scburdet

Essentially the same range as the other copy 3.5±0.5. Different defects, but accumulatively the same outcome. There might be some impact if that stain at the top of the front cover extends to the inner pages.

1.8, maybe 2.0

+1 assuming the inside is solid.

I see some spine stress marks and and something going on with the top right corner. You might be in the 7.5-8.0 range without the corner issue on the spine. That unfortunately is going to knock the grade down quite a bit. Maximum 6.0, which allows for a major defect and some small defects. I believe it's more likely a 5-5.5.

You will hear the phrase "buy the book, not the grade" if you hang out around these forums long enough. We've had a recent example of an Amazing Spider-Man 238 that the front look really nice, but had a big water stain on the back. I have a similar situation with another book. A particular defect may knock down the grade quite a bit, but still leave a very attractive book. The other possibility, of course, is that the sellers didn't know how to grade properly or didn't spend enough time assigning the grade. I'd call this an 8.0 on the front, 5.0 on the back. As others have suggested, the overall grade falls somewhere in between depending on if you could get a lot of the grime off the back. I'd bet topping out at the possibility of 7.5.

I believe that's what will keep it in the low 9s vs >9.2. Some of these defects are grade more or less harshly if they are manufacturing vs post purchase. Wait for a 2nd opinion before mailing it to CGC tho

9.2-9.4

6.0±0.5 based on the edge/corner wear

Thanks. Sounds like a great book for your collection. I was lamenting yesterday about missing out on the last chance to have his sig on an Astonishing Tales 25. Definitely, the least tragic part of that situation, but retroactively realizing that I missed out on many opportunities to immortalize the contributions of so many great writers and artists who molded my love of this hobby. Of course, you can buy sig books, but that's nothing like taking something that has sentimental value out of your collection to have a creator sign it.

I had this one 1/2 dozen or so books down the list to share, but the feedback on @comicginger1789's copy got me curious. If that copy didn't have the overspray, I might believe someone stole my copy and put it on ebay. I've had mixed feelings about this book b/c most of the cover looks nice, but there's some obvious defects along the spine. I've been on the fence about grading it for sure as I suspect it's right at the border of ROI at the current prices for books in approximately this grade. Maybe long term that doesn't matter so much as I think this book will at least see a steady climb or constant value. Love this cover regardless.

You mean that you don't want to invest $150-300 each on slabbed books that were published 2 months ago and there's no evidence that anyone will find that book collectable 20 years from now?!? I know a lot of people like to bandy about the impending doom of the comic industry. I am a skeptic although I am hoping for at least a mini-bubble burst to bring down the price for the 6-12 books (mostly late Silver Age) I'd like to have but can't imagine shelling out for right now. A segment of the comic buyers out there are acting like day traders and we know short term thinking has never had any negative consequences in any market. I may have not expressed myself clearly on the grading Overstreet vs. CGC. I'm guessing we're both old enough to have heard the Overstreet vs. CVM grading/pricing debates. I believe collectors will generally give the same book a different grade depending on whether it's in their collection or they're buying it/inspecting a recent purchase. People can look at Overstreet's scale (detailed) and subjectively assigned a grade that favors their preferred outcome (confirmation bias) and look at their returned CGC comic and think the grading was too strict for the same reason. Since, as far as I know, there has never been an equivalent authority to CGC for verifying Overstreet grades, there's room for controversy. I think we are in agreement that the purpose of CGC is to impose some sort of consistent standard to the collectables market, regardless of how well it matches standards other organizations might have. The one thing I do find appalling is when an industry professional (i.e. someone selling comics as their primary source of income) has grading standards that are outside any industry standards and then uses the excuse that they're not a "grading professional" to excuse overlooking obvious defects to advertise books at inflated grades. I still like Spider-Woman to re-center the discussion 🕷️😊

Can you take it out of the bag and give us a front and back shot?

I've been leery of posting multiple comics per day b/c I don't want to abuse the good people who help out here. I've been having a good discussion with @Eponymous about grading related to his MS32 and I thought it would be helpful to post mine to allow a side-by-side comparison. Once everyone tells me it's not as nice as I'd hoped, it might be instructive. Obviously, it would be great if there were examples of the same book in a bunch of different grades, but IDK how many Spider-Woman stans are out there. I was really into "obscure" 70-80s Marvel titles in the late 90s/early 00s so I picked up the full run of SW books (and Savage She-Hulk, and the Cat, and....). I've always liked this book, and a lot of the Marvel Spotlight series.

I believe everyone who participates here is going off of the CGC grade scale, which requires some experience sending books and seeing how they come back. If you do a side-by-side comparison of CGC's published scale and Overstreet's for example, you will see a lot more detail on the latter. I suspect the general consensus is that CGC might be a little stricter with grading. I've been collecting longer than grading services have existed, so back there was less consistency b/c there was no "enforcement mechanism" to interpret the scale(s). Meaning, someone would look at the Overstreet scale and make an assignment and you could agree or disagree, but there was no independent authority to arbitrate who was better at assigning grades. CGC is imperfect for sure, but I they're at least trying to provide consistent standards for collectibles.

On my list: 1) Color breaking creases bottom right (2, which are long); 2) hard crease top left back cover; 3) bottom right back cover, there's something. Looks like a tear, but I'll take your word that there aren't any, but it's something; 4) 1/2 dozen give or take color-breaking stress lines alone the spine, a couple are above average in length; 5) corners are rounded and have some wear; 6) top edge of the front cover has some non-color-breaking lines, this seems like the area where pressing would offer the greatest improvement; 7) the white on the back cover is a little dirty; 8) photos maybe make it look less so, but the cover is just a tad dull. IMO the longer stress lines on the spine and the 2 creases at the bottom are the different between 5.0/5.5 and maybe a 7.0. Long story short, I have an Astonishing Tales 25 that has similar spine wear (I sent if for the canceled Pérez signing since it had his first Marvel work & I had another CGC copy) and it came back as a 7.0 even with the rest of the book looking pretty sharp (i.e. no color breaking creases). The black on this book really highlight the color breaking defects whereas the AT25 has a yellow background that can hide things a bit.

Thanks for your post. Before someone else chimes in, I'll let you know that a full front and back cover is preferred even if you're asking about a specific defect. This was the first thing I learned when I posted here a few weeks ago, so it happens all the time. I've got this book too, with a couple of 3-4 very small stress marks on the spine and I ultimately decided not to send it. If the tic is deemed manufacturing (I doubt it), this may be handled less harshly. My fear would be that this is considered a single moderate defect, which would knock you down to 8.5. I would imagine the best case scenario is a 9.0. Given that the private signing/grading rate is close to the Standard Tier price, I think the book needs to come close to being a $400 book (or have some personal value to the collector). The highest recent sales for 9.6s are south of $300, around $250. 8.5s/9.0s would go for $200. As people in the sig room would probably tell you, if it's the JSC signed book you want, then go ahead. If you just want it graded, then you can probably get this done for ~1/2 the fee through standard Modern Tier grading. At least for me, I had a few alterative JSCs to consider, so it was easy to exclude mine which is maybe a 9.0 and certainly no better than a 9.2. I'll kick the tires of trying to find a better BP1 (or lose interest) since JSC seems to be a regular private signing visitor.

Seems like things are pretty active here at the moment, so I'll toss out my Thor 126, which I acquired when I was going after Cap Am 100, Hulk 102 and any number of "firsts" since there was no hope of affording a true first for those characters. Plus it's Thorsday, so no time like the present. This might be the one that's in the best shape and part of the sequence of books introducing Hercules.

Yeah, the 66 is black cover and every little thing shows like a sore thumb. White covers--get dirty. Black covers--show scuffs and stress marks. Can't win.

In the ≥9.0 range. Hard to be that exact with NM stuff without having the physical book to examine. Lack of flatness I believe is a pressable defect. I am not sure about that discoloration on the back cover. I think it depends on that it is.

5.5-6.0. Pretty close to my copy, which is in my sharing queue

5-5.5

8.5±0.5. Looks like some color breaking on those stress marks. Probably prevents going much above 9.0

7.0-7.5

The chipping on the back cover (could that be insect chewing?) is unfortunate b/c the front looks quite nice. Some rust migration. I'm guessing 4-4.5 but "presents well". Hopefully someone with Golden Age expertise weighs in, particularly on the pressing, b/c it seems like these Golden Age books present some challenges depending on how delicate the paper is. It also seems like there's a slight discount on some defects (staple rust?) with GA books b/c of the age.

I agree with private pressing, if nothing else, it's going to make the process *MUCH* longer using CCS. TBF, they're quite fast with the private signing pressing, which I understand is a quasi-separate operation, but I don't have enough data to assess how reliable they are compared to regular CCS. My experience has been good so far with signed book pressing, getting expected or higher than expect grades on everything with the exception of 1 book that was stain and therefore probably not "fixable" by any C&Per. It does seem to be pretty universal that the newer the book is, the less forgiving CGC is on little defects, which also makes sense.