• 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.

Get Marwood & I

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    23,588

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Get Marwood & I

  1. Get Marwood & I
    Ah, I do that too. No worries
  2. Get Marwood & I
    If CGC say the qualified label is used for 'books that have a significant defect that needs specific description', then why is the FF #110 I posted earlier a blue label? They note the error on the label, so it is clearly significant. So it should be a green label by their own description / standards, no? The point I was trying to make is that CGC are inconsistent in the application of labels to ink related printing errors. They grade millions of books, and human error will creep in all over the place, so mistakes will happen. But there does not appear to be a standard approach that they apply that I can see. Either ink related issues warrant green labels, or blue with a note if significant enough to be noticeable. It's not that difficult to pin down, and they just need to agree and document their approach. I would contact CGC myself to clarify the position but they ignored me when I contacted them several times through different channels on pence variants, L Miller variants, price font variants and to clarify the minimum amount of a book that they would grade. So I'm not in a hurry to ask them this question as they have shown, to me at least, a complete lack of interest in information which could have a material impact on the value of a book. I get the impression that they would suddenly find the points I've raised 'groundbreaking' if a leading industry figure took up the cause, but there you go. Anyway, this thread is supposed to be about Spawn, so sorry to the OP for the derail.
  3. Get Marwood & I
    I don't understand the point you're trying to make here ygogolak? Someone asked for pricing opinions on a Spawn #1 with reduced black ink. I was asked whether that would get a qualified label. I gave my opinion, using examples from eBay, and then posted a picture of a CGC graded Spawn #1 with a qualified label due to missing black ink. What did I do wrong?
  4. Get Marwood & I
    238 eluded me alas, one of the few Spidey MJI's I never owned: But I'm sure it does exist, and, unless it's a labelling error, CGC do too: When I last looked, the only ASM's that did not have MJI's were these: You're making me nostalgic.....
  5. Get Marwood & I
  6. Get Marwood & I
    Oops! Sorry Aweandlorder, you must think I hijacked your old thread. I didn't mean to. I just wanted to have fun with the Byrne ASM 13 and it took off. I was expecting one like followed by thread death to be honest. But people do like to rib bad covers it seems! I agree! But we can all move over to Aweandlorders original thread now, and carry on
  7. Get Marwood & I
    "It's too bad she won't live! But then again, who does?"
  8. Get Marwood & I
    Agreed, with one addition / one clarification as per my own earlier posted view. 1) Newsstand price variations only exist for the titles of Amazing Spider-man, Cable, Fantastic Four, Hulk, Thor, and X-Men. 2) Double sized issues do not have price variations. 3) There are no indicia variations (i.e. different indicia versions of the same comic). 4) No title has more than four consecutive price variant issues If true, I make it that there are a maximum of 40 variant issues in existence (6 titles x 8 variants (2 for each of 4 months) less the 8 double sized issues). We have a record of 26 of them here: Obviously, if we find an ASM #14 or a FF#22, it all changes. Similarly, a book from a different title. But I don't see it happening, much as I'd like it to. You can never have enough variants! I've taken this as far as I can now, as my only reference source being in the UK is eBay and my eyes are failing. So it's over to you guys in the US now, to hunt them down online and on foot. Good luck. I'll be watching out of interest only from now on
  9. Get Marwood & I
    Never feel bad interjecting Mark, if your intent is good Here's the error thread you mentioned above - my old Spidey lot are towards the end: Edit: Just see you had already posted it! Here's the Spawn book from it:
  10. Get Marwood & I
    Hi Mark, I'm not aware of any hard and fast rule applied by CGC in these cases. In my anecdotal experience, having collected around 100 printing errors back in the day, comics with the wrong interior get green qualified labels - and rightly so in my view as the wrong interior is a material error. Who would want an IH #181 with a Captain Marvel #35 interior? I suspect no one. With ink related errors - missing colours / reduced black etc - CGC are inconsistent, as I have seen blue and green labels. Take these two examples: The widely known FF #110 gets a blue label with the wording "Green Printing Error": This arguably less noticeable X-Men #121 error gets a qualified label with the wording "Manufactured With Uneven Black Ink" So if there is a rule, CGC themselves don't apply it consistently. I think ink related production issues should be blue labels, with a note on the label as per the FF #110 above.
  11. Get Marwood & I
    Proformas
  12. Get Marwood & I
    Out of interest, who were the Sons of Serpent, and why were they on strike? Was fighting Hulk not in their contract or something?
  13. Get Marwood & I
    Hot pants = hot comic!
  14. Get Marwood & I
    I like that Doctor Strange is telling one of the crooks how tall the Hulk is
  15. Get Marwood & I
    Yay, I've got likes back!
  16. Get Marwood & I
    It probably gives him the horn.
  17. Get Marwood & I
    What's that! What is the artist going for here!? "Look at my massive green pouch" It's bordering on obscene! Where's his blooody forehead!
  18. Get Marwood & I
    You rotter
  19. Get Marwood & I
    That's put me right off me dinner liz. And I've already eaten it
  20. Get Marwood & I
    A book that's going to sell for huge sums should have exhaustive notes to support its grade, given that a point difference can mean thousands. A new book just off the press at 9.6 etc needs no notes. For high monetary value books - and we can argue the $ level elsewhere - I would have a proforma covering every possible aspect of the book against which the grader must make a note if there is a defect. No note equals 'perfect'. That would help to take away all the debates like the one we're having here and make the grading process less opaque. Or, you could pay a premium for that service and get it on any book, regardless of value. I don't like the idea of someone telling / asking CGC ro remove a note to improve their sale chances. Does that really happen? If so, a standardised proforma would eliminate that. If it's a factual defect , recorded against a defined category, the comment stays.
  21. Get Marwood & I
    Only if the evaluation led to all notes being deleted. Updated notes are still notes, no?
  22. Get Marwood & I
    I get ya Bob. The only flaw is the married cover, with pinholes evident, that alone determines the 7.5 grade, so the only 'notes' needed are on the label. That does make a kind of sense, yes. Maybe in future, CGC should put a small notation on the label - say 'nn' - to indicate that there are 'no notes'. That would stop people asking for them and, in turn, save them time. Where do I collect my fee?
  23. Get Marwood & I
    I'm back! She can't half cook that woman Now, what's been happening in my absence then? Oh. K'all
  24. Get Marwood & I
    You wasn't? Oh, sorry. We're all friends now! Rotten cover please, when you're ready. Muggins is shouting 'dinners getting cold' up the stairs, so gotta dash.............
  25. Get Marwood & I
    Got ya. Now, enough of the history lesson Logan. Post us an orrible cover, that you proper hate. I'll comment later though, if you do. Me dinners ready now. Ciao