-
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
zzutak
-
Posts
4,723 -
Joined
Content Type
Forums
CGC Journals
Gallery
Events
Store
Posts posted by zzutak
-
-
On 5/18/2024 at 4:21 PM, Math Teacher said:
Fixed.
Not quite. I suspect Joe was (lightheartedly) questioning your choice of tense here:
On 5/18/2024 at 2:14 PM, Math Teacher said:I
mademake my share of "dumb" posts.
-
- Popular Post
On 5/18/2024 at 5:43 AM, BA773 said:I not excepted to do it without any damage on a such old book, so satisfied! This copy is really nice on overall so it s really cool to been able to clean this little mistake.
1. This was an arrival date. It is NOT a mistake that typically counts against the condition grade.
2. The ink loss resulting from your "cleaning" WILL be treated as a condition-lowering defect. Hence, the arrival date was NOT removed "with success."
I'd encourage you to practice with beaters rather than copies that are "really nice ... overall."
- Dick Pontoon, MBFan, PovertyRow and 4 others
-
7
-
On 5/17/2024 at 11:03 AM, HeathP said:
Why was the double cover not noted when my book was graded?
When you say not noted, do you mean not noted on either the label or the grader notes (or just not noted on the label)?
-
Remember, in this forum, we're generally being asked to guess the CGC grade.
-
On 5/17/2024 at 6:52 AM, Mokiguy said:
I find it hard to understand the issue people have with a detached centerfold, especially once it's encapsulated (and) never intended to be read or opened again.
Not quite. Third-party grading of any collectible has always been a means of promoting commerce. The primary value of a CGC certified/encapsulated specimen is the third-party assessment of condition (originality/restoration and grade). Many collectors will actually crack a book out of its holder after purchase, since a Mylar sleeve and acid-free backing board offers accessibility/readability, superior long-term protection (museums do not have important documents/ephemera encapsulated in CGC holders for the purpose of archival storage and preservation), and greatly reduced storage volume requirements.
Hidden/interior defects should always be noted and disclosed.
-
When in doubt, I always check the existing CGC Census to see the specifics assigned to the issue under consideration. If you do this, you'll see that CGC has always assigned your issue a 03/2024 publication date, regardless of the month shown on the cover.
-
- Popular Post
-
I've seen quite a few high-grade books with "appropriate" pencil markings on interior activity/puzzle pages. Mostly Dell Walt Disney and Timely funny animal titles. As near as I can tell, this particular blemish will normally not warrant a downgrade (although I'd expect CGC to be a bit more critical about markings that deface one or more interior pages).
- grendelbo, Paul Kosnik and Q.N.S.
-
3
-
75% of chips on a CGC 4.0. 25% of chips on a CGC 4.5.
-
- Popular Post
Another big save by @CGC Mike (who's right up there with Hall of Fame goaltenders like Patrick Roy).
- CGC Mike, grendel013, BeardedBubba and 2 others
-
3
-
1
-
1
-
On 5/13/2024 at 1:06 PM, NY Roadkill said:
subscription crease showing on front but otherwise sharp
No. Not "otherwise sharp" despite the seller's puffery.
On 5/13/2024 at 1:14 PM, NY Roadkill said:Trying to decide whether to buy it, seller says its a solid VF+ (8.5), I'm not sure it should be that high
I'm not trying to be mean here, but ......
If you cannot tell the difference between a 4.0-ish copy and "a solid 8.5" copy, you really should not be purchasing vintage books. Study. Learn. Then invest.
-
-
-
Congrats to you too!
CGC 6.0 is a pretty darn generous grade on that Supes. My first inclination was 4.5, which I then bumped up one grade increment because I've erred on the low side this entire competition. That TRC scuff/tear looks like it was caused by removing a piece of tape.
-
-
On 5/5/2024 at 5:26 PM, CGC Mike said:
Please don't make us wait that long.
Grades in (for better or for worse).
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 5/5/2024 at 8:29 PM, Cerebus3000 said:I have to note, the last thing I did before sending in my grades this round was change the 8.0 that I had given to SS 10 down to a 7.5.
I did the exact same thing with Book 19 (the Web of Spidey) -- initially had it at a 6.5 and, at the last second, dropped it to a 6.0. I mean, a book with a 6" long color-breaking crease can't be only one grade increment away from the lower end of the VF range (7.0) can it?
-
-
Mike's results indicate @apocalypse76 was the player who scored 5 bullseyes in Round 4!
- Superman2006 and Point Five
-
2
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
And here are the book era and CGC grade distributions in Contests C1 thru C10 -- a total of 200 challenges!
Era Era Σ C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 Gold 1930s-1940s 43 4 3 4 5 3 6 3 10 5 0 Atomic 1950s 51 4 3 6 2 5 2 8 10 11 0 Silver 1960s 45 5 7 4 6 5 5 7 0 1 5 Bronze 1970s 34 4 4 4 5 4 4 1 0 2 6 Copper 1980s 16 2 2 0 0 3 2 1 0 1 5 Modern 1990s-2020s 11 1 1 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 4 Σ 200 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 CGC Grade Σ C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 0.5 0 1.0 0 1.5 3 1 1 1 1.8 0 2.0 1 1 2.5 5 1 1 1 2 3.0 11 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 3.5 7 1 2 1 1 1 1 4.0 14 3 1 2 1 2 2 3 4.5 15 2 3 1 2 1 1 4 1 5.0 22 2 1 1 4 1 4 3 6 5.5 10 1 3 2 1 1 2 6.0 11 1 3 1 1 2 1 2 6.5 13 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 7.0 16 2 1 2 1 1 5 3 1 7.5 9 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 8.0 9 1 1 1 1 5 8.5 9 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 9.0 16 2 2 2 3 1 3 1 2 9.2 10 1 1 1 2 1 4 9.4 11 2 2 1 2 4 9.6 7 2 1 1 3 9.8 1 1 Σ 200 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Range CGC Grades Σ C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 V. Low 0.5~1.8 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Low 2.0~3.5 24 4 4 2 3 4 2 1 4 0 0 Mid 4.0~6.5 85 6 9 7 10 9 5 11 12 15 1 High 7.0~8.5 43 4 3 4 3 4 5 7 4 3 6 V. High 9.0~9.8 45 5 4 6 4 3 8 0 0 2 13 Σ 200 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 - CJ Design, TheGeneral, Superman2006 and 3 others
-
4
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 5/4/2024 at 9:00 PM, Cerebus3000 said:I would be interested in seeing some sort of comparison between the actual grades of this contest (each contest) with the average/mean/mode guessing of the cumulative top 10. I suspect the people that have a proven history of "cracking the code" will be clustered more tightly around the CGC grades, and it might dispel some comments about CGC inconsistency.
My experience with CGC dates back to the early 2000s, when CGC had only a handful of graders, and three different staff members independently assigned a numerical grade to each book. Any collector could easily learn what those three grades were with a simple (and very short) phone call to CGC. I made several of those calls to assess whether a CGC certified/encapsulated book I was considering purchasing was, for example, "a weak 8.0" (7.5, 8.0, 8.0), "a solid 8.0" (8.0, 8.0, 8.0), or "a strong 8.0" (8.0, 8.0, 8.5). My experience with CGC convinced me that CGC's "system" (the precision of its condition grading rubric, and the skill of the individuals who are tasked with properly interpreting and applying that rubric) is only reproducible to + or - one grade increment, at best. Hence, any player with a total score of 20 or less in any single CGC Contest is almost certainly an outstanding grader -- as good as most of the individuals CGC currently has on staff.
My conclusion is supported 100% by the cumulative results of these quarterly CGC Grading Contests. Just look at the "average scores" of the contestants that @Superman2006 has determined to be in the Top-10 thru Contest 9 (his MVP and Diamond Club rosters) -- all clustered around 20, which represents an average deviation from CGC's official assessment of exactly one grade increment:
CGC's proprietary grading rubric necessarily allows for judgment, and different graders may interpret/apply a given standard differently. Blemishes/defects can be overlooked or discounted for any number of reasons. The bottom line is that a given book may not always receive the same CGC grade if it's submitted several times (although the various grades assigned will almost certainly be within an increment or two of each other). This fact (not opinion) will be obvious to anyone who's done an initial pre-screen and then had the rejected books accepted on a later, identical, pre-screen. This is not meant to be a slam against CGC; I know of no collector who can/will assign the exact same grade to every one of his/her books every time he/she looks at 'em.
An average score over several contests of about 20 is the best we're going to see.
And yes, @TheGeneral is a beast.
- Yorick, jcjames, Superman2006 and 5 others
-
8
-
Agreed. Your effort (which is much appreciated
), so your call.
- grendelbo, skypinkblu, Sandflea and 1 other
-
4
-
On 5/4/2024 at 5:17 PM, CGC Mike said:
I found that many people got a bullseye (CGC 8.0) for this book. The chart will let us know.
Yep, the level of color-breaking wear on the SS #10 was comparable to the Avengers #10 (Book 1) and the Flash #122 (Book 11). Tiny ink flakes along left half of top edge; partial color-breaking bend across top-right corner; tiny chip out at top-right corner; color-breaking stress along right edge and at bottom-right corner; light scuff/wear of black line along middle third of spine. In my mind, these are far too many blemishes to warrant any grade above VF+.
Believe it or not, I've never owned or used a cell/smart phone. If you're old school, I'm Neanderthal!
What condition is not worth sending into be graded
in Newbie Comic Collecting Questions
Posted
Sounds like you were born in/around 1954 and are now about 70 years old. It also sounds like you know very little about the current marketplace (otherwise, you would have listed specific publishers and/or titles in your original post). Hence, I suggest you begin learning a bit about how comics are currently valued. Two references you may find useful: (1) the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide (53rd Edition); and (2) The Official CGC Guide to Grading Comics (1st Edition).
Based on the few details you've provided, it sounds like your comics are generally in the 2.0 GD-ish (major creases/fold/tears) to 5.0 VG/FN-ish (minor creases/fold/tears) range. When you factor in the cost of packaging/shipping/return-shipping/insurance, CGC certification/encapsulation will run a minimum of about $50/book. Although it's true that even the low-grade specimens will be "valued well above" their original cost (12 cents), that's not the comparison you should be making. As Artboy has noted, you should be asking, "Is the cost of certification greater than the increase in market value associated with said certification?" (unless, of course, you don't mind losing money on many/most submissions).
Interested in "preserving" your books for eventual transfer to your heirs? Consider placing them in Mylar sleeves with acid-free backing boards, then storing them in a cool, dry location (protected from insects, rodents, leaks/pipe-bursts, curious children, and thieves). Acid-free archival storage boxes are also readily available from companies such as Lineco and Talas. If it's good enough for the Library of Congress, it's good enough for you and me.
Good luck.