Today in 2013 comic book collectors are accustomed to paying high prices for pre-1970 comic books. Collecting old comic books is a perfectly mainstream respectable hobby and paying high prices for old comics just adds to the appeal of owning them. Owning a high grade Amazing Spider-Man #1 or Showcase #4 is like showing off your expensive new sports car or fancy flatscreen TV to your neighbors. The biggest comic book auction houses brag and bluster to their prospective consignors about the high prices achieved at auction for the comics of their previous consignors. The new owners proudly display their “trophy” books on internet chat boards to keep up with the Joneses in the comic collecting world. These proud owners don’t openly brag about how much they paid. That is showing off a little bit to much. But they don’t certainly don’t mind letting people draw the obvious conclusion that a lot of money was paid. Status symbols are supposed to be expensive, aren’t they?
This has been the reality of collecting comic books for long time. But it wasn’t always so. There was a time, about 35 years ago, that if you paid “big money” for a comic book you were considered not just stupid, but weird and demented as well. If you were trying to sell a comic for big money you were a greedy price gouger. And believe it or not, those beliefs weren’t held by just the non-comic collecting general public as expected but by comic collectors themselves! Want proof? I’ve supplied it below from letters and columns from the late 1960s and early 1970s from two of the best known comic book fanzines, the Rocket’s Blast-Comicollector (RB&CC) and The Buyers Guide To Comic Fandom (TBG). This documentation isn’t anecdotal or skewed. The views you will see below are just a small sample of many more that I found looking through these old fanzines. The views expressed were perfectly normal for that time period.
The comments below by these early 1970s collectors seem naive and silly to we modern day more sophisticated collectors. But let me explain why we modern sophisticates shouldn’t judge our primitive ancestors to harshly. Like almost everything else in America comic book collecting is a function of demographics, in particular Baby Boom demographics. The Boomers are the largest generation in American history by far. If you were born between 1946 and 1964, you’re a Baby Boomer. The peak years for Boomer births were the late 1950s and early 1960s with 1957 and 1961 recording the largest number of births. The comic book Silver Age didn’t start until 1956 (Showcase #4) and organized comic book collecting didn’t start until about 1965, say about the time Howard Rogofsky and Robert Bell started running ads selling old comics. The Overstreet Price Guide didn’t start until 1970 when the average Baby Boomer was about 12 years old. So the Boomers of that day had no way to drive up comic book prices. They were just kids with little money. The pre-Boomer generation in the 1960s certainly wasn’t going to pay big money either. The pre-Boomers had always considered comic books a.k.a “funny books” to them (ask your parents about that) just disposable children’s literature not worth more than the cover price. Also in the mid 1960s the Establishment (school teachers, PTA members, Chamber of Commerce, civic group folks, adults in general) still remembered the anti-comics crusade of the 1950s and still considered comics to be suspect reading for their kids. Maybe even subversive. To these people paying big money for comic books was considered a form of insanity.
But what happened when the Baby Boomers who loved the Silver Age comic books of their childhoods got old enough to have a job and had money to spend? In economic demographics there is the idea of a person’s “peak earning years.” When you get a job at age 20 you aren’t making much money. It takes 20 years of working to get the seniority and experience to make the big money. So most people’s peak earning years are naturally when they are in their late 40s and their 50s up to retirement. The economic boom of the 1980s and 1990s in America was largely fueled by the largest number of Baby Boomers in their peak earning years driving the American economy with their working and spending. And it’s the beginning of the Boomer retirement years (starting in 2006 and rapidly accelerating) that is largely to blame for America’s declining stock market and economy for the last several years. (Unfortunately, the worse is yet to come. Wait and see.) So obviously the inexorable and relentless climb in old comic book prices for the last 35 years was roughly a parabolic curve following the Boomer demographic tidal wave of the Boomers getting older, richer and more nostalgic for their childhoods, and using their spending power to indulge that nostalgia by buying back their comic books. No secret about that now but back in the early1970s how this huge parabola would eventually play out was invisible to most collectors.
So in the late 1960s and early 1970s when the fanzines RB&CC and TBG were printing the letters you see below the Boomer comic collectors were mostly older teenagers and young adults just starting to have enough money to drive up old comic prices. But many of them were puzzled. Comic books had never cost this much before the Price Guide came out. How could old comic books be worth hundreds of dollars? The collectors of that day were on the cusp of the coming Boomer fueled explosion in comic prices that is still playing out 35 years later. But they were still living in the past when comics books had been a nickel at the used bookstore and still .15 cent brand new. Like all people since the dawn of time, they couldn’t see the future even when it was coming down on them like a freight train. That’s just human nature. The immediate past and present is presumed to be “normal” and seeing a major change coming is very difficult. So let’s not be to hard on our comic collecting progenitors. They were only human and humans aren’t good at predicting the future. Even the professional science fiction writers usually get it wrong.
I think its interesting to look over the comments of these early collectors just starting to experience the initial comic book price shock waves in the early 1970s and not knowing what to make of it. I’ve put the comments from the collectors in RB&CC and TBG in quotes and in a different font style. I’ve added my own benefit-of-hindsight comments below the quoted remarks. Take a look below and follow the curve.
RB&CC #94, 1972 “Comic Collector’s Comments” column by Howard Siegel, pg. 71:
“The September 1972 edition of Newsweek magazine stunk to high heaven because of the garbage on page 75 in the guise of an article on comic book collecting. Bob Overstreet alerted me that it was coming because the national publication queried him. I anticipated its appearance, and after reading it am in the midst of attempting to identify the staff writer who penned this abysmal piece of rot.
‘Prices for vintage comics range from the original dime to $1,200.’
“I’ve never seen a price higher than $400.00 listed.”
‘Action #1, describing the origin of Superman, may be worth $1000.00 in mint condition but only $200 in poor.’
“He must have read one of Rogofsky’s price list while in a stupor. What startles me is that Newsweek has always implied that their editorial theme is accuracy. When then, did they decide to go the notoriety and sensationalism route? In all their interviews, whey did they cull out those bits and pieces which, in improper text, could make comic collecting and comic art seem like a get rich quick avenue populated by juveniles and eccentrics?”
Howard Siegel apparently was an adult or college student. He was one of the best columnists at RB&CC but he had the usual view that old comic books shouldn’t be worth a lot of money. He was correct about Newsweek exaggerating the prices of old comics. But the irony is the ignorant airhead reporters at Newsweek at least foreshadowed accidently the upward direction of prices while comic book insiders like Siegel were completely blind to it.
RB&CC #95, 1972 letter from Joe Onorato of Northfield, Vermont:
“Even worse is the guy who asks for bids and tops this foul practice by ‘reserving the right to reject any and all bids.’ He knows what he wants for his goods; he’s just looking for someone to overpay. Another fearful sight is the high prices in some quarters. Who can justify a $500 comic, even for Superman #1? Profits should be fair and reasonable. Overstreet’s Guide should be the limit. What other 10 cent item can you name that’s worth five thousand times its original cost in 35 years?”
I don’t think Joe was a big fan of capitalism. No need to let the messy free market of thousands of individual buyers and sellers set the market for old comic prices. Just let Bob Overstreet fix the price for everybody. I wonder what Joe thinks about Superman #1’s unfair and unreasonable price today in 2013 after another 41 years of price appreciation?
TBG #10, 1971 ad for fanzine Autocracy offering free ad rates:
“collectors…are forced to comply with the wishes of the crooked dealers, as they put arbitrary prices on memorable items such as the first copies of Captain America, Batman, as well as Action and Superman. You are made to shell to these dealers , on a ratio to whatever the dealers’ price is and however jacked up it is! Fans; do try our ‘zine.!! Help us to break the cycle of poverty that chains us to these leeches of the buck!
I wonder if this Autocracy guy and Joe Onorato had the same Marxist-Leninist teachers at school?
TBG #15, 1972 letter from Tim Marion of Newport News, Virginia:
“I am rather annoyed at the gall of some comic fans who deem themselves ‘dealers.’ At Fan Con, I met someone who was selling Conan #1 for #2.50. I offered the person 50 cents for it, and he thought I was being absurd. It so happens that Conan #1 is the only comic I need to fill my Robert E. Howard collection, but I certainly have no intention of paying $2.50 for it. I wonder if he needed Conan #1 badly if he’d pay $2.50 for it?”
Tim, it wouldn’t have killed you to spend the $2.50 if you picked a high grade copy which wasn’t hard to do in 1972. The market would have bailed you out in a few years and today in 2013 you could sell your Conan #1 for about $4,000 and have more money to buy some more Robert E. Howard stuff. What Howard non-comic book collectibles did you buy in 1972 that is worth more than Conan #1 in 2013? Nothing I wager.
TBG #21, 1972 ad by Ken Mieno of Northfield, Illinois:
“Ever notice how coin collectors pay more for uncirculated coins and stamp collectors pay more for uncancelled stamps? As the comic book collecting field grows, it seems quite likely that Mint comics will be worth more. All of my items are individually graded. Comic books are not only fun to own but may be a good investment as well. Wouldn’t you rather have comic books from the 1940s that look like they are right off the magazine rack?”
Not all collectors at this time were puzzled or befuddled by rising comic book prices. Several, like Ken here, had a feel for what was happening even if they don’t why exactly. It was unusual to individually grade old comic books in 1972 and even more unusual to realize the importance of high grade copies.
TBG #15, 1973 “Now What?” column by Murray Bishoff, pg. 25:
“I doubt that many of you have paid five dollars for Conan #1 even though I’ve seen several dealers trying to sell it at that price. Speaking of high prices, the original art of the classic comic strips has gone beyond the reach of the average collector. Several months ago the New York Municipal Museum of Art displayed and sold several original Krazy Kat strips by George Herriman. The original artwork brought up to $800 and $1000 a page. Who could pay such prices? Other museums and galleries! the experts have begun to stock up. Only true “art” addicts with lots of money can compete in this market, but it looks like fandom is full of the, too. For example, I’ve heard of a cult of collectors from California who buy original Carl Barks artwork of Donald Duck for $1000 a page! Veteran dealer Russ Cochran told me you can’t make a better investment than in original art because of its increasing value today.”
Murray Bishoff looks intelligent and prescient here but as shown later he makes other comments that indicate he shares the general opinion that it’s bizarre to pay big money for old comic books, unless you don’t mind people thinking you are crazy. Russ Cochran was a dealer who wasn’t concerned with what people thought. He knew was happening and got on board comic book and original art collecting early and made it pay. Does anybody know how the California Carl Barks cult made out in the long run? Harlan Ellison wrote an article for Playboy in the late 1980s about collecting old comic books. He said that the curators and buyers for America’s best art museums were almost totally ignorant of American comic books as an art form. I wonder why the museum Bishoff mentions here understood the importance of newspaper comic strip art but totally missed out on the importance of its close cousin, comic book art?
TBG #36, 1973 letter from Bruce Hamilton of Scottsdale, Arizona, pg. 26:
“Contrary to the thinking of some, it’s not the dealer who dictates the prices of any collector’s item. Instead it’s the fan and his willingness to pay. As a collector, I would always prefer a comic at full value and get it than discover a real bargain, hop on the phone and learn I was the tenth long distance caller since the day before yesterday, and thus not get it. You just can’t fight the law of supply and demand. If you were able to hold down prices to everyone’s level there would always be those who would offer a little extra ‘under the table’ to be notified first.
The complainers have been with us from the beginning. I’m continually amazed, though, at how they rationalize when they decide to sell their own collections. If you bought a Whiz #1 eight years ago for $25, what would you charge if you decide to sell it today? (I wish somebody would sell me a Rembrandt I could afford.) If a fan doesn’t like a dealer’s prices, he’s under no obligation to buy from him. Ken Mitchell laughs at dealers who want to pay last year’s prices for comics and then complain because their inventory is running low.”
Like Russ Cochran, Canadian dealer Ken Mitchell and Bruce Hamilton were savvy businessmen who understood the market, didn’t care about public opinion, and had a feel for the future. I’m sure they did very well over the years riding the parabola and dealing with reality instead of complaining about it. Hamilton died in 2005. Cochran died in 2020.
TBG #40, 1973 “Beautiful Balloons” column by Don and Maggie Thompson, page 27:
“The only thing we have to say about Mitchell Mehdy, the 18 year old Californian who paid $1801.26 for Action #1 is that he probably traded three $600 comic books plus postage. We verified the sale of a mint copy (Mehdy’s is beat up) within the last two years for around $600. And of course all real collectors know by now to avoid publicity, not seek it out; as the comics expert of the Cleveland Press, Don got a flock of queries from people who wanted to sell Mehdy their old comic books which turned out to be Archies, Caspers and the like, for huge sums of money.”
Here’s one of the best informed members of comic fandom, Don Thompson, echoing the usual opinion that it was best for ‘all real collectors’ to stay in the closet. To be fair, Don never claimed to be a dealer or even a serious comic collector so he never had a real reason to think about why prices were going up. He just liked to read comics for fun. He died in 1994 so he lived long enough to see a time when it was ok for comic collectors to come out of the closet.
TBG #41, 1973 “Now What?” column by Murray Bishoff, pg. 26:
“Finally, we have the strange case of Mr. Mitchell Mehdy, whose purchase of Action #1 you’ve all heard of by now. Mr. Mehdy has finally come out in the open to end all the speculation about himself. First of all he did pay the stated sum for the magazine, paid it in cash. His copy is not beat-up as the Thompson’s claimed last issue. You still might say nobody has any business paying that much for a comic book. Well, Mr. Mehdy is a dealer in addition to collecting, and he originally bought the magazine because one of his customers offered him $2500 for such a copy. The reason you probably never heard of him is because he got fed-up with organized fandom after his house was burglarized twice, so now he only deals on a person-to-person level. Mr. Mehdy told me he sought the publicity on his purchase hot for himself, but for the good of comics in general. You have to admit everybody was talking about comics for awhile and maybe a few responsible articles appeared in the newspapers, but personally I think this is the worse kind of publicity comics could get. The general public, who knows little or nothing about comics, has always thought our hobby was rather screwy. Now after this, I’m sure at least half the public thinks we are all mad. Furthermore many people who have quit collecting still have their comics and probably now think they own a fortune. Consequently these people will ask for ridiculous amounts of money and no collector will ever get those hidden comics. Let’s keep collecting responsible, and keep the public straightened out.”
Here’s Murray Bishoff, and another well informed comic book insider like Don Thompson, nearly oblivious to the wave of the future that Russ Cochran and Bruce Hamilton were riding for all it was worth while not caring a whit about keeping collecting ‘responsible’ or how ‘straightened’ out the public was. I wonder how ‘responsible’ Murray was when he sold his own collection?
TBG #42, 1973 “Beautiful Balloons” column by Don and Maggie Thompson, pg.27
“We got a phone call from Mitchell Mehdy. He says he most certainly did pay $1801.26 in cash, not trade for Action #1 and denies that his copy is beat-up. The photo I saw was of a beat-up Action #1 and I stick to that (Don speaking, since he talked to Mehdy). He also took umbrage at our saying that no true collector seeks out publicity about the value of his collection; we will amend to say that the collectors we know tend to shy away from publicity after experiencing it. We are still not convinced we actually did talk to Mehdy.”
TBG #45, 1973 Richard Pini of Watertown, Massachusetts quoted in “Crusader Comments” column, pg. 1:
“These days, comics collecting seems to be a pastime for two classes of people; dealers and speculators (and people who think they are) who have the books, and those wealthy enough to afford the prices. It has gotten to the point where most of the friendliness has gone out of comics dealing. Used to be, a body could get together with the local dealer and talk some and haggle some and trade and come away with a bundle of books feel that he got a fair deal. Now, it’s more likely to be, ‘Well, I’ve got the books I’m going to ask what I think they’re worth and if you want them, you’re going to pay that price, and if you don’t like it you can go screw because somebody else will pay it. I don’t mind a book with a spine roll, or a torn cover, or pages loose, or pen squiggles on the cover. I can even live coverless. I collect for collecting’s sake, to see what was and what is in comics, to capture a mood, to enjoy, and I surely don’t like getting reamed by those (and the number seems to be growing) to whom comics are just a business. Who would’ve thought that Nixon economics would ever invade the world of the paneled page.”
Yes Mr. Pini, it’s hard being a sensitive artist having to live in a brutal commercial world that can’t cater to your delicate sensibilities. Advice to Mr. Pini who doesn’t like Nixon economics: see Mr. Hamilton’s comments above about the law of supply and demand, but don’t blame Nixon, he didn’t invent it. He even tried to suppress it with his wage and price controls.
TBG #55, 1974 “Now What?” column by Murray Bishoff, pg.5:
“You can’t go wrong by investing in the really ‘high class’ Golden Age comics, like Action #1, just as long as you don’t try to sell it a month after you buy it. When you pay a lot for magazine, chances are you’ll have to wait awhile before another person willing to pay that price or more comes along.”
Sounds like Murray is warming up to the idea of it being ok to pay big money for old comics despite the public thinking your insane. He goes on to say in the same column:
“Mid and late sixties Marvel comics are coming back down and will probably stay down, although a strange phenomenon like Conan still continues to rise.”
Murray misses the boat here. 1960s Marvels have been one of the strongest performers in the last 40 years, probably out performing all other comic genres. To be fair, many people besides Murray in the early 1970’s just couldn’t see comics from the 1960s that were only a few years old ever being worth big money. Like I said, it’s hard to see the future.
TBG #65, 1974 “Beautiful Balloons” column by Don and Maggie Thompson, pg. 34:
“Isn’t it possible that the time has come to stop grabbing interviewers every time a reporter comes along to a comics meeting and telling them that Action #1 is worth $5,000 and old comics are worth a fortune? I think the point has been reached at which people aren’t going to toss out old comics as junk. We are getting into an age in which the non-fan won’t sell comics to fans because they’re sure the fans are trying to cheat them when the prices aren’t enough to buy a new car.”
Don goes on to quote a letter in this column from Dick Trombly:
“Anyhow there’s been so much publicity lately about the value of rare old comics that many people have been rejecting my offers and implying that I’m trying to rip them off. I get statements like ‘I saw on TV the other night that these old books are worth hundreds of dollars. You can’t kid me. These books are worth a fortune.’ I’m talking about Disneys, Marvels that are no more than ten years old. One lady, about a month ago, wanted ten bucks apiece for post-1965 Disneys that generally go for about a buck or two.”
Don Thompson and Dick Tromby are correct here about the increasing publicity of high comic book prices giving the general public the misguided notion that all old comic books are worth big money. I’m sure all comic book collectors today have had the exasperating experience of trying to buy a collection of old comic books from a normal person who thinks his beat-up, rat chewed copy of Beetle Bailey is worth the Near Mint price he sees in the one of the price guides at Barnes & Noble. Don goes on to say:
“Maybe the next time you’re interviewed, you might speculate about the bottom dropping out of the old comics market one of these days. You might point out that there are going to be fewer people who need Action #1 now that reprints of many rare items are readily available. You could mention that an entire 64 page comic book can be copied at any public Xerox machine for $6.40. Or that some of the people publicizing the large prices are dealers looking to up the market for their goods.”
Any worries Don had about the market collapsing for old comic books was unfounded of course. The market is still going strong in 2013. Anybody who stayed on the sidelines waiting for a market meltdown was on the wrong side of the future. Don’s speculation about reprints, although widely held by many collectors, also turned out to be mistaken. Maybe reprints did the hurt the market for some low grade reading copies but any comic book in average condition or better was never hurt by its reprinted counterpart.
TBG #67, 1974 “Now What” column by Murray Bishoff, pg. 60
“The general public has always been skeptical because of our spending habits, an now, instead of feeling smugly superior, I hope members of fandom will think twice before investing $1,000 or more in one book, or in general inflating our market.”
I don’t know what event Murray is referencing here to make comic fans wary of spending big money on comics, but he is still demonstrating the common idea that is was dangerous or stupid to do so. Granted, there wasn’t any need to spend $1,000 on to many comics in 1974, but even if you did the market would have bailed you out many times over if you held on for the long haul.
TBG #67 “Beautiful Balloons” column by Don and Maggie Thompson, pg. 65:
“We have once spent $6 for a comic book. Once. Other than that, we can’t recall spending more than $5 for any old comic. I’m not saying we never would spend more than $5; I just don’t think we ever have. Action #1 isn’t worth more than $1 to us, and that’s what we spent to get the reprint. If we got a copy, we’d just sell it for whatever we could get, and if other tastes agreed with ours, we wouldn’t get much.”
Don and Maggie certainly weren’t dealers or speculators. They loved comic books just for their own sake. However, at least Maggie wasn’t entirely devoid of speculative, mercenary spirits. When the big Spider-Man movie was released in 2002 she took the opportunity to unload the few early 1960s high grade copies of Amazing Spider-Man she and Don bought for $5 or less back in the day, for a big fat profit.
In this same column was a letter from Milt Jaskowski referencing recent articles about high prices for old comics in The Daily Mail and The Village Voice:
“Now if guys like Don Maris won’t turn down the publicity, how are we ever going to keep the prices down? And then we get guys like that Mitchell Mehdy going on the Tomorrow Show telling the world that some edition of Mickey Mouse is worth $5,000. Jesus, remember when it was scandalous when Action #1 went for $300? For that matter, I remember being laughed at for paying $5 for an EC.”
I wonder if Milt did his best to keep prices down when he sold his collection?
TBG #85, 1975 “Now What” column by Murray Bishoff, pg. 71:
“It’s good to buy and sell for a profit, and comic fandom offers all kinds of opportunities for dabbling in capitalism. If I bought an Action #1 for $25 I certainly wouldn’t sell it for $25. I would probably not hold onto it until I could sell it for $5,000 either. I consider that kind of waiting quite risky and even stupid if you’re holding anything short of a super-valuable book. When it comes to making a profit, some people never learn, so I support continued warnings against unsafe hoarding.”
I’m sure Murray wasn’t the only person who would have sold his Action #1 to soon before it hit $5,000. Why wait 30 years to become a millionaire when you can sell now it now in 1975 for a few hundred dollars more than you paid for a nice profit? After all, old comic books shouldn’t be worth this much money anyway and may not be in the future. This mania is all just some kind of crazy fad, right? In 1975 very few collectors thought any comic book would ever be worth $5,000. I’ve never seen anybody from that time claim in print that such a thing was possible. So Murray, contrary to his usual skepticism, is showing a little perceptive imagination here by conceding that at least Action #1 might do it some day. His warnings against ‘unsafe hoarding’ however show the typical conservative and overly cautious attitude about the future of old comic book prices held by many in those days. I suppose there have been a few cases of a speculator being burned from hoarding certain new books he thought would become valuable (the Jack Kirby comic The Demon from the early 1970s was supposedly a target for dealer hoarding which wouldn’t have worked out) but most anybody who ‘hoarded’ comics from before the 1980s did fine with them over the years. At worse, they probably sold to soon missed out on future price appreciations. But as myopic Murray and many others have shown, it’s hard to see the future.
In the early days of fandom, west coast style…to that matter northern Cal style we all knew the future value of GA comic books as well as SA were very underpriced, under publicized and combine with the early 70’s revolution which was centered in Berkley with the start of the underground comics revolution we knew something was afoot.The GA stuff was just to great to be kept down. I mean read Whiz#2… or Cap 1 and if you do not get goose bumps you are not alive…check your pulse…Action #1 cover one in my opinion greatest comic book covers ever created is mind blowing…without LSD!
History has proved us right. My bold prediction that Action #1 would be worth $10,000 was replied with shouted laughter. I purchased a new mustang for $2500 in 1973…that was 4 mustangs at the time.
The 1970’s was the GOLDEN AGE of real TRUE comic book collectors. The stuff was out there waiting to be cherry picked….a time never to be forgotten and cherished by those who were there.
There is a old saying…”you just had be there”….I am still an active collector today at age 68.
I would to take this post to thank whom I believe aided me in to becoming a true comic book collector back in the 70’s
First and foremost was to my fellow gradeschool comic book collector Victor who helped me form the 1966 Sacramento comic book collectors club
Second, Theo Holstein for educating me on the value of comic books and and the “trade up” method to get hard to get books and selling me the Action Comics 1 and being in my collector world for many many years.
Third, Bruce Hamilton who sold theo the Action #1 and then bought it back from me 1 years later when I had two better condition copies, we bought a lot of collections together in the early days and he did not deserve his tragic death under those circumstances.
fourth, Russ who was in my opinion besides being the greatest EC publisher ever, was a honest and true comic book and art collector to the end.
With that kind of foundation in the 1970’s it is no wonder that I turned out to be who I am today….a true comic book collector now and forever.
Thanks for the interesting comments Mitchell. I always like to hear about the experiences of old timer comic collectors like you. As I’ve lamented on this website many times I found collecting old comic books difficult in the 1960s and 1970s. That was no “golden age” for me. A little backwater town like Savannah, GA just didn’t have the old comics available. My golden age wan’t until the 1980s when I was in the U.S. Air Force and stationed at Mather AFB in Sacramento, CA. I finally had some money in my pocket and met West Coast dealers like like Ron Pussell and John Verzyl who sold me high grade comics all of which I still have today.
Also Mitchell, thanks again for the comments you make on my Leader’s Reports posts on the CGC Silver Age chat board. I always appreciate them.