Tony S

Well, that could be. But the thicker holder is - as near as I can tell - simply a different, deeper back half of he slab. It appears CGC probably has several - maybe more - back half of the slabs in various depths to accommodate thicker books. So same front half of the slab, backs of different depths, all the same materials and design. I don't believe there was any materials change until Barex - the plastic CGC (and PGX) used for the inner holder - became unavailable. Which was around the time of the new holder. Ineos, the maker of Barex, closed the only plant making the plastic sometime in 2015, I say sometime because the date the plant actually closed is hard to nail down. It was announced they were closing the first quarter of 2015, but there were also reports that upon that announcement they had an influx of orders as businesses that used Barex made orders large enough to give them time to find alternatives. Which resulted in the plant in Lima Ohio staying open longer than originally planned. Voldy started out in 2014 using PETG - and everyone in the comic slabbing business is using some version of polyester film (PET) now for the inner holder. I don't believe CGC has ever actually stated what plastic is used for the outer holder. I worked a few years in the plastic industry and I am 99.9% certain it is common and inexpensive high impact polystyrene. Which is used in packaging all sorts of stuff that values rigidity, potential clarity and low cost. It's the same stuff that is used to make clear CD cases. Like you can purchase in 50/100 packs at Office Depot super cheap. So think of your CGC outer holder as a larger, thicker CD case. A bit of blue tinting added to give it the premium, glass like look that the marketing types love.

If this is so I'm unaware. I've unslabbed hundreds - maybe close to a thousand - CGC graded books. Any difference between the holders from the very first to April 2016 isn't obvious. Just changing the appearance of the labels (you mention "old label gen 1") wouldn't mean anything as far as the holder goes.

Mystafo had the correct reply. The OP's book currently sits in a Generation 1 (the original) holder. The Generation 2 holder that caused waves was only used for a few months - April 2016 to June 24, 2016 . There is NO REASON to believe the CGC case is causing waviness in the OP's book. The book could be reholdered for a modest fee ($15 plus shipping). But IMHO, the best route with this book would be: 1) Send it to CCS for pressing evaluation (screening) . If CCS says it's a good pressing candidate, go for it. If they say no, then get the reholder. For a book at this price level, the evaluation will be free IF the book is subsequently pressed. But if you are categorically opposed to pressing, just send the book back in for reholder. It's cheap, the new holder looks nice. You could even ask for and pay the extra $5 for the Captain America label.

Absolute, best comment I've read in months. .. Being old has a few advantages, right?

There is nothing in my collection I have not read. Even the encapsulated books I've read the stories at some point in time. I also purchase very few new comics and what few I do buy I read.

CGC's stance on tape is that adding tape can never improve the grade. So the question becomes "why is the tape on the book? If the tape is sealing a tear, CGC will grade the book as though the tear is still there. If tape reattaches a cover or a piece of the book, CGC will grade the book as though the cover or piece is detached. If the tape doesn't "fix" something, then the tape itself is treated as defect and the grade is affected. Your question was which is better, tape or a tear. If the tape on the first book is sealing a tear (and it probably is) to CGC when grading the book there is no difference. BOTH books have tears. Collectors generally dislike tape - and for good reason. Over time it will slowly damage the paper. But personally the first book - the one with some tape - has much better eye appeal. Stronger color, little creasing and wear. If they are about the same price I'd want the better looking book. Even though it has a small amount of tape. Welcome to the boards.

Cool resource. Thanks!

D'em Marvels going to sit me back more $$

Nice resource. This might not be so bad. i have a number of the DC books for Sept 1963

No, but dang....Now you have me thinking. Superman Annual 7. That would be cover date 9/63. I have that book. I have an Avengers 1. This will be a bit expensive unless I load it up with Charlton Romance and War titles BUT....Spinner racks are hard on comic books. I like this idea, but I think it like it better with pictures of said comic books placed in backing boards and bags, or mounted to an art type board. But it would be a very cool display/man cave thing. So thanks for the suggestion Kav!

Well - IMHO the majority here has it all wrong. Putting a backing board in the center of a comic book is an old school dealer idea. That way you could see both the front and back covers of the comic book. Without removing the book from the bag. And yes, if you stick something a quarter of inch thick in the middle of the book you will cause problems. A standard 20-24 point backing board?? No. It's also a great idea for the short term when a book is going to be handled a lot. Like getting books signed. For signatures I always use a backing board on the back as normal and a backing board in the middle of the book. Something to further prevent spine dents from the book being pressed on while getting signed. Finally, one of the largest companies that SELLS collector supplies mentions the (good) reason for placing a backing board in the center of comics "When a backing is placed in the center of the comic it protects the comic book spine from crushing." https://www.bagsunlimited.com/topic/savemycomics

The sheet above is books from late 1953 (Sept) This was before Marvel nearly went out of business as a result of being unable to distribute (get their books on newsstands) in 1957. Their deal with Independent News - which owned and distributed DC Comics - limited Marvel greatly in the number of comics they could publish a month. The exact figure being a bit of a mystery as well. 8-16 is floated often. If Goodman wanted cheaper paper stock, Eastman Color probably did print his (Marvel's) covers separately. As I said no one really knows for sure the why of Marvel chipping being a mostly Marvel Comics problem - and only in the very late 50's to the early 60's. Goodman's inherent cheapness combined with Marvel's financial difficulties from 1958-1963 seems to point to poor paper quality as the culprit. The idea of dull cutting blades doesn't make near as much sense. I mean for like 5-6 years did they ONLY cut Marvel's covers with dull blades? Eastman Color was a business. If the customer wanted cheaper - or better - paper stock they would have likely sold the customer what they wanted.

Vintage Comic book covers and comic book pages were printed in very large width giant rolls of of paper, then folded and THEN cut. So one cut was cutting multiple interior pages. You can see this for yourself from time to time with vintage books where the cutter did not cut all the way through the pages. You'll have like six or eight pages (I forget) still stuck together and not completely trimmed. Because 6 or 8 pages were printed at the same time on one super wide piece of paper. You can also see this occasionally on vintage giant size books that were stapled and the cover glued on. If the cutter did not cut the interior (spine side) clean and the cover comes loose you can actually see the folded bunch of pages. A giant size book might have 4-6 such bunches depending on page count, Most comics in the 50's on were printed at World Color Press in Sparta, IL. Covers were similar, but better paper. And many to most covers up until the late 60's were printed at Eastern Color in New York, then the covers shipped to Sparta. Six covers - front and back - were typically printed at a time. Occasionally uncut sheets of covers turn up for sale and are napped up by collectors. Here is an example. This is ONE sheet - I snagged the picture from a discussion here back in 2010. This is Not something taped together. So when everything was folded up, there was just a few cuts. By the late 60's World Color press had largely taken over all of the printing of comic books - including the covers. The exception I'm aware of was Charlton, who owned their own printing plant. I'm not really sure without more research where Marvel and DC print their comics today. I think it moved to Canada. But there are a number of places that print comic books now. The printing process being what the posted video shows. Response above is more about how comics are manufactured. The answer about Marvel chipping is to some degree an unknown. The most likely answer is NOT the common one about dull cutting blades. The simplest answer is probably correct. Martin Goodman had a reputation of being cheap. When Marvel's distributor went out of business Marvel nearly did too. A deal with DC to distribute their books kept them from bankruptcy but was also designed to keep them from making too much money and from distributing too many titles. So Goodman saved money where he could -likely in printing costs. Marvel used cheaper paper those early years and the front cover gets more wear than the back.

The seller of this book has had it listed BIN with best offer for a long time - and at widely varying prices. It spent a long time at - if Memory serves me correctly - about $40,000. Then over a period of time it dropped down as low as $5,000. I thought about buying it at that price even though I have a 6.5 graded by Voldy. It's spent it's last few months at $8.000. Be interesting to see where this lands price wise.

That looks really, really good

Black Panther 1 VF/NM @ $50

Purchased a run of 1-11 of Cherry Poptart from Chris. The books were nicer than expected, arrived quickly and were very securely packaged. Thanks!! Tony

I have no idea the book or where the creases. Nor if the press was done as well as possible. But I would note it is possible to have non-color breaking creases that do not go away with pressing. Creases in white areas for instance are never going to be noted as "color breaking". White is the absence of color, there is no color to break. But the paper fibers can be damaged and the damage is obvious to see. In a line, like a crease. Pressing makes it flat, but the line of damaged paper fibers is still there and can be seen. Very light shades of color can be similar.

Not to debate - because I know and fully acknowledge you are an expert on undergrounds. I've learned a lot just reading your posts over the years. But it sounds like CBCS and OPG had very similar reasons not to deal with undergrounds. In your own words, they "stick to what they know".

Overstreet doesn't list undergrounds for the same reasons Voldy doesn't grade them. They are very small niche of the comic collecting market. Many of the books had multiple printings that are difficult to tell apart. Expertise in the underground comix market - both identifying and valuing them - is pretty thin. It really has nothing to do with Bob being offended by them. He's not. Listing them would be more effort than it's worth in terms of increasing guide sales. And any listing would be full of errors and omissions. I can think of several publications I wish had a price guide. Famous Monsters, Fangoria, Starlog, the various Eerie publications, the countless men's magazines with story titles like "Soft Flesh for the Nazi's Fanged Doom" with women in bondage and rats. A price guide with that and undergrounds I'd buy every year. I'm not knocking the idea - and I have a small collection of undergrounds myself. Just bought a run of Cherry Poptart here on the boards. But I think the direction needed headed is to see Fogel's price guide come out more often. Not to try to get Oversteet to publish a guide about stuff they have limited knowledge of.

Joker softcover. Complete.

It probably depends on the type of error. Also how common the error. Examples with pictures would no doubt lead to more discussion You might find this interesting reading. Welcome to the boards

You'll be fine.... Pressing and restoration removal might both be done by CCS, but they are entirely different services. I don't feel like getting deep into it but some of the more critical comments are - IMHO - lacking in perspective. I don't feel like putting up a wall of text trying explain it and I don't - and am not - defending CCS. But restoration removal is inherently a risky, uncertain procedure. There is no guarantee that ALL the restoration will be found and removed the first time. And if you give that truth any serious thought, you realize that is the reason why restoration removal is inherently risky. If there is no way to be 100% certain all restoration is identified up front,, then there is NO WAY of knowing just how damaged the book is going to be by removal of said restoration. It also becomes a "once you get started you can't stop" situation. You thought you were scrapping off a tiny bit of color touch. But then more is found. So you remove more. And maybe even a third go. Because it's hard to stop. You had a 9.2 restored that has dropped 8.5 restored and will probably drop more the third try. But you have to keep trying because you've already lost two grades and it's still purple. The label designations are not as helpful as you might think. I've sent in books that were labeled "small amount of color touch" that I thought would get moderate to extensive. The only criticism I would level at CCS is they should - IMHO - simply refuse to remove amateur color touch. Yes, there is a market for it. But it cannot be done (the removal) without physically damaging the book. Which seems inherently "wrong". The definition of amateur color touch is essentially that it bleeds through the paper. So - like the TTA 27 above - the only way to remove it is to make holes. So it seems like it would be better for the hobby overall if CCS took the stance that they won't provide a service that permanently damages or makes the appearance of a book look hideous. But let's be fair. The problem doesn't start with CCS. The problem starts with collectors and dealers that want to make their books worth more $$ by getting them out of a restored grade.

Amateur (C category) restoration are not good candidates for restoration removal. Almost never. If you are really lucky and it's one tiny spot, OK. But there is no guarantee that the initial grading notation of "very slight, slight or moderate" is particularly accurate. The bottom line is the book in question had more CT than the original grading would lead most to believe. It's too late now, but the book should have just been left alone.

Sorry to say, it almost certainly means that it is is going to be a Green, Qualified label grade. Keep in mind that PGX does not have a Qualified label. They will note in the label description things like price stickers, signatures, coupons cut, etc that with CGC would earn a Green, qualified label. But PGX (nor CBCS) have green qualified labels. So the label color would be blue from them. Maybe PGX missed something in grading that CGC caught. But just as likely - maybe more -is there was something noted on the PGX book that for CGC gets a Qualified label.