Sometimes I think there is legit foul play but sonetimes it could also be a muggle who truly does not know what they have and is going on wgat a quick google search gave them
.

It should probably state "Silver Anniversary Edition" somewhere in the description. It would still do quite well even as a Silver Anniversary item.

Definitely a case of buyer beware and be sure and check the pics and description carefully before bidding, but if you are spending that kind of money you should be doing that anyway.

Mike B.

So far I have seen the "Anniversary" and "F-116" on the labels. Its going to be interesting how they label the rest. But yea, you can tell both of those from the cover.

Mars wrote in buyer beware:Would be nice if the auction stated this and agree CGC really could have done a better job here by adding the "Silver" anniversary edition.  But there is also a silver anniversary TSR logo right on the cover of the book and anyone spending that kind of money should be able to identify the printing - especially when it is easily identifiable just from the cover.

Absolutely. Very few hobbies will hand-hold buyers so if you are spending big bucks it makes sense for due diligence, which is why The Acaeum is a great place  to come and toss out questions and due research. The amount of knowledge of the hobby on these boards is insane, so use it.

Also important to remember that people have been over-spending on dubious purchases long before companies began slabbing items. Slabbing just adds a veneer of respectability but remember there are few people working at CGC or CBCS that have the level of knowledge here. I know the guys at CBCS are frequent visitors to this site and use printing info found here. Like I always say, it will shake out once there are more and more people using the slabbing services. And there will be some sadder but wiser people after the dust settles.

Mike B.

Since I didn't want to keep quoting different responses, I'll try and answer questions in general.

Since I'm the CGC D&D guy, I want to be clear about certain things. As graders, we do have a say in most of what is put on a label, but in the end, it's management's decision.

To be clear, I've been on the D&D items now for about 2 years. Prior to that, you had verifiers building the information based on a specific format. Some items that were graded before
may have had some information changed when another copy came in and I verified it. I've been trying to be consistent with format and information. We do have limited space for art
credits and key information with magazines (extra lines for the comics) based on label space. Hopefully in the future if we ever get our program upgraded, we'll have more room to put
more info.

About publishers, years & numbers:
For the most part, we use the indicia of all publications. I've tried and gotten our resident CGC employee who handles and fixes all correct info to try
and make the Dragon magazines correct with publishers. Going from TSR Publications to TSR Inc to WotC then to Paizo (if I spelled it correctly). I don't know how much he's gotten to correct
but I gave him the list. Any new Dragon magazines that come in I'm making sure the publisher is correct before the label is printed. So there will be false publisher info on mags out there. I
also plan on going through my personal collection and make sure any true inserts like posters, centerfolds, trading cards that may not be noted on the cover or interior are noted in our database
to make sure we don't miss anything that should be there. We have only graded a handful of Dungeon. We called it Dungeon Adventures and that seems to be ok.

We did not use TSR Games at all as a publisher. For the B2 1999 edition where we have TSR Hobbies as the publisher and not TSR games or WotC, that is what is on the booklet. Again, we go with
what is printed, not what a website says or what collectors may want it to say. The 1983 Basic Rules on The Acaeum says 12th-14th printing. The rulebooks have the 1983 interior date (can't remember
month). I've only seen a "First Printing" on the interior. So we specify the date on our label stating 1983. Are the 12th-14th printing only identified by box variations? It is not CGCs job to "teach" the
world that this is not an original printing from the beginning and that there were several beforehand. We do not list "First Printing" on any of our labels, only "Second Printing" and so on. So the 1983
edition does not say which printing this is (meaning 12-14th), it's a "First Printing" from 1983.

We have chosen to give the modules numbers based on the series for our "issue" number. S1 for Tomb of Horrors, B2 for Keep on the Borderlands, etc. Eventually modules had no designation. Lots of 1990s adventures do not
have anything. We designate these with #nn as our issue. The title line has a limited number of characters you can type. I try to be as consistent as possible. "Dungeons & Dragons: Module" if there is an issue like B2.
"Advanced Dungeons & Dragons: Module" for something like S1. If #nn, I try to fit the entire name of the module in the title. For example, "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons: Module Ravenloft Chilling Tales". If the full
title can't fit, I'll shorten it to "Advanced D&D: Module Ravenloft Chilling Tales". There are some instances where the title of the adventure is really long. I'll then try to cut corners with predicates and such. I think most
people are smart enough to figure things out.

Oh, editing to add one thing. We do NOT use ISBN or Product Numbers for our issue numbers.

If you have any questions, there is a CGC thread I've been answering anything that people want to know. I'll be happy to try and help.

Phil

No problem. My point is about the dates of modules. I noticed that the dates CGC puts on the front of its labels seem to vary. Looking at the few that Disco has up for sale, the G1 and G3 modules are dated 1978 on the CGC labels (which is the date of the first printings of those modules). Whereas the date on the CGC labels of the B2 module and S2 module he has for sale is 1999 (the date of the Silver Anniversary printing).

However, all four of those modules are in fact Silver Anniversary modules, so I guess to be consistent they either should all be dated 1999 on the CGC labels (publication date), or by the date of their first printings - in this case that would be 1978 (G1 & G3), 1980 (B2) and 1979 (S2). But the CGC labels seem to vary.

Here is another example, a Green S1.

 CGC 9.0 Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Tomb of Horrors S1 Module (Sixth Printing)

	$645.00  (fixed price)       Buy It Now
	Seller:  hobbut-com

With this module the first printing date is 1978 and this later printing is 1981 (both dates are on the cover). You have gone with 1981.

I can see the logic of going with first publication date at the top of your CGC label and also with the printing date. I just noticed that with Disco's slabbed modules up on ebay (is "slab" the right word?) you had done some one way some the other. In case that confuses some people, I thought it might be helpful to show you.  



Disclaimer: there are wiser collectors here and I know nothing about comics, so if I have this wrong, I am happy to be corrected

I really do hate it when you just look at a listing and then you receive offers for them. Not even on my watchlist. I'm getting Disco offering these overpriced modules at a "discount". Bahahah

There isnt a way to know. They didnt pay to have a high res image in the CGC database which is usually crystal clear.

Mordenkainen wrote in buyer beware:Seller appears to be relying on the buyer to understand that this is from a broken up anniversary set. Seems underhanded to me.


** expired/removed eBay auction **

It says 1999 and Anniversay Edition on the label.