is the market is actually doing in this regard?
 

Do CGC graded comics and identical comics in comparable grades graded by the competitors sell for roughly the same amount?

What do eBay/HA/Clink completed listings show?  When 2 books graded by two competing grading companies are listed side-by-side (such as sometimes happens in Clink auctions) are the results similar or is there a disparity?  How much of a disparity?  Are these results an outlier or is there a pattern that occurs with regularity? Regular enough that I can view results on GPA as comparable or do they have to be viewed as distinctly separate?

When you answer those type of ‘WHAT is the market actually doing?’ questions then you’ll have the answers you need with regard to selling.

(Those questions also deal in specifics; generalizations like ‘this company grades looser/tighter’ ...which veer into the supposed “WHY”..aren’t going to get you the specifics you need)

I’m not saying I agree or disagree with what the market is doing, I’m not talking about the “rightness” or “wrongness” of it, that’s getting into the “WHY” question.  Which would be fine...if we were talking about our general collecting philosophy.  Heck, there’s A LOT of things the market is doing right now that I personally don’t agree with and don’t understand.  
 

But if I’m contemplating selling a book I kind of have to set my personal collecting philosophy aside and strictly concern myself with what the market is  actually doing...like it or not.  Sitting back and demanding the market perform the way I think it should isn’t going to get me anywhere when it comes to selling. 

The market is also manipulated by prejudices. Sometimes those prejudices are built into the business plan. I see what you mean, though. CGC books are ALWAYS sold for MORE. The savvy buyer will look past the label and INTO the slab. What am I actually GETTING here? Is it a nice book? Is it within say an 8.0-8.5 grade? Before we can sell a given book, we have to buy it. I buy with the idea of keeping it first, selling it second. So, a future sale has to be a possibility while owning a book. So, I won't buy a 9.6 graded GL/GA 76 unless it LOOKS like a 9.6 regardless of who slabbed and graded it. I'm not looking at the stupid label of who graded it. I'm thinking of a potential buyer years from now. Are they going to say "Yah, it SAYS 9.6 but it has all these color breaking hatchet lines up and down the spine! No sale!" Then I would wonder why I bought it myself. Am I supposed to say to them "Oh well the grader must have had a bad day!" No. I'M going to have a bad day being stuck with a GL/GA CGC 9.6 that's actually presenting like a 7.5. All 3 companies have done it/still doing it. It's all about presentation. The only other problem I have with grading is if I buy the exact same book raw, I have to pay $100-$200 more if it's graded. And MORESO if it's CGC. How many times have we ALL paid for someone else's grading process? Like that's some guarantee that the book is actually what it says it is? It's kind of a racket and a grift in a lot of ways.

Haha. Maybe it REALLY just boils down to "CGC" is easier to say than "CBCS'. LOL!

[William-James88]

On 2/3/2021 at 5:35 PM, Math Teacher said:

Last year, I remember someone saying that Batman #232 was an under-valued BA key. So, I got a Voldy #232 in 9.4 grade. I am now trying to sell it, to help pay for the AF #15 I recently purchased. I'm trying to sell it to some comic-collecting friends, and the best offer I have gotten is $1,000, which is exactly $100 more than I paid for it. On GoCollect, the FMV is $1,550, and GPAnalysis has a last sale of $1,640. I understand that CGC books demand higher prices, but I don't think the difference should be this great.

Has Batman #232 fallen out of favor recently, and nobody told me? If this has become a less valuable comic that Batman #251, I may have to lower my expectations.

I'm a bit confused, why would you say it has fallen out of favour when you are being offered more money than what you spent on it? Look at the year you bought it at 900 in a voldy 9.4 slab and look at how much the CGC version of the same book was going for at the same time. Were they the same? How much was a CGC 9.4 going for when you bought yours? With that answer, you'll basically be answering your own question.

[William-James88]

30 minutes ago, Randall Ries said:

The market is also manipulated by prejudices. Sometimes those prejudices are built into the business plan. I see what you mean, though. CGC books are ALWAYS sold for MORE. 

Always?

Same book given the same grade by CGC and CBCS, sold at the same time for the same price.

[the blob]

On 2/6/2021 at 10:03 AM, Randall Ries said:

It's really quite sad. Even pathetic how some view grading companies. Can't see past the company to a nice book inside the holder. That's a Bat 232 in there. I would not give one inch of it away just because it is a graded book by another company. Some of the nicest books I have are not CGC graded.

On their page, one can post photos of CGC graded books. Even sell them on the For Sale pages. They aren't snobs. Are people here REALLY that insecure so that other books can't at least be SHOWN here? That's pathetic.

Good for them for allowing CGC books to be featured on their page. They haven't forgotten it's still about the comic books and not envy. Like when Pillsbury got all haired out when Ben and Jerry's used their cookie dough in their ice cream and sued them for it:

"What's The Dough Boy Afraid Of?"

It is not sad, it is the reality of a market that thinks the other guy's 9.4 slab is more likely to house a book that would be a 9.2 or 9.0 for CGC. Folks are still willing to lay out a grand for the book. Plus, he is limiting his universe to "friends," that is hardly a way to get anything approaching FMV. I hunt for vodly books in the hope that I can get something nice at a huge discount as there is probably a 50/50 chance they are the same as CGC on any given book. Generally I don't find anything. the third company..so many their books just look so bad in relation to the grades I have a tough time telling myself there is any hope they are equivalent

[the blob]

here is a p*x that sold for $1070:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/BATMAN-232-PGX-9-4-WHITE-PAGES-1ST-RAS-AL-GHUL-SIGNED-NEAL-ADAMS-NOT-CGC/254820553624?hash=item3b547d1398:g:wKcAAOSwi9Vf6ibH

So a voldy should probably be worth something in the middle of this and what GPA sys a CGC is worth

With that said, you paid $900 for your voldy when the GPA was no doubt a chunk higher. Wouldn't you expect the differential to remain?

[William-James88]

4 minutes ago, the blob said:

 

With that said, you paid $900 for your voldy when the GPA was no doubt a chunk higher. Wouldn't you expect the differential to remain?

yeah, that was my point above, why expect a different outcome now? 

[the blob]

1 hour ago, William-James88 said:

Always?

Same book given the same grade by CGC and CBCS, sold at the same time for the same price.

You found one example from nearly a year ago. I assume the same seller as well? Absolutely bizarre that they would have auctions ending within 20 seconds for the same book? Are people stupid? Why on earth would someone list the same book to end so close? And I see this a lot.

[the blob]

7 hours ago, D2 said:

That is untrue. 
CBCS forums have no problem with others posting up their CGC graded books. 

Their forums are pretty hard to look at and navigate. This place is a better user experience.

I thought the rule was no selling other cos slabs, not that you can't post a picture of one? 

[Funnybooks]

Just now, the blob said:

Their forums are pretty hard to look at and navigate. This place is a better user experience.

I thought the rule was no selling other cos slabs, not that you can't post a picture of one? 

Can't post pics for any reason and agreed on user experience

[the blob]

7 minutes ago, Funnybooks said:

Can't post pics for any reason and agreed on user experience

I'm not doubting you, but where does it say that as to any post? We've seen an image in this thread and I swear I have seen folks post PG^ books with "what the heck is this???" type comments? I see it in the sales forum: 

 

[D2]

30 minutes ago, the blob said:

Their forums are pretty hard to look at and navigate. This place is a better user experience.

I thought the rule was no selling other cos slabs, not that you can't post a picture of one? 

This place is a better experience for me as well. There is a bigger network here as well, naturally.

 

[William-James88]

58 minutes ago, the blob said:

You found one example from nearly a year ago.

When someone uses absolutes, all you need is one example to prove that false.

[William-James88]

26 minutes ago, the blob said:

I'm not doubting you, but where does it say that as to any post? We've seen an image in this thread and I swear I have seen folks post PG^ books with "what the heck is this???" type comments? I see it in the sales forum: 

 

You can post pics of CBCS slabs in relation to discussion pertaining to CGC. So I did exactly that above. And people post them sometimes asking "if I sent this to CGC, would they be stricter?".

[comicdonna]

28 minutes ago, the blob said:

38 minutes ago, Funnybooks said:

Can't post pics for any reason and agreed on user experience

I'm not doubting you, but where does it say that as to any post? We've seen an image in this thread and I swear I have seen folks post PG^ books with "what the heck is this???" type comments? I see it in the sales forum: 

 

 

[Math Teacher]

2 hours ago, William-James88 said:

I'm a bit confused, why would you say it has fallen out of favour when you are being offered more money than what you spent on it? Look at the year you bought it at 900 in a voldy 9.4 slab and look at how much the CGC version of the same book was going for at the same time. Were they the same? How much was a CGC 9.4 going for when you bought yours? With that answer, you'll basically be answering your own question.

I bought my Batman #232 sometime in May, 2020. I'm sorry, but I can't be more specific than that.

Here are the Batman #232 sales for 2020:

02/28/2020 - $1,200
03/07/2020 - $1,440
05/08/2020 - $968
07/08/2020 - $1,600
08/26/2020 - $1,650
09/18/2020 - $1,650
12/10/2020 - $1,640

I have no doubt that I bought it in May, as I had seen that the price had dropped considerably. Also, the seller was highly motivated, as he needed money to fund a grail purchase.

I have recently tried to sell this on Instagram using elite_comics 11 service. The highest offer that I have gotten was $1,200. It is true that CBCS books sell for less than CGC books. However, I would find it hard to believe that this discount is normally 25% lower. That seems to be a lot, in my opinion.

Several people claim that the grades a CGC book receives are always lower than the grade of a CBCS book. I believe, just in this thread, that there is plenty of anecdotal evidence to show that is not true.

My original intent of this post was that a 9.4 copy, even if it is from CBCS, should be a book that any Batman collector would want to have in his collection. There are plenty of people who fill their collections with only high-grade books. It seems to me that this book should generate more interest than one offer of $1,200. I am concerned about the amount of money I was offered, yes, but I am more concerned about the fact that I have only gotten one offer. That is why I poised the question, "Has interest in Batman #232 dropped?"

[Math Teacher]

2 hours ago, the blob said:

It is not sad, it is the reality of a market that thinks the other guy's 9.4 slab is more likely to house a book that would be a 9.2 or 9.0 for CGC. Folks are still willing to lay out a grand for the book. Plus, he is limiting his universe to "friends," that is hardly a way to get anything approaching FMV.

If you read a later post of mine, I have stated that I am now trying to sell this book on Instagram. I have received ONE offer of $1,200. My concern about this book is two-fold. First, I don't think that I should have to sell a CBCS book for a price that is 25% lower than the same grade of a CGC book. Second, I am concerned that I have only received one offer for what I consider to be a major Batman Bronze Age key.