Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on August 10, 2013 at 3:34pm

LOL. If one is good they all are. Wow

PSA said "likely genuine". I've sent in quite a few likely genuines in and had them come back as not good. About 60% of the time the in person PSA review differs from the quick opinion in my experience. I've also had a likely not genuine come back as good. I think the QO from PSA are a joke.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carl Ryan on August 10, 2013 at 7:43pm

Ok, so you just got caught lying your butt off by William 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on August 10, 2013 at 3:29pm

Take it to the next step. All you shady EBAY sellers say that. None has yet to show anyone what the next step is.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carl Ryan on August 10, 2013 at 7:39pm

And the ebay seller arrives in typical fashion. How many times do sellers of forgeries do this every week?????

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Schwartz on August 10, 2013 at 3:03pm

You can type in caps all you want, it doesn't make the stuff you bought from goonart any more authentic. You seem like you've got a pretty good thing going on ebay with plenty of PSA and JSA authentic items. I don't know why you'd risk marks against your account by reselling this junk now that it's clear that's what it is. Nobody's calling you a forger, but you bought them from one and you fell victim to a "too good to be true" scenario. If I were you, I would direct some of this energy toward goonart, get your money back, and move on selling the rest of your good items.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 10, 2013 at 5:18pm

William: Do you have any scans of the PGX Lees you can share? As you may know, PGX has a very dubious reputation in the comic grading world. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 10, 2013 at 5:12pm

I think livmemorabilia is a legit seller and I can understand him being defensive. I give him credit for wanting to do the right thing when this was brought to his attention.

PSA Quick Opinion is for weeding out obvious fakes in my opinion. It may not catch relatively deceptive forgeries... especially in ebay sized scans.

I applaud livmemorabilia for sending these in for a full exam. If they come back bad -- and I suspect they will -- I hope he can recoup the funds from Goonart.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Schwartz on August 10, 2013 at 6:23pm

Yes, in case anybody missed it, here is a status update that he left-

Him voluntarily taking down the auctions for now is all anybody can ask for from a seller trying to do the right thing. Personally, I think sending them into PSA is throwing good money after bad, based on the evidence presented here...but if he'll be more satisfied hearing it from them instead of a bunch of anonymous internet people, then that's his prerogative and understandable.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bjarne Soderholm on August 10, 2013 at 7:08pm

What is going on with this auction? Over $1.500 for this? What is wrong with people?

And of course it's a private listing!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Schwartz on August 10, 2013 at 7:35pm

It is ridiculous. The main problem is that PGX has a reputation for greatly overgrading comics to an almost laughable degree. By giving it a 9.8 grade, they're basically saying this vintage, classic comic is in perfect condition, as if you bought it fresh today - an incredible rarity for its age.

The reality is if this was graded by a reputable firm like CGC, it would probably come in considerably lower (like maybe a 7 for example), which suddenly isn't so much of a rarity. Unfortunately, a lot of people aren't aware of PGX's less-than-stellar reputation and they assume a PGX 9.8 is equal to a CGC 9.8, which it isn't.

I wouldn't consider it out of the realm of possibility for some shill bidding to be going on as well, in theory made much easier with a private listing.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 10, 2013 at 7:47pm

BINGO

PGX has long been suspected of beng corrupt and giving gift grades to their associates, missing restoration by either incompetence or corruption, etc. they are located in Oregon, and we often see other sellers from Oregon with fantasyland PGX grades. Are they selling books they have slabbed themselves?

I paid big bucks for a journey into mystery 89 in a PGX unrestored slab in 2005. Years after found out it was trimmed.

Here is a site dedicated to exposing PGX: http://www.justafanboy.com/PGX/

I do not trust their "witnessed" signings.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Schwartz on August 10, 2013 at 7:56pm

William-

While I wouldn't go near anything PGX for various reasons, I have to say I'm not really seeing any major problems with the Stan Lee signatures on the items they currently have listed. (Except maybe that X-Men #1 which I wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole). Now, they could list a whole new batch tomorrow that would be a completely different story. You never know with them.

A little rushed? Yes. And that crummy marker isn't helping anything. But I'm seeing a lot of the right qualities as well. I know we say Stan is a signing machine (which is true), but there are a couple of things to keep in mind, IMO-

He's now a 90-year old man with recent health problems who's kept on a pretty hectic appearance schedule. Some shakiness and inconsistency is bound to set in eventually. Over the past 2-3 years, I see a lot more autographs coming out of these conventions that look "off"-but-real. And the part of his signature that's showing the most inconsistency is, in fact, the 'S'.

If you look at Youtube videos of these convention signings, they keep his lines moving pretty briskly, and subsequently a lot of autographs are coming out of there rushed looking. The ones listed show natural variations in the same signature, in my opinion (except maybe that X-Men one - I'm not sure what to make of that one). Compare that to the goonart forgeries which look so identical, they're almost like an autopen, and that's more of a red flag to me than rushed examples that maybe aren't 110% on exemplar.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• …
• 16
• Next ›
• Page