scburdet

2.0/2.5. The spots and other discoloration has me expecting the lower end, but I always seem to be off low

Corner crease the signs of paper oxidation on the rear cover are the main issue, neither fixed by c/p. 8.5±0.5

lots of discoloration & some stains, which are a CGC no-no. 4.0/4.5

my suspicion here is that pressing wouldn't boost the grade much, and would not be risk free given how the structure of the spine/staples appears in the photos. It would definitely look better if the cover/pages could be squared up with pressing. I see at least a 4.5, but a 5.0/5.5 is a possibility b/c GA books seem to get allowances b/c the methods of production were dicey (although it looks to me like the spine roll here is from handling).

tears around the price box?

The CGC guide book says a cover detached at a single staple can still get a 7.0 or 7.5. I suspect you'd have to look for a long time to find one like this. I'd look carefully at the bottom staple for structural weakness b/c the top detachment can strain the bottom one during handling and it could knock it down further. I'll say 5.5/6.0 b/c of the detachment plus other minor/moderate defects that wouldn't get to the max for a detachment.

2.0--maybe 2.5 with a GA allowance. If it wasn't GA, I'd go 1.8.

5.0/5.5 stains are killers rn at CGC

2.5 max

2.5/3.0 is a good expectation b/c of pieces out. It seems unlikely to me that C/P move the needle here b/c they can't get rid of the missing parts. It might improve the presentation, but not the grade. I did not read the post before looking at the pictures, but generally a good idea not to bias the jury with grades. At minimum, use the spoiler feature.

The enlarged pics aren't the sharpest, but it looks like creasing all or most of the say parallel to the spine all the way down. That probably means 4.5/5.0 tops. Maybe and outside shot at 5.5 since the creases aren't that heavy.

I do love it when a book becomes more expensive and the reason I want it is different from everyone else's.

According to the CGC guide, writing on can lead to a grade of 4.0–9.8 depending on what it is, and where it is. 4.0/4.5 for this kind of writing I'd wager. It's also consistent with the rest of the book. Without the writing it still looks like a 5.0, maybe stretch that to a 5.5 with a really effective C/P, but the writing is going to cap it regardless on other improvements.

I found this one interesting & it's the earliest issue in my current collection. Never read Metal Men, despite the Venn diagram of hobby & professional career having the most overlap here. The inner description says the cover is by Simonson & Wrightson and was the original cover art for Metal Men 54. As is more typical of the older, white issues, there's some grim on the reverse, otherwise pretty nice shape.

Is that a bindery tear on the TLFC? That's where mine is. Similar in size, yours is sitting more flush with the cover if that's what it is

I hope to be this lucky. Mine is a newsstand with a small bindery tear. Did you press it?

about 7.0

Wouldn't surprise me if CGC dinged the tiny stain way more than it seems fair, maybe 7.5. Other than that, I'd expect an 8.0/8.5 b/c of the dinged corner and the other small defects. Hard cover to keep nice and this copy looks pretty solid.

9.0 mostly due to a couple stress lines and the spine corners. It's hard to say about the rest of the spine. Think it's pretty typical to see the white patches b/c of the binding/cardstock cover, but hard to guess what side a grader will come down on.

Going with 5.0. Spine is pretty rough, does look like a small tear on the cover, and some rust? maybe on the staple.

my bad. Lots of Hembeck in the CR covers I have. I read about the homage a while back and transposed artists.

there's a little discoloration, nothing on the other side of the paper so I don't have extensive experience with these, but a lot of the copies I have have imperfections that are hard to ID. I'm assuming these were mass produced with minimal quality control. Very cool/too bad about the OA. I've never been an OA collector, although I would take the original cover are off Avengers 158. I assume that would be beyond cost prohibitive, even if someone put it up for sale, since it's Kirby doing a core title cover. I just love it though.

Board member & fellow Comic Reader enthusiast @THE_BEYONDER asked about this one, so I figured why not put it up. Unfortunately, I plan to keep it b/c I like the John Byrne take on Hembeck's Don Martin's style, and Power Man & Iron Fist are on my list of characters I collect. Actually, one of the nicer ones I own. No mailing label & no one marked up the checklist.

maybe an 8.0

9.0/9.2. Just in case you didn't realize it, this is the JC Penney reprint from 1993, not the original from '78. These editions look almost the same, but the ad on the back is a dead giveaway. No X-Men on video in the 70s.