scburdet

looks 7ish. C/P can't do much for the dust shadow on the back or the stuff going on with the BLFC. The only thing I see beyond that of possible concern would be the dark area in the text on the back cover. If that's ink on the opposite side of that cover coming through, not a big deal. If that's some kind of discoloration or stain, it could drop is several more grades.

5.6/6.0 now maybe? CGC doesn't make standard for internal tears are. I just got back a UK magazine at 8.5 with the four most inner wraps detached & split. I could only rationalize this as a production problem b/c I don't see how it would have happened with normal handling without damaging other parts of the book. The notes don't give insight into this though. I only mention it as an example where the insides have a much less significant impact that the outsides. If it was the cover, I'd wager my book would have been ~4.5. The BC problems depends on what it is. It sort of looks like a tape pull. Could have been any kind of adhesive that took some of the surface material off? I'd have to look at it in-hand & probably still wouldn't be sure. As a proxy again, I have a book with two descent size tape pulls on the back (one of my first submissions & on me for not paying attention) that is a 7.0. A similar or greater affected total area. So two noticeable defects combined is where my uncertain guess comes from.

6.0/6.5. I'm not sure it can get to 7.0 with the little chip, but otherwise a pretty good looking copy.

CGC's stance on tape has been documented for over a decade: https://www.cgccomics.com/news/article/3327/CGC-Modifies-Stance-on-Grading-Submissions-with-Tape/ Please see the guide lines in red letters at the top of the forum for proper posting procedures & modify your post accordingly.

I agree. 1.8/2.0. The missing internal piece won't matter much given the overall rough shape

I do think a non-qualified label for part of a mailing insert being removed sounds weird. This is more or less why qualified labels exist. And people tend to be harder on qualified books that are missing ads than they should be IMO. Missing a MVS is one thing, but missing something that's inserted that isn't connected to the story is silly. I don't make the rules & maybe this is an exception. Going off very limited information, all the available & sold MJs of this issue I can find have a CGC label that says it also contains the Tattooz insert. The label could not reflect reality, but that's what several say. A missing Tattooz is the classic green label for this book. I don't think that should really matter with grading, but if that's the case you could still get a Qualified grade. I don't see the spine ticks, but this looks like a 9.2/9.4. Sometimes I think this book gets treated with a heavier hand, but maybe not as heavy for a rarer variant.

Call me crazy, but I have a similarly damaged X-Men 49 that everyone on the board thought would get hammered. I wasn't that much more optimistic & then it came back at 7.5. This corner looks a little worse, so I'll give it a 6.5 with very limited potential to do better. If a corner is deemed to be a crunch, then 7.0 is supposed to be the low-end for that defect alone.

I think this scores at least an 8.5 with a proper cleaning. CGC seems quite forgiving with these black covers & in this case a small company with lower production QC.

Here's what I see. Possibly some light fraying along the spine fold. A white dot that may be something or nothing next to the bottom staple. Some bluish ink or something along the back spine. Could be misapplied ink during production or transferred from contacting other comics sometime during it's lifetime. To the limits of how well one can grade books from photos, I'd give this a 9.4/9.6. It might have 9.8 potential, but I would not bet on it personally. What you do with grading depends on what you plan to do with your comics. If you like graded comics & want this for a personal collection, grading might be a perfectly fine option especially if you don't care that much about the assigned grade. If you are looking to sell, this is a 9.8 or bust book IMO. Grading isn't cheap when you add in CGC membership, grading fees, shipping, etc. If you got a 9.6, you'd probably break even. With a little luck that got the book a 9.8, you might make a small profit; however, it probably isn't enough profit to be worth the hassle or risk.

Is the front cover scan in the bag? I see what looks like the remnants of a price tag along the bottom. I'm also seeing a line in the BLFC just under the cape. It will matter if that's on the book

We'll be happy to provide you that grade. We just have to see (at least) the front & back covers. If it was an older book, you might want to post photos of things like the centerfold that are more likely to be damaged from reading over the years. I have little fear there is anything hidden inside this one.

Standards are front & back pictures. As I said, have no fear, you are not dealing with an extremely high value book. The high water mark for a nearly perfect graded copy of Spawn 1 is around $250 https://gocollect.com/app/comic/spawn-1

Please see the forum guidelines linked in the big red letters at the top of the page & edit your post accordingly. FYI, this is not a $1000 book. Have no fear.

I cannot wait for the discussion about why the grades CGC assigned are wrong. The only thing better than examining a Man-Thing is staring at a Giant-Size Man-Thing...........I'll show myself out.

I don't think it will matter much in this case. The stress lines will still be color breaking, but it might look marginally better

9.0/9.2

If you're going to get it graded, I would have an experienced person try to maximize it's visual appeal. Even if it doesn't boost the grade, looking better in the slab is worth it in this case

The CGC book says a fully detached cover can receive a grade between 2.5-5.0 with other defects impacting the overall grade. Further, it states that 4.0 is the typical highest grade for a fully detached cover. This is how I arrived at my guess since the rest of the book isn't too bad. If this was another book, I would say 2.0/2.5. As an early-ish ASM with 1st Punisher, I think a cleaned up copy *might* get to the 3.5. Maybe not, but the Overstreet 2.0 is below CGC's officially published low point.

yes. I think 3s is most likely. A press might take out some of the rippling around the edges & give it the best shot to go higher. Sometimes you see a key book like this land a grade higher than you might expect, or a comparable "regular" book might grade, if it presents well. This is all hand waving obviously b/c the grader notes don't walk you through the grading rationale.

Universal 3.5/4.0. I think lower. A qualified label would only be if the book looked very high grade but had a detached cover. There's plenty going on here, so I don't think that even if the cover was attached it would do much better than a 4.5

1.5/1.8

3.0/3.5 It would help to work on the full cover shots. It's hard to look at details with those angles & lighting.

9.2 give or take.

Maybe 8.0/8.5 with a really good c/p. A crunch can knock a book down to a 7.0. Given the FMV for this book, there's not much upside to investing in grading & a fair amount of potential for the costs to be close to the value of the graded copy.

6.0/6.5. Might squeak a 7.0 with a really good c/p to improve its appearance. It can also hurt if there are little splits on the spine of the cover. Happens a lot with square bounds