Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Page 106 of 111123 ... 103, 104, 105, 106, 107 ... 109110111
Author


Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5692
Joined: Nov 16, 2002
Last Visit: Jan 18, 2022
Location: Wichita, KS, USA

Post Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2015 11:44 pm 
 

TheHistorian wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:How much is that per page?


I can't tell you that, since I don't know page counts, but at $1585.33 per issue, that's not too bad, really ;)

Rob and I were discussing the issues at lunch, and I commented that I thought that they'd sell for about $14K ---good to see that my estimation skills are still on the money :)


Allan Grohe ([email protected])
Greyhawk, grodog Style

Editor and Project Manager, Black Blade Publishing
https://www.facebook.com/BlackBladePublishing/

 WWW  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 413
Joined: May 07, 2007
Last Visit: Aug 03, 2021

Post Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 12:11 am 
 

grodog wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:
TheHistorian wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:How much is that per page?


I can't tell you that, since I don't know page counts, but at $1585.33 per issue, that's not too bad, really ;)

Rob and I were discussing the issues at lunch, and I commented that I thought that they'd sell for about $14K ---good to see that my estimation skills are still on the money :)


We discussed how most of them are fakes. How can anyone ascribe values in the thousands of dollars for photocopies?? I see $14k for two real issues and old copies of the rest. No idea how you'd valuate these, your estimation skills aside.

Zenfinite

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1098
Joined: May 14, 2008
Last Visit: Jan 18, 2022
Location: West of a site called "Chicago" . . .

Post Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 7:56 am 
 

I don't think it's fair to call them fakes.  I think three of them are likely "originals", meaning that they are as originally distributed, with an original cover.  The others appear to be vintage photocopies.  So many years down the road, I think we all too often try to make distinctions about early products that we give too much credit to something we think was "original".  (As just one example, the multiple debates here about the different brown box printings.)  This was a newsletter for a club, mailed by people who had day jobs.  One possibility:  someone was left off the mailing, called or wrote Gary, and he photocopied his copy and mailed it or gave it to the subscriber.  That would explain why there are several originals and other photocopies in this set.  In any case, it seems very likely that these copies were made around the time of the original distribution, and likely by Gary or someone else involved in the C&C Society, and given to a member.  How different is that from how the originals were produced and distributed?  Now, are the copies worth less than an "original"?  Sure.  But worthless?  That doesn't make sense to me.

My rough guess?  $3000 for each original, $1000 for each photocopy.  That takes you to $15,000.  So the buyer paid about the right price (though still more than I was willing to pay).


"Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus."

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
JG Valuation Board
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 5029
Joined: Oct 11, 2004
Last Visit: Jan 16, 2017
Location: Texas

Post Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 2:29 pm 
 

Bracton wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:I don't think it's fair to call them fakes.  I think three of them are likely "originals", meaning that they are as originally distributed, with an original cover.  The others appear to be vintage photocopies.  

Now, are the copies worth less than an "original"?  Sure.  But worthless?  That doesn't make sense to me.

My rough guess?  $3000 for each original, $1000 for each photocopy.  That takes you to $15,000.  So the buyer paid about the right price (though still more than I was willing to pay).


Vintage photocopies?
What is that?
So then the buyer could now photocopy all of them and sell a few sets of them for... umnnn..... lets say a bargain price of just $500 each issue (being modern copies instead of vintage photocopies, makes them worth half price perhaps?) and get all his money back and then some....
I say no to valuating ANY photocopies at $1000 each or modern copies at high prices either.
SLIPPERY SLOPE!
So then I could print copies of the Ultra Rare Greyhawk Papers (I scanned them before selling them) that I sold to a fellow member a few years ago and sell them for 1/4th of what he paid?
Seriously?
The implied justification that they MIGHT be really old (vintage) photocopies flys in the face of the ideals and practices of almost every collector here.
How many times have the leaders and high end collectors on this site blasted e-Bay sellers for doing that?
How many times have auctions been ended through the work of collectors on this site for that very reason?
IF that listing featured only 2 true originals, then the buyer paid $7,000 each for the two true original copies and the shipping costs was for the photocopies.


"Guys, I am starting to think Tegel Manor might be haunted..."
Stated by me as a PC during a run of Tegel Manor DMed by killjoy at NTRPGCon 2010

Charter Member of the ATM

  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 413
Joined: May 07, 2007
Last Visit: Aug 03, 2021

Post Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 3:49 pm 
 

Gnat the Beggar wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:
Bracton wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:I don't think it's fair to call them fakes.  I think three of them are likely "originals", meaning that they are as originally distributed, with an original cover.  The others appear to be vintage photocopies.  

Now, are the copies worth less than an "original"?  Sure.  But worthless?  That doesn't make sense to me.

My rough guess?  $3000 for each original, $1000 for each photocopy.  That takes you to $15,000.  So the buyer paid about the right price (though still more than I was willing to pay).


Vintage photocopies?
What is that?
So then the buyer could now photocopy all of them and sell a few sets of them for... umnnn..... lets say a bargain price of just $500 each issue (being modern copies instead of vintage photocopies, makes them worth half price perhaps?) and get all his money back and then some....
I say no to valuating ANY photocopies at $1000 each or modern copies at high prices either.
SLIPPERY SLOPE!
So then I could print copies of the Ultra Rare Greyhawk Papers (I scanned them before selling them) that I sold to a fellow member a few years ago and sell them for 1/4th of what he paid?
Seriously?
The implied justification that they MIGHT be really old (vintage) photocopies flys in the face of the ideals and practices of almost every collector here.
How many times have the leaders and high end collectors on this site blasted e-Bay sellers for doing that?
How many times have auctions been ended through the work of collectors on this site for that very reason?
IF that listing featured only 2 true originals, then the buyer paid $7,000 each for the two true original copies and the shipping costs was for the photocopies.


I agree with this 1000000%.

Zenfinite

  

User avatar

Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 229
Joined: Jun 08, 2007
Last Visit: Jan 18, 2022
Location: San Diego, CA

Post Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 3:55 pm 
 

Gnat the Beggar wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:Vintage photocopies?
What is that?

Bracton's point is that the distinction between a photocopy and a distribution issue is not as clear as we would like it to be, for early periodicals. The means of photocopying and the means of production might not actually be different in some cases, and thus you have to rely on other forms of evidence to decide whether or not something is "original." We didn't make the slope slippery, it was slick enough to begin with.

As I said above in this thread, there is a very small set of people who have the expertise to make these judgments. I wouldn't be too hasty to denounce something as a worthless fake, as I do think it matters how and by whom the copies were made. There are a lot of anomalies and corner cases when you evaluate works produced as informally as the DB.

I will however concede that the eBay auction format pretty much deprives us of the information we need to make that evaluation before bidding, and thus going big on items like this is something of a coin toss. I don't know how much that uncertainty affected the outcome of the auction, though certainly some people sat this one out because of that doubt. I could imagine this having gone higher.


Author of Playing at the World and The Elusive Shift, co-author of D&D Art & Arcana and Heroes's Feast

 WWW  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector

Posts: 3155
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 05, 2016
Location: UK

Post Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 5:16 pm 
 

Gnat the Beggar wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:How many times have the leaders and high end collectors on this site blasted e-Bay sellers for doing that?
How many times have auctions been ended through the work of collectors on this site for that very reason?
IF that listing featured only 2 true originals, then the buyer paid $7,000 each for the two true original copies and the shipping costs was for the photocopies.

The word you're looking for is "provenance". I didn't see Paul refuse to handle the sale of "worthless photocopies" in those recent RJK auctions; e.g.

** eBay auction listing blocked.  Please enable cookies in your browser for this site and for eBay! **



"7.3 ORGANIZING THE PARTY: Always have a keg, even if it's BYOB...
7.4 TAKING THE GAME SERIOUSLY: Don't"

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1098
Joined: May 14, 2008
Last Visit: Jan 18, 2022
Location: West of a site called "Chicago" . . .

Post Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 8:58 pm 
 

Unsurprisingly, Jon put the point far better than I did.

It is certainly possible that the copies were made by the subscriber, to just have extra copies.  That would indeed be, in my view, an item of very little value (other than the novelty of being able to read something where likely ten or fewer copies are in existence).  And, if that is how these copies came to be, Zen's and Gnat's objection to giving any real value to them absolutely makes sense.

That, however, was not my assumption, based upon the fact that duplicate originals were not being sold, along with Jon's earlier posts and the opinion of another Acaeum member much more experienced in evaluating these types of items than I.

As Jon suggested, the original distribution of the Domesdays often appear to have been done via photocopies, made by Gary or others in the C&C Society.  IF that is the case with these copies, then they are in effect originals, just without the color paper cover.  It is impossible to tell from the pictures in an eBay auction whether this may be the case, and without provenance it may be forever impossible to be sure either way.  That being said, a few members on this forum (myself certainly not included) may be able to look at the copies and make an educated guess as to whether they were in effect part of the original distribution.

If they were, then I stand by my valuation.


"Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus."

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor
Valuation Board

Posts: 1867
Joined: May 01, 2004
Last Visit: Jan 17, 2022
Location: Almost Lake Geneva, WI

Post Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2015 10:00 am 
 

Bracton wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:the original distribution of the Domesdays often appear to have been done via photocopies, made by Gary or others in the C&C Society.  IF that is the case with these copies, then they are in effect originals, just without the color paper cover.  It is impossible to tell from the pictures in an eBay auction whether this may be the case, and without provenance it may be forever impossible to be sure either way.  That being said, a few members on this forum (myself certainly not included) may be able to look at the copies and make an educated guess as to whether they were in effect part of the original distribution.

If they were, then I stand by my valuation.

Concur.
Rob made extra copies for members who lacked them, in the early 1970s.

Domesdays were free 1-pg handouts at first, picked up at the club meetings.
Then the club implemented dues, and around that time, Rob became 'King'. (Various titles were awarded.)
Some wouldn't pay dues at first. They missed out on their newsletters. So they paid up eventually, and more copies had to be made.
(Sometimes we find Rob's or Gary's name copied on the front page of the period copy. In that case the source piece is obvious.)

We can sometimes tell by the type of paper used. However, that could obviously be defeated by using old paper to make modern copies.
Thus, the combination of provenance plus physical characteristics is the current sole practical method of verification.

all imnsho ;>

SO, if you have so many original Domesdays that you scorn those photocopied very soon after (from our 40-year perspective) the originals were made, fine. :)

F


My friends Dave & Gary made a quantum leap in the human soul. Remember them.

  


Prolific Collector

Posts: 168
Joined: Aug 11, 2010
Last Visit: May 31, 2021

Post Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2015 12:20 pm 
 

I suppose it's sort of like saying that a Gutenberg isn't an original Bible, eh? :)

  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6540
Joined: Jan 03, 2005
Last Visit: Jan 18, 2022
Location: UK

Post Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2015 3:42 am 
 

Lou Zocchi used to sell photocopies of PotVQ, and his 'reprints' of many other products were near as damn it photocopies.
Does that not make his product line 'fake'?
Besides, every fanzine I've ever seen has been the handywork of some enterprising kid or club on their photocopier.


This week I've been mostly eating . . . gummy bears.

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
JG Valuation Board
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 5029
Joined: Oct 11, 2004
Last Visit: Jan 16, 2017
Location: Texas

Post Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:29 am 
 

Phentari wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay: I suppose it's sort of like saying that a Gutenberg isn't an original Bible, eh? :)


I get the point but that was Not the best analogy you could have chosen.
The Guttenberg Bible, was in fact a first print.
The original first original first print of any major book in the history of the entire world.

So, no not even close to the same things.....   :roll:


"Guys, I am starting to think Tegel Manor might be haunted..."
Stated by me as a PC during a run of Tegel Manor DMed by killjoy at NTRPGCon 2010

Charter Member of the ATM

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector

Posts: 1605
Joined: Mar 08, 2008
Last Visit: Jan 18, 2022
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2015 8:23 am 
 

This was an interesting lot:


** expired eBay auction **


I've never heard of the Stone of Sandor.. nice pick up :)


I draw the line at collecting... D&D Towels.

Did we need: Jade Magi Sewer Crawl

Shoulda been: ".. from Pangreenia to Floratopolis, from mystical Treeonia of spectral Forests to Schruborial dimensions."  - The Forests of Leng

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3593
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Jan 13, 2022
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2015 5:55 pm 
 

Thunderdave wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:This was an interesting lot:


** expired eBay auction **


I've never heard of the Stone of Sandor.. nice pick up :)


Awesome deal 8O


Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

 WWW  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector

Posts: 3155
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 05, 2016
Location: UK

Post Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2015 9:31 pm 
 

No kidding...
Right after Aaron's BIN listings, too.

Thunderdave wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:This was an interesting lot:


** expired eBay auction **


I've never heard of the Stone of Sandor.. nice pick up :)

Even if "never heard of", a search locates one of the usual suspects more often than not. ;)

(Can't be that rare if I have a copy although I'm needing to hunt down a "missing" box as I've not seen In Quest of the Hand of Vecna, Wenches and Winekegs, The Quirp Quarp, Of Teddies and Toenail Gin, Quests for Adventurers and some other odds-and-ends that should be nearby for some time :?).


"7.3 ORGANIZING THE PARTY: Always have a keg, even if it's BYOB...
7.4 TAKING THE GAME SERIOUSLY: Don't"

  

User avatar

Sage Collector

Posts: 2572
Joined: Aug 02, 2006
Last Visit: Jan 18, 2022
Location: Seattle, WA

Post Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2015 8:06 pm 
 

Including the always tough to find issue 2:

** eBay auction listing blocked.  Please enable cookies in your browser for this site and for eBay! **



Areas of interest/knowledge: Harn, WFRP, Ars Magica, anything BRP based such as CoC, Runequest, Pendragon and all their related games

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector

Posts: 3155
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 05, 2016
Location: UK

Post Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2015 9:13 pm 
 

(Interesting additional item in with their OCE + supps., too.)


"7.3 ORGANIZING THE PARTY: Always have a keg, even if it's BYOB...
7.4 TAKING THE GAME SERIOUSLY: Don't"

  

User avatar

Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 135
Joined: Feb 08, 2014
Last Visit: Mar 04, 2021

Post Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2015 12:47 pm 
 

Bracton wrote in Interesting Non-TSR Items Formerly on eBay:Unsurprisingly, Jon put the point far better than I did.

It is certainly possible that the copies were made by the subscriber, to just have extra copies.  That would indeed be, in my view, an item of very little value (other than the novelty of being able to read something where likely ten or fewer copies are in existence).  And, if that is how these copies came to be, Zen's and Gnat's objection to giving any real value to them absolutely makes sense.

That, however, was not my assumption, based upon the fact that duplicate originals were not being sold, along with Jon's earlier posts and the opinion of another Acaeum member much more experienced in evaluating these types of items than I.

As Jon suggested, the original distribution of the Domesdays often appear to have been done via photocopies, made by Gary or others in the C&C Society.  IF that is the case with these copies, then they are in effect originals, just without the color paper cover.  It is impossible to tell from the pictures in an eBay auction whether this may be the case, and without provenance it may be forever impossible to be sure either way.  That being said, a few members on this forum (myself certainly not included) may be able to look at the copies and make an educated guess as to whether they were in effect part of the original distribution.

If they were, then I stand by my valuation.


I thought I would update the Domesday post.  I was the winner of the Domesdays.  I rarely comment on my purchases but I believe my EBay purchases have become not as secretive over the past couple of years.  There are quite a few of you that know me and I am apparently one of the "usual suspects" now.  As I had posted earlier, I believed with Stratochamp and Increment that there were 2 solid and obvious original DBs:  #6 and #10.  I also highly suspected that #12 was an original DB because the photo showed the staple in the upper left corner, the fold in the middle for mailing, and the staple mark in the top middle and bottom middle of the page where it was stapled together for mailing which was consistent with the original distribution for the later DBs.  In addition, I could tell in the dog ear on the upper left corner that the cover was a different color from the other pages.  #11 was too hard to tell and there was hope that it may be an original which was also why Increment did not rule it out.  

Upon receiving the DBs, the good news is that the covers of #11 and #12 are light blue green and different from the other pages.  Reviewing this information with the experts, we were able to confirm that #6, #10, #11, and #12 are indeed original DBs.  The remaining copies do appear to be period photocopies that could have been made by Gary or someone else in the C&C Society at the time of the C&C Society.  The fact that the later DBs #10-12 are originals could indicate that this individual acquired originals and the copies around the same time in early to mid 1971.  Overall, the exact time and origin of the copies may never be known.  The staple rust, fading and aging does indicate that they are old but there is not an exact date as of yet.  One other item that I was very pleased to discover is that stapled to the DB #4 are DBs #1, #2, and #3.  I was thrilled to behold these extremely rare DBs.  They are also copies likely produced at the exact same time as DB #4.

Overall, I personally am pleased to come away from this with 4 original DBs and what are likely 8 period copies of DBs.  It would have been interesting to see what the individual DBs would have sold for in the market today.  Until we see some come up for auction, it will likely be a lot of speculation.  It was a bit of a roll of the dice for this auction.  I may not have rolled a 20 on the D20 but I feel like it was at least a strong 18 or 19.   :D  :D  :D  :D  :D


Last edited by Melnibonean on Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
  
PreviousNext
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Page 106 of 111123 ... 103, 104, 105, 106, 107 ... 109110111