scburdet

Same disclaimer as the other book about the inside. The ticks are indicative of an 8.0

For comics this age, I it would be beneficial to show a sample of inside pages and what the inside of the cover looks like b/c any tanning/foxing is being penalized pretty severely. Assuming there are no issues there 8.5±0.5

I agree these don't look like gripper holes that I've been educated about by other board members. You've done a good job pointing out defects. I would call those tears a moderate defect, so that's 8.5 tops. I suspect the other little dings will be enough to drop things to 8.0, but 8.5 is possible. I think this looks better than comics in the 7s though.

You will need to make separate posts for each book to avoid the ire of some board participants. It's pretty hard to address condition issues in the 2-book photos. In the one close-up. I would be concerned about the scuff along the top, and the white spot in Batman's cape. I'm not really sure how CGC treats these book-style comics since the act of just opening the cover creates that crease that breaks color. I think you might be looking at a pretty stiff penalty based on samples I see out there for sale. Maybe with a ceiling of 8.0 or lower.

I'll ask my guy when we get them back. I know he photographs anything that goes to CGC, which is smart. I got a book back from a signing recently and I'm almost positive it's not what I sent them (I got back a sketched/signed direct and I ordered a signature on what I'm pretty sure was a newsstand. Still waiting to see if they can figure something out on that one)

3.0±0.5, but I'm putting the probability more towards the low end. The creasing along the spine is pretty heavy, and that along gets to the 4s, and then there are at least 2 good sized creases right in the middle of the cover. The chips out of the bottom front edge and that spot on the back.

Yeah, that would go against the CGC policy on being a black box. I have a 9.4 that says minor foxing on the back cover (one, corner and can't really see it) another I guesstimate cost me at least 1.0 off the total for foxing on inside of front cover based on the rest of the notes. I did not notice or photograph it, so the only way to know is to take it out of the holder. That's just for a single instance, so I imagine it gets a lot worse if it's all over a cover or throughout the book

Update for me: I dropped off my other TM books yesterday and after discussing with my CGC dealer, Spawn 1 did not make the cut. Unless it's a guaranteed 9.8 (or you just really want the signature on a particular copy), it's not going to be worth the investment. Take that advice FWIW

With the C&Per now, then off to Sarasota

With the C&Per now, then off to Sarasota

With the C&Per now, then off to Sarasota

With the C&Per now, then off to Sarasota

With the C&Per now, then off to Sarasota and Todd McFarlane. I would not have paid the premium for the signing if this one wasn't a MJs.

With the C&Per now, then off to Sarasota

With the C&Per now, then off to Sarasota

I was going to give a >9.2, which is the best you can do guessing NMs without handling the actual book IMO. On the next to last photo, I see a darkish ring in the corner right near the edge. If that is even a small stain, you run the risk of maxing out closer to 9.0

Pressing should take out the one bend at the top. I don't notice any color breaking there, but the crease at the bottom is the issue (it's basically in the same place my copy is creased FWIW). There are a few tics and some white splotches (color rub?) along the bottom. The crease along would put the ceiling at 7.0 and there's an accumulation of other defects that will take it several levels below that. 5.5 feels about right.

5.0±0.5. Lowed end if CGC comes down on the foxing, which I think is possible.

From minimal personal experience and what I've also heard from someone who is an authorized CGC dealer, they're hammering foxing and the grade might be a much lower number than the other defects would suggest. There's apparently been a shift in grading foxing that used to be largely considered part of natural aging.

It's bizarre to me that there appear to be quite a few copies of this book with similar fingerprints (mine is in the Spidey sense. I also have a clean copy). I have one of them and I remember 1 or 2 others being posted here in recent months. Is this bad ink? Was there someone who had especially sweaty hand packing books off the printer for Marvel in 1979? I wanted to say 6.0, maybe higher, especially before I noticing the sub crease. It's definitely not obvious except in the angled picture. I think you could get a 5.5, but I wouldn't want to roll the dice on this one.

+1. I think this looks a grade below a 4.5 I have, and I'd have a hard time knocking this down into the 3s

IMO you'd have to be lucky to even pull an 8.0. There are ~1/2 dozen spine ticks that break color. The bottom left corner of the front is blunted, and it at least looks like the black ink in the top left corner of the front is scuffed or otherwise not as dark/shiny as other copies I looked at. I see what looks like a light line from the Hulk box that ends just above the Spider-Man UPC box. That could be a lighting thing in the photo, but I'd check it.

8.0ish. Too many spine creases/stress and corner dings to get into the NM bin. Seems like they're largely on the back, which is lucky.

5.5/6.0 seems to be the consensus, so I'll add that I find the two dolls on the back cover very disturbing.

5.0±0.5. Wavering between 4.5 and 5.0 as my midpoint, but I think this looks better than 4.5s I've seen.