Bomber-Bob

Never saw this book before......

I think you are right but not CGC .

Just picked this up @ Wizard Chicago, thought it was a cool cover someone may enjoy seeing......

BTW, though I really don't understand the procedures behind the ASK CGC thread, apparently they rejected my question about clarification of the Qualified .5 grade. I pointed them to this thread. I'm puzzled because it seems like a reasonable question, this thread has been respectful, and why wouldn't they explain it to us ?

There's always that one kid that gets in line first and takes all the ice cream before the other kids even gets a chance.

Not sure, I don't have the notes, but I suspect the 'error' did not affect the grade. BTW, I had to step up to the plate in auction to get this, it does sell for a premium. Thanks, it is a cool book. I think you have a cool book also and it is worth submitting.

Maybe this will help.....

Last issue.......

Recent acquisition from Rick. The man has got us all hooked !

It is my understanding that the tanning of inside covers is taken into consideration for the grade, not the PQ.

While CGC will overlook some common printing flaws, I don't think they ignore flaws from the distribution process. The question is where do you draw the line ? Are you supposed to ignore impact dings, folds, crease, etc that can happen during distribution. And how do you definitively place the flaw as occurring during distribution and not ownership. You can't. I know you are disappointed but your book has a flaw that should not be ignored. Would you be happy if you bought this book as an already slabbed 9.8 ?

I just double checked the CGC shipping guidelines and it sounds like you did everything correctly, see #5. https://www.cgccomics.com/services/shipping_your_books.asp

In a broader sense, the answer to your question is No. It depends on the flaw . Some may have a Rule of Thumb for pricing certain flaws but you would have to put the book in auction to really find out. I'm sorry to say this specific flaw would probably be frowned upon by the marketplace. I would not buy a book with this flaw.

We do see an occasional response from CGC in this sub-forum but I doubt they would ever comment on a question about grading. To really find out, you would have to send it in.

I've only seen one example of a double cover that did not have an overall grade of the higher of the two. In that case the page quality was tan or something and the overall grade was actually lower than either cover. So perhaps you are correct but in most cases, it is the higher of the two covers.

It makes no sense to me why FF1 is not seeing more love in the marketplace. It's such a great book, historical, iconic, all that good stuff. And, as these recent examples show, it is a joy to look at.

If you just recently purchased it, ask for your money back. I wouldn't mess with it.

In theory I would love to agree with you but international shipments are not just about the financials. I still get confused with the paperwork. The Tracking is often not there, the risk of customs opening packages, higher risk of damage. Personally, I've had some terrible experiences. I just can't agree with you. If a seller does not want to deal with it, I have to respect it.

I agree with you about the second buyer. One would also have to assume that, upon being approached by the second buyer, Pablo would have said something about being in negotiation with someone else. So if Pablo did say something and the second buyer knew, shame on the second buyer. If Pablo did not say anything to the second buyer, shame on Pablo.

I'm not sure anybody can definitely tell you what CGC will do with this, hence I suspect, the lack of response. I am assuming, since you want to get it signed, this is a keeper. If so, I think the ink smears will probably bother you long term. I know it would bother me.

All of these Pedigree beauties. Great stuff. Love it. Thanks for showing.

I would bet everything is fine but I still think you should call on Monday. Good luck and let us know.

I think another problem was brought up regarding timestamps. I think you can edit a PM without affecting the timestamp ?

I remember years ago, after an incident, the Boards tried to clarify exactly what Take It should mean. I don't think conclusion was reached. The problem lay with all the permutations of Take It. I'll Take it per PM. I'll take it pending PM. I'll Take based on scan. I'll Take based on BC scan. Etc.Etc.Etc. It was my understanding from those discussions that the Seller can set the rules any way he deems appropriate = no Board specific Rules . The problem occurs when the Seller is not explicitly clear.