• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

jtrias00

Member
  • Posts

    118
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jtrias00

  1. 22 minutes ago, williamhlawson said:

    Yes, I agree there are presentation differences regarding the X10, rusting staples effects the entire book, every wrap, it's structural integrity, etc. so I understand severity with technical grade associated with such as well.  Presentation isn't everything, though highly important in my collecting over the years, with a 'bang for the buck' vg being my fave :)  My AF seems a little more solid spine wise and overall cover appearance top to bottom.  I see the rear cover pulling that book up from lower, but just my opinion.  The rear cover on mine is clearly in need of a clean, but the bottom edge chipping is the most severe downgrade I believe. So the rear cover I believe pulls that one up, and in my case pulls it down.  I still think its a 2 minimum, a 2.25 is in order, with a 2.5 possible with clean.  But...we'll see.

     

    I agree with you on your book.  I think if the conditions of your af15 and my xmen 10 were flipped, the estimates would come back higher on the af15 and lower on the xmen 10. I could be off base, just my observation.

  2. Question for everyone, as this thread is pretty good example of a concern i've been seeing in big book grade estimates vs smaller book estimates from the same era.  I put the below xmen 10 book up the other day for review, and the consensus was a 3.0, noting the rusty staples is what caused the low grade, which i agree.  The above spidey is getting estimates of 2.5-3.0.  Does anyone else think that these two books from a presentation stand point, are not on the same level?  690216909_s-l1600(4).thumb.jpg.94ca68982ccf398c77caca9e00316417.jpg 

    s-l1600 (3).jpg

  3. I've found that damage like this effects higher grades more so than lower grades.  So if the book was impeccable, the amount of the point deduction for the tear would be greater for say a 9.8, then it would for a 4.0.  Someone correct me if i'm wrong.  Also i see more forgiveness on older books than on newer books.

     

    I'd estimate this book to be around 5.5-6.0. 

  4. 1 hour ago, D84 said:

    You may not know, but I'll ask...

    Is the piece added to the upper right corner of the front cover from a donor or a reproduction?

     

    1 hour ago, D84 said:

    You may not know, but I'll ask...

    Is the piece added to the upper right corner of the front cover from a donor or a reproduction?

    Im not sure, didn't even know it was it was a foreign piece.  I don't know how to detect restoration beyond the obvious stuff.