I guess my train of thought is, it's foolish to pay hundreds (or thousands) of dollars for a comic to read, which is what Fred would be doing if he opened the slab.  I can understand the logic of paying that much for a comic to own as a collectible (though I would never do it myself).  That seems to be why Fred bought it, for the thrill of owning a moderately rare object that has value to him.  Opening it and reading it would be like buying a Franklin Mint collector's plate and then eating on it regularly.  You're taking the risk that the object that you paid a lot for and that has value to you will be damaged.

Does it make sense to turn comics into collector's objects and seal them away so they can't be read, and charge hundreds or thousands of dollars for them?  I don't think so.  But I think it would make even less sense to pay a ridiculously-inflated collector's object price and then treat the book like it was something you bought down at the newsstand yesterday.  If someone gave him the book for free I'd say yeah, open it and read it.  But the fact that he paid a pile of dough for it to me makes it foolish to open it.

Nathan, you said you own a copy of AF #15 that you've read several times.  How much did you pay for it, if you don't mind me asking?

In return for putting in a couple of bucks, each JBF member will be able to own and read the comic for a period of say one week, whereupon he/she passes it to the next person, and so on. Naturally I will go first, email me for my postal address Fred.

...and there are much wiser investments to make.

••

The whole speculator market in comic books began with an article in the Wall Street Journal. It's not often possible to trace a phenomenon to a single source, but in this case it is, sadly, all too obvious. Before the article fans bought and collected comics, traded them, and some of the really old, really rare issues, those of historical significance in the industry, would occasionally sell for big bucks.

That's what happened to spur this article. A copy of ACTION COMICS 1 sold at auction for $20,000 (this was around 1976), and the writer of the article, apparently smoking some combination of crack, meth and speed, with a cocaine chaser, declared this, on an "original outlay" of 10¢, a "better investment than gold". Astonishingly, nothing at all was said about the very simply and obvious fact that the individual who had sold the comic for $20Gs had NOT paid 10¢. When the more likely previous purchase price was factored in, the gold analogy became absurd.

But the damage was done. The Wall Street Journal had declared comic books a great "investment", and the minibrains flocked to the call. None of those o-so-important factors were much in play any more -- historical significance, scarcity, age, etc. "Investors" began scooping up old comics, and in many cases INVENTING reasons for them to be "valuable". One such was whether the creative team was deemed "hot". This would lead to speculation in NEW comics. Anything that said "No. 1" on the cover. This would be the point on which the eventual speculator boom would turn, and the rocks upon which the whole industry would founder.

The ultimate manifestation of this madness was "slabbing" -- the transformation of something created to entertain into something that could serve ONLY as an "investment". And the whole hobby has slipped so far from its roots that many can't even see why that's a PROBLEM!!

> ...and there are much wiser investments to make.

A faulty premise an assumption and a subjective opinion. Though the book wasn't purchased primarily for investment purposes, buying collectibles during a recession is accepted by many as smart investing.

If one were a collector of guns and a gamesman, they might be motivated to purchase an antique flintlock pistol that is in prestine condition. They may buy it for a pretty penny, not for investment purposes, but because it is so damn cool to have.... would anyone expect them to fire off said gun because that is what guns are made for?

That said, no worries for any that expressed concerns. I'm not offended. It's a discussion board. Moreso, it's an online discussion board.

I have one slabbed book. It is a Wolverine: Origins # 1 variant cover. I bought the regular copy when it came out. I received the CGC version when I bought a VIP pass for a con. One of the goodies given to VIP. My first thought was to crack it open just because. But it just sits in a box collecting dust.

Anyway, congrats on the purchase Fred. No matter what you do with it an Amazing Fantasy # 15 is a great addition to any collection.

"That's what happened to spur this article. A copy of ACTION COMICS 1 sold at auction for $20,000 (this was around 1976), and the writer of the article, apparently smoking some combination of crack, meth and speed, with a cocaine chaser, declared this, on an "original outlay" of 10¢, a "better investment than gold". Astonishingly, nothing at all was said about the very simply and obvious fact that the individual who had sold the comic for $20Gs had NOT paid 10¢. When the more likely previous purchase price was factored in, the gold analogy became absurd."

Okay, i gotta call you on this one. For what it is worth, the price of gold bottomed out in 1976 at $102 an oz.  Today that ounce of gold is valued at $1259.74, or 12.35 times that 1976 amount.

Action Comics #1 sold for $20k in 1976. In March of 2009, a copy (graded 6.0, wtm) sold at auction for $317,200, or 15.86 times what it would have gone for in 1976.

So, the lesson to be learned, if you can go out and purchase lots and lots of copies of Action Comics #1, that will be a better investment than gold.

New Mutants #87...not so much.

Okay, i gotta call you on this one. For what it is worth, the price of gold bottomed out in 1976 at $102 an oz. Today that ounce of gold is valued at $1259.74, or 12.35 times that 1976 amount.

Action Comics #1 sold for $20k in 1976. In March of 2009, a copy (graded 6.0, wtm) sold at auction for $317,200, or 15.86 times what it would have gone for in 1976.

So, the lesson to be learned, if you can go out and purchase lots and lots of copies of Action Comics #1, that will be a better investment than gold.

••

Can I borrow your time machine? Cuz, unless you are using one to go back and snag "lots and lots" of copies of ACTION COMICS 1 before anybody decided it was "valuable" what you are going to have to spend to acquire those copies, versus what you can then turn around and sell them for, is going to make the "return" a LOT less than on gold.

So, the "lesson to be learned" is that if our imaginary speculator has $317,200 to spend on EACH of those "lots and lots" of copies of ACTION 1, and if s/he can then find someone at least as rich as s/he is, and -- important -- even more stupid, s/he is not QUITE going to manage that 1586% return, is s/he?

••

The commission analogy is a good one. With "slabbing", we take the steps needed for "preservation" too far -- as if we order a commission, get it professionally framed with museum quality glass, hang it somewhere that it will not be exposed to direct sunlight or excess humidity, but, just to be EXTRA safe, have it framed so the BACK of the piece is facing outward.

One could argue for the "joy of ownership" -- but is ownership the be-all and end-all? I have friends who collect antiques, as I do, and when a new arrival creates a lack of space, something already possessed is cycled into storage. What's the point? I have spent some insane amounts of money on Cool Stuff over the years -- that dinosaur bone was not cheap!! -- but I justify the expense, to some degree, by the fact that I can put my hand on each and every thing I own. Nothing is hidden or locked away.

What would be the point of that?