Email Alertscheckbox YTcheckbox Manage Email Alerts

CBCS Collections/Pedigrees - "Newsstand Mint"16327

Pages:

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by Brash Quote: Originally Posted by Gaard I've always been curious... Who has the final 'say'? If it's CGC, what if CGC wasn't around (went out of business or whatever). You could ask the same question but replace 'CGC' with 'CBCS'. Does PGX get a say? Does Overstreet? IOW, who determines whether or not a collection is a pedigree? Bingo! Answered!
	3 years ago	Post 26 • IP flag post

Why just the women? I like bears. 3.43K	3.43K Gaard private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Quote: Originally Posted by Gaard I've always been curious... Who has the final 'say'? If it's CGC, what if CGC wasn't around (went out of business or whatever). You could ask the same question but replace 'CGC' with 'CBCS'. Does PGX get a say? Does Overstreet? IOW, who determines whether or not a collection is a pedigree? Nowadays I'd say everybody but PGX has some say because we all use the same basic criteria. It just depends who the owner initially brings the books to I guess. I have no problem with CBCS determining a new pedigree and marketing it like CGC has. CGC doesn't have a monopoly on naming new pedigrees. So what you're saying is that CBCS might recognize a certain collection as a pedigree, but CGC might say, "Nah, I don't think so." So then where are we? Joe could say, "Look at this comic. It's part of the X pedigree." And Bill would say, "Yeah, no. The X collection is not a pedigree." Joe would say, "Oh yes it is. CBCS says so." And Bill would say, "Who cares if CBCS says so? Nobody else does."
	3 years ago	Post 27 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 3
	Quote: Originally Posted by Gaard Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Quote: Originally Posted by Gaard I've always been curious... Who has the final 'say'? If it's CGC, what if CGC wasn't around (went out of business or whatever). You could ask the same question but replace 'CGC' with 'CBCS'. Does PGX get a say? Does Overstreet? IOW, who determines whether or not a collection is a pedigree? Nowadays I'd say everybody but PGX has some say because we all use the same basic criteria. It just depends who the owner initially brings the books to I guess. I have no problem with CBCS determining a new pedigree and marketing it like CGC has. CGC doesn't have a monopoly on naming new pedigrees. So what you're saying is that CBCS might recognize a certain collection as a pedigree, but CGC might say, "Nah, I don't think so." So then where are we? As long as everyone follows the criteria this should not happen. If this did happen I think buyers would vote with their wallets. As noted Steve set up the pedigree criteria for both CGC and CBCS so I don't see there being a huge difference/problem.
	3 years ago	Post 28 • IP flag post

Please continue to ignore anything I post. 33.16K	33.16K southerncross private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Originally,collections were deemed pedigrees because of market acceptance. The market, the comic buying public had the final say.
	3 years ago	Post 29 • IP flag post

past performance is no guarantee of future actions. 30.57K	30.57K KatKomics private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Quote: Originally Posted by Gaard Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Quote: Originally Posted by Gaard I've always been curious... Who has the final 'say'? If it's CGC, what if CGC wasn't around (went out of business or whatever). You could ask the same question but replace 'CGC' with 'CBCS'. Does PGX get a say? Does Overstreet? IOW, who determines whether or not a collection is a pedigree? Nowadays I'd say everybody but PGX has some say because we all use the same basic criteria. It just depends who the owner initially brings the books to I guess. I have no problem with CBCS determining a new pedigree and marketing it like CGC has. CGC doesn't have a monopoly on naming new pedigrees. So what you're saying is that CBCS might recognize a certain collection as a pedigree, but CGC might say, "Nah, I don't think so." So then where are we? As long as everyone follows the criteria this should not happen. If this did happen I think buyers would vote with their wallets. As noted Steve set up the pedigree criteria for both CGC and CBCS so I don't see there being a huge difference/problem. ^^^^ this $$ talks - the "promise" collection is for sure famous - was it a manufactured fame =yes! is it the same pedigree as other pedigrees = no But all those people who spent big $$ on the "promise" collection have said with a big YES that they will treat it as a real pedigree despite the dubious nature of the "promise" collection If some other organization Hertiage/Hakes or other auction house or other grading company (CBCS) "found" a new pedigree and hyped the sh!t out of it and the market dumped cash into it thereby verifying it - other grading companies etc. would basically have no choice but to also recognize it
	3 years ago	Post 30 • IP flag post

Collector 25	25 Brash private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by HexView This definition from the 1989 OPG is more specific than that. Plus pedigrees were always discussed in The CBG in the 90s. I'm not sure what you think this proves. It's exactly the same as what I posted. Basically "it's a Pedigree because it's famous."
	3 years ago	Post 31 • IP flag post

Collector 25	25 Brash private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by KatKomics $$ talks - the "promise" collection is for sure famous - was it a manufactured fame =yes! is it the same pedigree as other pedigrees = no But all those people who spent big $$ on the "promise" collection have said with a big YES that they will treat it as a real pedigree despite the dubious nature of the "promise" collection If some other organization Hertiage/Hakes or other auction house or other grading company (CBCS) "found" a new pedigree and hyped the sh!t out of it and the market dumped cash into it thereby verifying it - other grading companies etc. would basically have no choice but to also recognize it I think this is right on unfortunately, which is kind of the point I was trying to make. I think a neutral third party or more transparency about how a collection qualifies would benefit the industry. The market can only act rationally with sufficient information. If not all Pedigrees are equal then that's OK I guess, but maybe that classification needs to be refined to reflect that.
	3 years ago	Post 32 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by Brash This definition from the 1989 OPG is more specific than that. Plus pedigrees were always discussed in The CBG in the 90s. I'm not sure what you think this proves. It's exactly the same as what I posted. Basically "it's a Pedigree because it's famous." It's not the same at all. The specific use of the word "outstanding" changes the meaning and, along with the non-pedigree warning, indicates a criteria about 20 years before you said we had one. Plus, why would a collection be "famous" in the first place? Because it's a large, high grade collection with lots of keys. Those are 3 criteria we still use today.
	3 years ago	Post 33 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by Brash Quote: Originally Posted by KatKomics $$ talks - the "promise" collection is for sure famous - was it a manufactured fame =yes! is it the same pedigree as other pedigrees = no But all those people who spent big $$ on the "promise" collection have said with a big YES that they will treat it as a real pedigree despite the dubious nature of the "promise" collection If some other organization Hertiage/Hakes or other auction house or other grading company (CBCS) "found" a new pedigree and hyped the sh!t out of it and the market dumped cash into it thereby verifying it - other grading companies etc. would basically have no choice but to also recognize it I think this is right on unfortunately, which is kind of the point I was trying to make. I think a neutral third party or more transparency about how a collection qualifies would benefit the industry. The market can only act rationally with sufficient information. If not all Pedigrees are equal then that's OK I guess, but maybe that classification needs to be refined to reflect that. No.
	3 years ago	Post 34 • IP flag post

past performance is no guarantee of future actions. 30.57K	30.57K KatKomics private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Can you imagine if Chuck found his Mile High II collection in todays world?? Pretty sure it isn't a "recognized" collection/pedigree but today - today - with all the on-line auction houses and at least 2 reputable grading companies?? 100 - bazillion% they would make a deal to only grade with X company and sell through X auction house the top of the top of those books and the 24hr media machine, fanboy world would loose it's sh!t at all those comics discovered = instant fame!! Would it be a "true" collection or "pedigree" -not a chance in heck. Could you dupe collectors into paying a premium for vintage 9.8's that were previously not on the market - ummmmm....yeah.... Mark my words - when they find Amelia Earhart's plane and it turns out her only reading material was 100's of comics - someone will slap that on a label and collectors will pay through the nose for it!
	3 years ago	Post 35 • IP flag post

Collector 25	25 Brash private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by HexView It's not the same at all. The specific use of the word "outstanding" changes the meaning and, along with the non-pedigree warning, indicates a criteria about 20 years before you said we had one. Plus, why would a collection be "famous" in the first place? Because it's a large, high grade collection with lots of keys. Those are 3 criteria we still use today. You're kind of proving my point. Outstanding adds literally nothing to the definition. Does that mean "super" famous then? How exactly would one quantify that? And before you argue that such things can't be quantified, take a look at this. It looks like the work on this is on pause but it's really impressive. This is the kind of data that should be made available for every candidate collection.
	3 years ago	Post 36 • IP flag post

past performance is no guarantee of future actions. 30.57K	30.57K KatKomics private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Plus, why would a collection be "famous" in the first place? Because it's a large, high grade collection with lots of keys. Those are 3 criteria we still use today. it's also how the collection came to be. i.e. one person bought all the issues when newly released This is why the Mile High II never reached collection/pedigree status - Chuck bought them all second hand and the books were never available for sale to the public but were instead basically books bought as a scam to get free $$ from the publishers - famous - yes, high grade - yes, large - yes.....pedigree - no
	3 years ago	Post 37 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill.

521

HexView private msg quote post Address this user

plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brash
Quote:
Originally Posted by HexView
It's not the same at all. The specific use of the word "outstanding" changes the meaning and, along with the non-pedigree warning, indicates a criteria about 20 years before you said we had one. Plus, why would a collection be "famous" in the first place? Because it's a large, high grade collection with lots of keys. Those are 3 criteria we still use today.

You're kind of proving my point. Outstanding adds literally nothing to the definition.

you can't be serious

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barth[/quote

And before you argue that such things can't be quantified, take a look at this. It looks like the work on this is on pause but it's really impressive. This is the kind of data that should be made available for every candidate collection.

you know that website and book belongs to Matt Nelson, the president of CGC, right? You just threw your support behind CGC’s pedigree criteria

3 years ago

I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this. 76.21K	76.21K GAC private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by KatKomics Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Plus, why would a collection be "famous" in the first place? Because it's a large, high grade collection with lots of keys. Those are 3 criteria we still use today. it's also how the collection came to be. i.e. one person bought all the issues when newly released This is why the Mile High II never reached collection/pedigree status - Chuck bought them all second hand and the books were never available for sale to the public but were instead basically books bought as a scam to get free $$ from the publishers - famous - yes, high grade - yes, large - yes.....pedigree - no I am not familiar with this...seems like there's an interesting story there.
	3 years ago	Post 39 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by KatKomics Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Plus, why would a collection be "famous" in the first place? Because it's a large, high grade collection with lots of keys. Those are 3 criteria we still use today. it's also how the collection came to be. i.e. one person bought all the issues when newly released This is why the Mile High II never reached collection/pedigree status - Chuck bought them all second hand and the books were never available for sale to the public but were instead basically books bought as a scam to get free $$ from the publishers - famous - yes, high grade - yes, large - yes.....pedigree - no Yup original owner would be the 4th criteria. MHII was a pedigree for many years, but CGC finally came to their senses and stopped believing Chuck's bullshit.
	3 years ago	Post 40 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 3
	Quote: Originally Posted by GAC Quote: Originally Posted by KatKomics Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Plus, why would a collection be "famous" in the first place? Because it's a large, high grade collection with lots of keys. Those are 3 criteria we still use today. it's also how the collection came to be. i.e. one person bought all the issues when newly released This is why the Mile High II never reached collection/pedigree status - Chuck bought them all second hand and the books were never available for sale to the public but were instead basically books bought as a scam to get free $$ from the publishers - famous - yes, high grade - yes, large - yes.....pedigree - no I am not familiar with this...seems like there's an interesting story there. Chuck bought pallets full of supposedly destroyed comics from the mob. Allegedly.
	3 years ago	Post 41 • IP flag post

Collector 25	25 Brash private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by HexView you know that website and book belongs to Matt Nelson, the president of CGC, right? You just threw your support behind CGC’s pedigree criteria LOL. Dude I posted it, of course I know who wrote it. I don't know if you're intentionally missing the point or not but either way I have no interest in arguing with you any further. I've made a note of your "double secret outstanding probation" criteria for classifying Pedigrees so I think we're good here. Thanks for the notes.
	3 years ago	Post 42 • IP flag post

Please continue to ignore anything I post. 33.16K	33.16K southerncross private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	A book from the Mile high 2 collection
	3 years ago	Post 43 • IP flag post

past performance is no guarantee of future actions. 30.57K	30.57K KatKomics private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Quote: Originally Posted by KatKomics Quote: Originally Posted by HexView Plus, why would a collection be "famous" in the first place? Because it's a large, high grade collection with lots of keys. Those are 3 criteria we still use today. it's also how the collection came to be. i.e. one person bought all the issues when newly released This is why the Mile High II never reached collection/pedigree status - Chuck bought them all second hand and the books were never available for sale to the public but were instead basically books bought as a scam to get free $$ from the publishers - famous - yes, high grade - yes, large - yes.....pedigree - no Yup original owner would be the 4th criteria. MHII was a pedigree for many years, but CGC finally came to their senses and stopped believing Chuck's bullshit. hey, hey now!! I have 2 Captain Marvel from the MHII with certificates - certificates means it's real right!! lol!
	3 years ago	Post 44 • IP flag post

Masculinity takes a holiday. 37.28K	37.28K EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Starting to realize that so much of the worlds "wealth" is just a Ponzi Scheme of perception. In that nothing is really based on facts and provability and all value is just dependent on the next buyers willingness to accept the story that is being sold. Bitcoin, NFT's, Pedigrees, fiat currencies, college educations, 9.8s, hot Modern comic books...it's like the value of everything is just reliant on continued acceptance of the current narrative. Only things like land, structures and tools/equipment have true undeniable value.
	3 years ago	Post 45 • IP flag post

If the viagra is working you should be well over a 9.8. 17.97K	17.97K xkonk private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 1
	Quote: Originally Posted by EbayMafia Only things like land, structures and tools/equipment have true undeniable value. Those and a mother's love... at least to her children. Everyone else, YMMV.
	3 years ago	Post 46 • IP flag post

I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery. 56.49K	56.49K DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by southerncross A book from the Mile high 2 ~~collection~~ warehouse find Fixed your post.
	3 years ago	Post 47 • IP flag post

past performance is no guarantee of future actions. 30.57K	30.57K KatKomics private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by DrWatson Quote: Originally Posted by southerncross A book from the Mile high 2 ~~collection~~ warehouse find Fixed your post. lol!!
	3 years ago	Post 48 • IP flag post

The Fifth Golden Girl 48.46K	48.46K sborock private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	As for the Mile High 2 collection. At CGC we did not recognize "collections", so it got a pedigree designation instead. Which we decided after a bit to get rid of it's pedigree designation. The books were in fantastic condition and deep runs with multiple copies. It also had the 1st SA 10 we ever gave out at CGC. Sweet book.
	3 years ago	Post 49 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by sborock As for the Mile High 2 collection. At CGC we did not recognize "collections", so it got a pedigree designation instead. What about "from the collection of Dallas Stephens" original label aka "From the Dallas Stevens/MileHighComics.com Collection"? https://www.metropoliscomics.com/item/241785
	3 years ago	Post 50 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 3
	"From the collection of Nicolas Cage"
	3 years ago	Post 51 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 3
	"From the collection of Joe and Nadia Mannarino"
	3 years ago	Post 52 • IP flag post

I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this. 76.21K	76.21K GAC private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by sborock As for the Mile High 2 collection. At CGC we did not recognize "collections",.... Not Do...did.
	3 years ago	Post 53 • IP flag post

Hello, my name is Stu and I'm a shill. 521	521 HexView private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by GAC Quote: Originally Posted by sborock As for the Mile High 2 collection. At CGC we did not recognize "collections",.... Not Do...did. That's my point. All of the books posted above were slabbed when Steve was president of CGC 2000-2008
	3 years ago	Post 54 • IP flag post

Collector 25	25 Brash private msg quote post Address this user	plus 1 plus 1 plus 1 0
	Quote: Originally Posted by HexView What about "from the collection of Dallas Stephens" original label aka "From the Dallas Stevens/MileHighComics.com Collection"? https://www.metropoliscomics.com/item/241785 I don't know about the Pedigree but I think we can all agree that's one of the best covers of all time.
	3 years ago	Post 55 • IP flag post

626878 71 30

« Forum Home

Pages:

1 2 3

This topic is archived. Start new topic?