GlennSimpson

Anxiously awaiting having the ability to purchase - when will this show up in the store?

The area in the lower left of the front, like the strip down the leftish side, looks like a tape pull or something but it is smooth, like a production flaw. That's the main thing that is throwing me off.

I guess it comes across as weird to think that they would dock me for a detached centerfold when the centerfold is no longer detached.

It's the only thing holding like 3 of the spreads, including the cover, together. It's even on the outside. Looks pretty bad to me, maybe it doesn't meet your definition of tattered (but then, I don't think books in "Good" condition are in good condition). And I specifically mentioned archival tape in my original post. So everybody keeps acting like the "Conserved or Restored" is some sort of obvious thing, when a) this guy used far more tape than I mentioned and didn't get Conserved or Restored and b) the release about Scotch tape doesn't mention Conserved or Restored.

The other things is, I can read the following (from the CGC announcement) two ways: "...CGC will modify its grading standard and ignore the presence of tape if it serves a function (such as fixing a tear or spine split) and instead grade the book as if it was not present. Therefore, any existing defect will be graded accordingly. " So there is a tear, with tape holding the tear together. I read the above as either: a. They grade it as if it has the tear, but don't take off additional for the tape. b. They grade it as if it doesn't have the tear, since the tape is fixing it. I assume the former, but it's not clear.

At the top of the video is the link to the "back from CGC" video.

I just watched a video where a guy used a ton of archival tape to reconstruct a tattered book and he got a blue-label 1.0.

But potentially at a higher grade (assuming that it was the detached centerfold that led to the 7.0). EDIT: Meant to end that with a ?

Let's say I have a book that has a detached centerfold. Let's say it gets a blue label 7.0. What would be the effect if I had taken two small pieces of archival tape and reinforced the two staple areas and generally gotten the centerfold reattached?

I recently saw a Youtube video where the poster referenced a page they said was on CGC with a set of photos with descriptions of flaws. But I can't find it on the actual site? Is it still there, was it ever?

Somebody borrowed my scanner so trying to do regular photos, forgive if this comes out wonky. Mainly concerned about ink residue on back.

Any third opinions to break the tie?

Please grade WITHOUT assumed pressing.

Is that a tear in the center top on the back?

Thanks for the info. I tend to focus on completing runs primarily - if something winds up being valuable, so be it.

I do have a box of everything $21+ (which is the point at which I have around ~300 books so it all fits in one box, used to be $20+ but had to pull some as I started pressing and generating more that qualify). I have thought about doing the next box (I'd have to see what the numbers would be, like $17-$20 or something). The insurance company has never said anything about requiring photo evidence, but it certainly couldn't hurt. I spend a lot of time going through my comics anyway. In the old days it was adding content and creator information to online databases, now it is grading and other things. So dedicating the time isn't too much of an issue. Just mainly that 9.0/9.2 break that is frustrating, along with some flaws that are unclear in terms of ramifications.

I'm very familiar with the information on grading on YouTube, but those are all extrapolation around CGC grades, not Overstreet. There's not much of anything where people are specifically zooming in on books and showing flaws and correlating them specifically to Overstreet grades. As for insurance, I am already grading the entire collection, that's kinda the point. The insurance company would indeed require a list of comics and their grades. My understanding is that I would give them the list with the grades, and obviously the amount that they were insured for, and they confirm if that amount was reasonable (although the problem is they will not reveal ahead of time the method they use for that evaluation). There are some additional statements about what would happen if there was a disagreement on the amount, involving hiring other appraisers and some such. Thus I am having to make some guesses on how much to insure it for - not too much or I am wasting money, too little and I am losing money later. I've been buying about 75% of DC and 50% of Marvel's output for the last 40 years or so, it seems unreasonable to just completely let all of that get sunk in a fire. I am also well aware of how it would go if someone was coming in to buy. I still, out of pride if nothing else, would like to have them all accurately graded and valued. I guess I am in just a weird sweet spot between investor and collector and reader.

It does, but they don't really "zoom in" to indicate the specifics of the flaws.

Again, aware of that. There are still a variety of flaws that are not clearly described.

That search only results in links to places to BUY the guide. I have the guide - I want more information than what is in the guide. What are "a limited number", "a minor accumulation", etc?

So perhaps the original question needs to be: "Does anybody know where there are videos or additional information on how to grade comics according to the Overstreet standard rather than CGC?" And if no such thing exists, why not?

Yeah, which makes it ironic (although also understandable) that all of the deeper information available outside of Overstreet grading guide are actually attempts at interpreting CGC rather than trying to further explain Overstreet's.

So perhaps the bottom line is: 1. There are some differences between Overstreet and CGC grading standards 2. If you are going to leave books raw and present them for sale or insurance or whatever, you need to use Overstreet's standards. 3. If you are going to have the books slabbed and are seeking to just evaluate them beforehand, you need to use CGC's standards.

That's an interesting line of thinking. In terms of online grading training/discussions, there is a trend towards "this is how to grade so that you can try to determine what grade CGC will give", although there is other content simply saying "this is how you grade comics" but still using CGC examples.