They're Still Out There! 22 22

[Mmehdy]

29 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

Anyone know where that quote about the run gap was in the video?  

probably in the middle somewhere....they were taking about holes in runs...I know very few people were actually there, let alone remember about the SF..really Comics and Comics collection like I was. Back then the collection came in 3 waves as it was split between 3 siblings. So nobody knew until each wave hit, one collector, God rest his soul, bought out almost the entire thrid wave when it was taked to the SDCC. A lot of those books were sold by Erine Gurber who published the Photo Journel Guide. That is another long long story, and you had to be there to see how that played out.

 My point is there is a "possibility" that this is not the total collection. I think they get that across in the video. My take its 1/10 that something else is out there which is coming from the collection, and 5/10 that if it existed it is already out here.

Edited May 14, 2021 by Mmehdy

[szav]

44 minutes ago, vheflin said:

Imagine the tax bill.

They’ll need a lawyer I’m sure.  Do they inherit the collection with a stepped up basis so less taxes?  unless they inherited a year or two ago... in which case values doubled or more?  It’ll be a headache for sure  but a nice sorta problem to have.

Edited May 14, 2021 by szav

[szav]

Uhh...not my favorite issue so I hadn't looked at it yet but can someone explain this 9.6 to me.  Is there any explanation for the highlighted area being scraped off and then the black line drawn back in with marker.  I want to love this collection and make myself ok with the grades, really I do.  Can the uneven black line be explained any other way than having been drawn back in?  I just cant see the color being magically lifeted off the top and bottom of this line.  Printing defect?

[adamstrange]

20 minutes ago, szav said:

Printing defect?

Most likely.  Fox books from this time period were poorly printed.

[szav]

5 minutes ago, adamstrange said:

Most likely.  Fox books from this time period were poorly printed.

Thanks, I’ve never seen an apparent rub that big in one, with black ink over the top.  I guess this one will provide an interesting test of value in the assigned grade and census rank vs. actual appearance of the book. 

[N e r V]

37 minutes ago, adamstrange said:

Most likely.  Fox books from this time period were poorly printed.

 

28 minutes ago, szav said:

Thanks, I’ve never seen an apparent rub that big in one, with black ink over the top.  I guess this one will provide an interesting test of value in the assigned grade and census rank vs. actual appearance of the book. 

Yep, printing issues not uncommon. Looks like the book has a couple more as the green in one spots turns yellow and black line breaks too with yellow covering it in one section. Hardly a deal breaker (for me) on a book like that…

 

 

[Sarg]

On 4/29/2021 at 11:51 AM, adamstrange said:

 

 

Regarding artist attribution (again), in my opinion:

#17 is definitely not by Baker. It's not his style at all. It strongly resembles Al Feldstein -- but the latter had no recollection of drawing a PL cover. I think it is probably Feldstein. 

#18 is probably by Jack Kamen, since the small figures look like him, and the design is similar to a cover Kamen drew for Brenda Starr. But Kamen didn't draw Sandra's face this way. Feldstein-esque inking. 

#13 is Matt Baker pencils.

#20 is possibly Baker pencils.

#23 is definitely Kamen pencils and inks. 

[LearnedHand]

On 5/10/2021 at 2:55 PM, MrBedrock said:

Mitch, the problem with your definition is that if those older collectors "who have a emotional connection to our great GA/SA world" truly felt that way then why are they overwhelmingly the ones who try to beat comic dealers up on price? If they truly felt that way then money should be no object.

 

Debates over dust shadows, inflated grades, etc. aside, this is truly an astonishing collection!  To think someone meticulously amassed the best copies on the newsstand, and that collection sat basically in a time capsule for 70-80 years, is mind-boggling.      

@Richard - I agree with your comments and, on your "money [being] no object" comment, I recognize you're saying this sort of tongue-in-cheek to make a point.  I would say, however, that as you know, hobby dynamics have changed dramatically since the advent of CGC and the on-line auctions. Back in the day ('70s - '80s), it was a rarity to see a GA book priced over ~$500, with most at/below $200.  Even a grade-school kid like me working with allowance and Christmas money could walk into the NYC Seuling and CreationCon shows with ~$150 in my pocket and go home with at least 1-2 high-grade GA books.  Books were rarely priced above Guide, and Guide was the starting point for bargaining - a core (and fun) part of the deal.  Dealers handed you a book and generally pointed out they could do better than asking price.  That's changed...      

... today, "Guide multiples" are the pricing norm.  Some hobbyists even think it's a badge of honor to point out how they can drop $10k on a book at any given time.  Imagine putting a nice GA collection together today if average book price is $10k.  But, as I'm sure you'd agree, for the Average Joe with a mortgage and children, this isn't feasible and we are no longer talking about a fun hobby where you "buy what you like;" it's a broader conversation about spending considerations.  As such, I think you can be an older collector or "true hobbyist" (whatever that might be) and still be very focused on spending.  My $0.2...       

Back on-topic: going to sit back and soak in the continued unveiling of this amazing collection.  It's something that doesn't come around every day!  

Peter

Edited May 15, 2021 by LearnedHand

[chrisco37]

I think the collection is amazing.  Some of those pre-slab scans show off incredible inks/gloss.  That Suspense is just ridiculous.  It looks like it just came off the rack.  

Definitely some “gift grades” (preferential treatment to HA) on some that have been posted.  Somewhat expected/predictable as CGC & HA have been in bed since the beginning of the slab market.  Anyone “surprised” at this hasn’t been around very long or hasn’t been paying attention/ignoring the past 20 years.  
Assume everything in a slab from this collection has (sadly) been pressed.  They aren’t going to leave that kind of money on the table.  
I wish I could be a player for some of these books, but they’ll all be way out of my reach.  Good luck to those that are bidding.

It’s be nice if the CGC slabs had the clarity of the Voldy slabs.  It would help the colors pop a little better.  Really would like to see CGC try and improve that aspect of their slabs.

 

[Sarg]

14 hours ago, szav said:

Uhh...not my favorite issue so I hadn't looked at it yet but can someone explain this 9.6 to me.  Is there any explanation for the highlighted area being scraped off and then the black line drawn back in with marker.  I want to love this collection and make myself ok with the grades, really I do.  Can the uneven black line be explained any other way than having been drawn back in?  I just cant see the color being magically lifeted off the top and bottom of this line.  Printing defect?

 

This cover, also, is not by Baker. The actual artist is unknown. 

 

[szav]

13 hours ago, N e r V said:

Hardly a deal breaker (for me) on a book like that…

It's a good looking copy overall, but I think it's been said CGC claims to follow the OPG guidelines (at least for grading, but probably not for value when determining what to charge for grading....).  Well from this year's OPG from this year.  9.6 NM+:  blah blah blah...."only subtle bindery or printing defects are allowed."  I guess we could debate the meaning of the word 'subtle' and whether or not whoever graded this book needs help understanding the term. 

I'm surprised there's not a few more guffaws over this one, but I think maybe the discussion of all the overgraded books is getting a bit tiresome.  They are great books overall grades aside and I'm still eagerly looking forward to the auction and looking forward to seeing the master list.

 

[linmoth]

Something else I’ve been thinking about. How did he get them from the news stand, drug store in such great condition? He must have really cared about those books at an early age. How many of us could say that. Even though I loved my comics, that’s how I learned to read, I never treated them with any sense of reverence. My mother worked at a 5&10 store and would bring me home a few a week I read them and put them in a box. 

[N e r V]

5 hours ago, szav said:

It's a good looking copy overall, but I think it's been said CGC claims to follow the OPG guidelines (at least for grading, but probably not for value when determining what to charge for grading....).  Well from this year's OPG from this year.  9.6 NM+:  blah blah blah...."only subtle bindery or printing defects are allowed."  I guess we could debate the meaning of the word 'subtle' and whether or not whoever graded this book needs help understanding the term. 

I'm surprised there's not a few more guffaws over this one, but I think maybe the discussion of all the overgraded books is getting a bit tiresome.  They are great books overall grades aside and I'm still eagerly looking forward to the auction and looking forward to seeing the master list.

 

I’ve never found Overstreet or anyone else to have clear cut grading standards that weren’t down to how different people interpret them. It’s art not science.

It’s why the buyers are all over the place on agreeing with numbers and what is or is not acceptable.

After years of collecting I have my own ideas of what an 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 8.5, 9.4, etc… should look like and buy it as such if it’s CGC or Bedrock or Superworld or Dale Robert’s or Harley or whoever. There’s a few dealers I feel over grade by a half or full point most of the time and so I factor that in too.

I’ve not seen every CGC book out there but I usually agree with what I see when I buy otherwise it’s a no go. Going back to your final sentence I think it’s cool to have another sweet looking collection out there numbers be damned. I think a lot of us are curious to see what the prices realized are going to be in this already overheated market…

Edited May 15, 2021 by N e r V

[Badger]

On 5/13/2021 at 10:13 AM, Timely said:

Here is a xerox I took of the MH Det #120. Inks were dripping wet with gloss!

 

 

Not to Badger a point, it looks like it has ink loss on Penguin's hat, head, and coat. Lou_Fine says its total . 

 

[lou_fine]

On 5/14/2021 at 3:49 AM, tabcom said:

On 5/13/2021 at 6:42 PM, aardvark88 said:

+1, as Matt Nelson Promises:

 

Expand  

what’s the timeline where lou_fine comes in?

 

On 5/14/2021 at 4:12 AM, Straw-Man said:

my board routine lately:  i post the appropriate issues in the f.f. and d.d threads in silver, check gold connections to see if i have an offering, and then come over here for his [and others] lamentations.   i have a morbid fascination with it.

It just makes my heart beat to hear that some of you wake up every morning with bated breath just waiting with anticipation and desire to hear my latest musings and ramblings on this Promise Collection pedigree here.    

Seriously though (if that's possible), sounds like some of you need to develop a sense of humour here.  Especially since I have already clearly stated that I consider this Promise Collection to be an once in a lifetime generational GA OO collection, and like they said in the video here, at this late stage of the comic book collecting life cycle that we are in, possibly (but hopefully not) the last true major GA OO collection to come out.  All I am really doing is taking scans that other boardies have pointed out from a negative point of view, and restating it in a more light-hearted way to bring a bit of levity to these rather dour takes on some of these gorgeous books here.  

After all, if you didn't have at least a chuckle in terms of the S&M girl with the CGC grading whip or the CGC Promise Collection grading train barreling down on you at full speed whilst your HG GA book gripped firmly in hand, then you must truly be a CGC acolyte who's overdosing on your hourly dose of CGC juice.  Reminds me of how upset boardies were when I used to make jokes about some of Jason Ewert's books way back in the day when almost all boardies here thought that was absolute sacrilege as he was pretty much deemed to be God's gift to uber HG comic books back then.  

Anyways, back to the video that was posted here by Allan.  Although it was certainly nice to watch 4 comic book guys geeking out over comic books, I thought it would have been even better if they had spiced it up with at least a bit of humour here for us.  Esspecially when they already acknowledged seeing the posts from some of the boardies here on their very own CGC boards.  Perfect examples being when Brian was talking about not even being able to afford a corner of these first group of books posted here and Matt going on about the perfect square corners, it would have been a nice touch if they could have flashed pictures of the covers and zoomed in on the corners of the 2 Subby's and the Sun Girl at that point.  Or when Matt was talking about how the books were pristine because they had not been handled in the past 70 years except for being mylared and boarded about 20 years ago, they really should have flashed an exceprt of that informational video with Matt doing a page count on a GA book while seemingly bending the corners of some of the pages at the same time.   Although certainly hilarious, I guess that would have been a bridge too far for them though.  

After all, these are the four color funny books that we are dealing with here and we may as well have some fun and laughs while talking about them here, instead of being a sourpuss and getting your undies all in a knot whenever anything negative is ever mentioned about CGC and their grading, because it's all really meant more as constructive criticism. 

Edited May 16, 2021 by lou_fine

[Mmehdy]

4 hours ago, LearnedHand said:

 

Debates over dust shadows, inflated grades, etc. aside, this is truly an astonishing collection!  To think someone meticulously amassed the best copies on the newsstand, and that collection sat basically in a time capsule for 70-80 years, is mind-boggling.      

@Richard - I agree with your comments and, on your "money [being] no object" comment, I recognize you're saying this sort of tongue-in-cheek to make a point.  I would say, however, that as you know, hobby dynamics have changed dramatically since the advent of CGC and the on-line auctions. Back in the day ('70s - '80s), it was a rarity to see a GA book priced over ~$500, with most at/below $200.  Even a grade-school kid like me working with allowance and Christmas money could walk into the NYC Seuling and CreationCon shows with ~$150 in my pocket and go home with at least 1-2 high-grade GA books.  Books were rarely priced above Guide, and Guide was the starting point for bargaining - a core (and fun) part of the deal.  Dealers handed you a book and generally pointed out they could do better than asking price.  That's changed...      

... today, "Guide multiples" are the pricing norm.  Some hobbyists even think it's a badge of honor to point out how they can drop $10k on a book at any given time.  Imagine putting a nice GA collection together today if average book price is $10k.  But, as I'm sure you'd agree, for the Average Joe with a mortgage and children, this isn't feasible and we are no longer talking about a fun hobby where you "buy what you like;" it's a broader conversation about spending considerations.  As such, I think you can be an older collector or "true hobbyist" (whatever that might be) and still be very focused on spending.  My $0.2...       

Back on-topic: going to sit back and soak in the continued unveiling of this amazing collection.  It's something that doesn't come around every day!  

Peter

I always found dealers going guide or above in the early 70's in the conventions, probably because of the cost of the tables etc. I disagree with you measuring stick of GA comic book prices at " Guide Multiples" "Guide" is not no longer a guide, it a book which is within the  shadows with some ancient pricing thing Bob Overstreet used to create out GA/SA comic book world. He always underpriced each year such that the "next" guide prices would go up no matter what...then many years later he proudly showed how GA/SA prices were slowly always in a upward direction. The Price guide is dead in my opinion when it comes to pricing any GA/SA comic book in today's market. You can be 10X what that books says in a once a year snapshot of prices according to its structure and that does not mean anything. The Price guide today is a shadow of what it was and what it was meant to do in the 1970's. It a for advertisers and revenue, catch-up pricing for those unaware of the Auction Archives and GPA, histories of comic book collecting published 40x, and pictures of some GA/SA books which you can access on the internet with a simple search.It is published now simply until people figure out it is 95% the same material every year with a different cover.

 I am unsurprised that it is not 20x times what this guide price is today . One of my major beef's was the ignoring of "Pedigree" collections such as the Church and SF in that guide .He sat by silently with the all powerful guide and did not take into account, historical finds which elevate the GA comic book itself.

 Remember the name itself ..Guide...that is all it is. When I purchased Action #1 for over $1800..Guide price In Mint was around $600....I had a collector come up to be and say...But Overstreet guide price is a lot lower and my response to him and the other people was this exactly "Buy it from  Bob Oversteet".

I appreciate you raising the issue of price valuation, especially now with this unique GA collection coming on to our radar in the next 18 months.

 My opinion as to what a current market price is......The Ga/SA comic book market is worldwide, instant like oatmeal in package, and is subject to the two "highest bidders" controlling the market price. Even if the third bidder is 30% below #1 and #2...it will never be recorded on one of the big 3 auction sites to the public.

 So anything goes, if you stick by my advice...you buy the book, make a independent judgement as to condition in your mind, and adjust your price paid if there is added historical significance to the book. When looking at past prices, and that is what they are..past prices with past competition which cannot account for new  buyers in the bidding pool understand you only have the information as to the two top bidders on the final price result if the GA book has been sold recently in a auction site.

 Paying current market price does not always work out, I say buy with you "GUT" instinct. If it feels right, if really want the book, then don't let the past  history,  Price Guide or whatever hold you back....go for it and good luck.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 15, 2021 by Mmehdy

[lou_fine]

On 5/14/2021 at 5:42 AM, Mr. Lady Luck said:

hen they talk about how the raw copies were so nice (i.e. after pressing, the book is a 9.6, but the raw book would have been a 9.4), I die a little bit inside.

I actually found this comment from Brian to be a little bit refreshing because he's simply stating a fact that everybody knows, but don't ever want to say.  

Need to watch that part of the video again, but did Matt cringed a bit at that point since Brian did mentioned it a couple of times and this is almost ALWAYS the type of stuff that you don't directly admit to doing yourself or to a particular book.  Of course, Heritage has an in-house advantage and not the same risk here because everybody knows the work was done by CCS and as a result, any CCS incurred defects would most probably be treated by the graders "accordingly" because it's shhhh........really all in the family.  

Definitely found it kind of ironic though that Brian kept going on and on about the Black Hood 16 in CGC 9.6 and how it was pretty much light years above the next highest graded copy which was way way down there in the census.  The first thought that came to my mind was if that's the case, then why in the world would you take the chance at putting the book through the CCS meat grinder just in case you end up damaging the book during the process which is clearly what must have happened to at least a few of the other books posted so far.  Especially when he said that even if a book looked perfect and probably in 9.4, they would still pressed it and I assume to see if they could just squeezed that final bit of potential out of the book.  The picture that came to my mind at that point was Halperin and Ivy and how they don't really love and care for the comic books the same way that some of us do here, but really care more for the comic books only in terms of using them as a vehicle to acquire what they really truly love, namely money itself.    

Being a long time comic book collector and definitely what most of you here would call a grumpy old man as compared to today's CGC label centric focused generation of collectors, I definitely would have kept the Black Hood 16 in its original already perfect condition the way it had been for the past 75+ plus years and not even think about monkeying around with it.    

Of course, that's just me and it's really a case of to each, their own.  It's all good to me, which ever way each of us choose to collect as long as we can all get fun and joy out of this hobby while doing it.  

Edited May 16, 2021 by lou_fine

[RareHighGrade]

12 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

On 5/14/2021 at 5:42 AM, Mr. Lady Luck said:

When they talk about how the raw copies were so nice (i.e. after pressing, the book is a 9.6, but the raw book would have been a 9.4), I die a little bit inside.

I actually found this comment from Brian to be a little bit refreshing because he's simply stating a fact that everybody knows, but don't ever want to say.  

And that fact is that the virgin unpressed 9.4 likely had a plump rounded spine, which has now been pressed flat in the 9.6 version.  Many collectors (at least those who have been around long enough to see those unicorns) would prefer the former to the latter.  I don't have a problem with all types of pressing (e.g., pressing out creases that are not near the spine), but once the spine of a pedigree book has been pancaked, it can never be returned to its original form.

[buttock]

9 minutes ago, RareHighGrade said:

And that fact is that the virgin unpressed 9.4 likely had a plump rounded spine, which has now been pressed flat in the 9.6 version.  Many collectors (at least those who have been around long enough to see those unicorns) would prefer the former to the latter.  I don't have a problem with all types of pressing (e.g., pressing out creases that are not near the spine), but once the spine of a pedigree book has been pancaked, it can never be returned to its original form.

There's nothing like a big fat golden age book that fills up the mylar and you can see a gap at the centerfold when looking from above.  Seems like a lot of Larsons look like that.  Churches, not so much from being stored in stacks.  

[lou_fine]

19 hours ago, szav said:

Uhh...not my favorite issue so I hadn't looked at it yet but can someone explain this 9.6 to me.  Is there any explanation for the highlighted area being scraped off and then the black line drawn back in with marker.  I want to love this collection and make myself ok with the grades, really I do.  Can the uneven black line be explained any other way than having been drawn back in?  I just cant see the color being magically lifeted off the top and bottom of this line.  Printing defect?

All I'll say here is that if I ever submitted a book like this into CGC for grading, I would most likely also receive a grade with a "6" in it, but sad to say, with the "6" on the other side of the decimal point.  Heck, without having the actual book in hand and knowing my luck, it would probably also come back encased in a holder with one of those nicely purple colored label of theirs.   

Interesting to note that this is the only copy of PL 14 that has a yellow, orange, green, orange, green stripe combination on the spine edge of the book here.  All of the other copies that I just checked on both the HA and CC auction archives has the green, orange, green, orange, green stripe combination.  Like usual with any of the Promise Collection visual defects noted to date, everybody seems to be very forgiving and conveniently attributing them all to production printing defects to be ignored for grading purposes.    

   Since it's a production printing defect variant, I guess Heritage should not only be hyping this book here as not only being the single highest graded copy , but also a super super rare variant with no other existing copy in any condition in the entire universe.