Jaydogrules Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 (edited) Funny, no one can demonstrate that any of that has ever happened here. Just more of the same hate that's been around since 2003. At what point does being wrong get boring ? So it is just more sour grapes from "certain people" (the same people, one of whom is posting under multiple accounts) who have nothing better to do than be bothered by what books they don't own sell for. As for the Batman Grendel, that book does come up for sale intermittently, has been up for sale fairly recently raw, and has not even come close to what the 608 has sold for raw. So "certain people's" speculative statements are not supported. -J. Edited July 22, 2017 by Jaydogrules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkstar Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 Ah yes, back to the old line of "you just hate this book because you don't own it". I recall that line being used by a certain someone before in regards to the ASM 678 Quinones variant wherein I promptly responded with proof that I did own that book and yet had no issue debating its value while in the process of selling it! As for proof that 608 is indeed a victim of market manipulation, you are asking the impossible. What is irrefutable is that the book does has questionable transactions attached to it. And due to eBay's scrubbing of sales data and masking of user's identities that is all you are going to get. In regards to the Batman Grendel ashcan, whether it currently has approached the value of 608 is irrelevant. The ashcan was introduced into the discussion as a result of your assertion that the Batman 608 RRP variant is "the only one (Batman variant) that is worth anything significant". WRONG. Having sold a copy of the ashcan for just under 900 dollars a few years ago, before variants went nuts, I can attest that it is indeed worth something significant...to the people that actually know about it. Also I stated that ashcan would go for more than the RRP book IF it existed in 9.8 and IF it was as hyped publicly as the RRP. The reasoning is sound as the ashcan is effectively totally unknown at this time, its print run is a fraction of the RRP's and it does not currently exist in 9.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 (edited) Sorry , but I don't find anything "questionable" about someone on eBay buying and selling 3 different copies of a book over an eight year period, and I highly doubt any reasonable or objective person would. And I don't know what you sold the Batman Grendel for years ago but last year a copy sold for a whopping $85 dollars so I stand by my assertion that the 608 is the only Batman variant that has consistently sold for any significant money. In fact, for a book that you are purporting to have a smaller print run than the RRP, there have been in fact MORE of those for sale, each selling for a couple of hundred bucks, than the RRP over the last few months. Would some people consider a couple hundred dollars a "significant" sum for a Batman variant? Meh. There are many Batman variants that sell for that. But none other anywhere near the level of the RRP. And for good reason. -J. Edited July 22, 2017 by Jaydogrules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkstar Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 Its 3 separate auction wins by the same buyer in less than a month, not across 8 years. But who cares about the facts, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 2 minutes ago, darkstar said: Its 3 separate auction wins by the same buyer in less than a month, not across 8 years. But who cares about the facts, right? No. It was two auctions. Months ago. With feedback left in both directions. And neither book has been re-listed anywhere publicly since. It may be a "fact", but it doesn't actually prove anything (other than somebody purchased two copies). You're grasping at straws because you don't like what these variants sell for. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkstar Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 5 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said: No. It was two auctions. Months ago. With feedback left in both directions. And neither book has been re-listed anywhere publicly since. It may be a "fact", but it doesn't actually prove anything (other than somebody purchased two copies). You're grasping at straws because you don't like what these variants sell for. -J. WRONG 3 different copies from 3 different auctions won by the same buyer 3 separate times in the span of a month: http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&showauto=true&item=282392947211&rmvSB=trueim http://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/222460041430?item=222460041430&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565&rmvSB=true http://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/282426980780?item=282426980780&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565&rmvSB=true Feedback is meaningless. I can have a friend in California win an auction for a book and send him an empty package with a tracking number. We both leave positive feedback. There is a record of the sale (and the delivery of a package). I can then use that sale as a price point to re-sell this book through another non-public avenue, here, facebook, a convention, it doesn't matter where. This didn't necessarily happen, but it remains a possibility. Even if there are no shenanigans involved, if one buyer was able to win 3 separate auctions for the book in less than a month, what does that say about the market for this book? Perhaps its nowhere near as strong as you think it is, just maybe? I'm not grasping at anything. You need to move beyond this idea that people are trolling you in regards to variants simply because they "hate them". Beyond the stupidity of that idea, there aren't enough hours in the day to entertain that endeavor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 (edited) No. It was only two of the auctions. Look again. And now you're REALLY grasping at straws, trying to point out what someone "might" have done privately, you simply have no evidence of anything, you're speculating has descended into the utter sublime, and yet you just keep going. Okay, so a buyer wanted to own two copies of this hard to find book. SO WHAT? As I've already said , there are boardies who will openly tell you they have, in the past, also bought this book in multiple if they could when it has come up for sale. SO WHAT? What does that tell me about "the market" for the book? About the same that it does when I consider that, even with 200 slabs now on the census, people are holding on to them tight and they barely ever come up for sale, in any grade or condition, ever. About the same that it does that the one and only copy on eBay right now has 66 watchers. About the same that it does that the last raw copy was at $1k in less than 24 hours before the seller pulled it to likely sell off eBay. About the same as it does that somebody recently paid $1000 for a copy that would have been a blue label 6.5 with a detached cover just so they could own any copy at a relatively affordable price point. About the same as it does that every other copy in every grade and label type other than a blue 9.8 has also busted GPA in the last 24 months. It all tells me that the book is one of the most desired and sought after Batman books out there and that it's one of the top books of the modern age, which also tells me why it sells for a mint. -J. Edited July 22, 2017 by Jaydogrules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkstar Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 You can click on the three links provided and see that the same buyer won three different auctions. If you can't even count to three, we should probably just stop here. And again, the market is not very strong for this book if the same seller can win three separate auctions on this book in less than a month. If the market was that strong then with how rarely this book comes up for sale (according to you), those listings should have seen more action. You have a single seller overpaying for copies of this book and it gives the appearance of it being more in demand that it is in reality. Book became a runaway train due to hype and infrequent sales data and almost certain manipulation. I already used the caveat that my skepticism in regards to the series of questionable sales of this book (the three linked above) may have been misguided. I walked you through a possibility, since you were unable to come to the conclusion on your own, where leaving feedback is not evidence of a true sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 (edited) Okay, so then you just can't see that e**5 (512) won the first auction and r**0 won the orher two. Lets just continue to ignore all of the other sales before and after that over the last two years that clearly showed the book spiking again. You just don't like those two sales because one guy decided to own two copies of a book in grade that literally almost never comes up for sale. Got it. You are literally just repeating the same broken record that has been unequivocally wrong since this thread was first started in 2003. And lookie lookie. Now that $500 book is a $5000-$6000 book. How will you feel when it's a $10,000 book ? And again, I highly doubt any reasonable or objective person would find an individual owning two copies of the same book to be "questionable", nor do I believe any reasonable or objective person would choose to use the word "series" as a descriptor of two sales. -J. Edited July 22, 2017 by Jaydogrules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightninglad Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 It's always possible that I'm just an insufficiently_thoughtful_person, but I clearly see r**0 (512) having won all three auctions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazyboy Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Jaydogrules said: Okay, so then you just can't see that e**5 (512) won the first auction and r**0 won the orher two. Lets just continue to ignore all of the other sales before and after that over the last two years that clearly showed the book spiking again. You just don't like those two sales because one guy decided to own two copies of a book in grade that literally almost never comes up for sale. Got it. You are literally just repeating the same broken record that has been unequivocally wrong since this thread was first started in 2003. And lookie lookie. Now that $500 book is a $5000-$6000 book. How will you feel when it's a $10,000 book ? And again, I highly doubt any reasonable or objective person would find an individual owning two copies of the same book to be "questionable", nor do I believe any reasonable or objective person would choose to use the word "series" as a descriptor of two sales. -J. Wow, you're so delusional that you're hallucinating bidder IDs. I don't even see a bid from "e***5" on any of those auctions, let alone a winning bid. Seek some help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazyboy Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 4 hours ago, Jaydogrules said: I can't believe you just used the words "niche" and "shallow" with anything having to do with the demand for Batman. You are aware that Batman epemera has at least a little more demand than Maxx ashcans, right ? -J. Variant, not Batman. A Batman variant may have more demand than a New Warriors variant, but it's still a niche. Who the cares about Maxx ashcans, especially relative to this discussion (but even in general)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 1 hour ago, lightninglad said: It's always possible that I'm just an insufficiently_thoughtful_person, but I clearly see r**0 (512) having won all three auctions Even if e**5 (512) didn't win it for $4900, k**k (1716) would have had it for $4850. Or r**a (548) would have had it for $4750. That's called intense "demand". EBay listings are stale after 90 days. I'm starting to think they are glitchy and unreliable after that, thus making this conversation even more pointless and irrelevant than it already was. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazyboy Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 2 hours ago, darkstar said: You can click on the three links provided and see that the same buyer won three different auctions. If you can't even count to three, we should probably just stop here. And again, the market is not very strong for this book if the same seller can win three separate auctions on this book in less than a month. If the market was that strong then with how rarely this book comes up for sale (according to you), those listings should have seen more action. Look at the other bids, too. Very few unique bidders, especially near "market value" and the hammer price. Like I said: shallow. 2 hours ago, darkstar said: You have a single seller overpaying for copies of this book and it gives the appearance of it being more in demand that it is in reality. Book became a runaway train due to hype and infrequent sales data and almost certain manipulation. I already used the caveat that my skepticism in regards to the series of questionable sales of this book (the three linked above) may have been misguided. I walked you through a possibility, since you were unable to come to the conclusion on your own, where leaving feedback is not evidence of a true sale. Why was "r***0" so desperate to acquire multiple copies and pay so much for each that they had the top 6, 4, and 5 bids on the three auctions, respectively? I know people who collect multiple copies of certain books, but I don't know anybody who offers to empty their wallet (or bank account) every time they see a copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightninglad Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 What's interesting is that neither 1716 nor 548 were willing to bid that high on the next auction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, Lazyboy said: Look at the other bids, too. Very few unique bidders, especially near "market value" and the hammer price. Like I said: shallow. Why was "r***0" so desperate to acquire multiple copies and pay so much for each that they had the top 6, 4, and 5 bids on the three auctions, respectively? I know people who collect multiple copies of certain books, but I don't know anybody who offers to empty their wallet (or bank account) every time they see a copy. Why you are always so concerned with how other people choose to spend their money is the far more pressing question you should be grappling with. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, lightninglad said: What's interesting is that neither 1716 nor 548 were willing to bid that high on the next auction So instead it would have gone to y**s (959) for $4550. -J. Edited July 23, 2017 by Jaydogrules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazyboy Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said: Why you are always so concerned with how other people choose to spend their money is the far more pressing question you should be grappling with. -J. I don't care how people spend their money, specifically. My interest is in understanding the market. You seem to be very interested in the same thing, Mr. Black Pot. At least it seems that way when you're constantly throwing around accusations of shill bidding on books you don't like. divad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Lazyboy said: I don't care how people spend their money, specifically. My interest is in understanding the market. You seem to be very interested in the same thing, Mr. Black Pot. At least it seems that way when you're constantly throwing around accusations of shill bidding on books you don't like. Wrong again. I point out when books actually ARE being shilled and it's obvious. Zero/low feedback bidders/ 100% bidding activity with the same sellers, and then the same book reappearing a very short time later for sale again. It's like I said a few posts back, this book sells so infrequently, if somebody were to attempt to do that here, even if they were attempting to subsequently sell the book privately, setting a price using and referencing the two eBay 9.8 sales (though I notice you continue to ignore the various other sales that happened across other grade and label colours in the two years prior as this book began to spike again), it wouldn't be very hard for a buyer with even a modicum of savvy (and one would hope that would be the case if he is looking at a $5k-$6k book to purchase) can simply look at the eBay sales, or GPA and say "hey, didn't that exact same book supposedly just sell for $XXXX? What are you trying to pull here?" But since none of these books have actually reappeared anywhere publicly since then, the only thing that we do know with any certainty is that- that they have not been offered for sale publicly since they were purchased. Anything else beyond that is gross supposition that only someone chewing on sour grapes would repeatedly suggest. Which I actually find ironic, given how hostile you use to get everytime someone sought to even casually suppose a book's print number via comichron. But just in case you really are trying to just "understand the market" I will break down in its most elemental form the reasons for this book's insane popularity and values it commands- Batman. Rare. 15 years old. Variant. Batman. Jim Lee. Batman. Rare. Variant. Batman. -J. Edited July 23, 2017 by Jaydogrules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divad Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 29 minutes ago, lightninglad said: What's interesting is that neither 1716 nor 548 were willing to bid that high on the next auction What's really interesting is why anyone would pay $5,000 for modern krap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
