PGM GIANT SIZE X MEN #1

[bronzilla]

Opinions please 1/8 inch spine split lower left front cover

[Dark Knight]

6.5

[gernblanston]

How severe is the damage on the back cover along the right side? It looks like there is significant bubbling but it is hard to tell from a flat scan.

[TFL-migration]

I have a 6.5 of this book. I will go 4.5 possible 5.0 Nowhere near a 6.5 IMHO

[gernblanston]

I have a 6.5 of this book. I will go 4.5 possible 5.0 Nowhere near a 6.5 IMHO

 

Thats what I was thinking with the back cover damage. Looks like a 4.0/4.5.

[bronzilla]

No bubbling or damage it is the production problem rampant on many of these giant size issues.

[gernblanston]

No bubbling or damage it is the production problem rampant on many of these giant size issues.

 

Yeah, but I have one of these issues and the back cover doesn't look like that even though it is giant size.

[bronzilla]

Yeah dont mean to imply all do but many of the giant szes at marvel had those large bulky staples and the glue was over used. I remember a post on these boards a year or so ago that dealt with this problem extensivly. Thats cool yours doesnt have this problem.

[gernblanston]

Yeah dont mean to imply all do but many of the giant szes at marvel had those large bulky staples and the glue was over used. I remember a post on these boards a year or so ago that dealt with this problem extensivly. Thats cool yours doesnt have this problem.

 

I didn't buy it raw as a kid, but slabbed as an adult, and payed accordingly.

[Old_Pages_Breath-migration]

i think this one would have to be graded by hand due to the back cover situation.

[divad]

I have a 6.5 of this book. I will go 4.5 possible 5.0 Nowhere near a 6.5 IMHO

 

No way this book is less than a 6.0 . . .

[Mr. Zipper]

Good grief. Some of you guys can't tell a VG+ from a FN+. Please sell all of your VG+s on ebay so I can buy them all.

 

The waviness on the back is due to the glued spine and is very common on squarebounds. CGC considers it a production issue and many, many 9.4 or better books have this.

 

This book would be a CGC 6.0 or 6.5. It might even be a 7.0 if not for the slight spine tear at the bottom.

[divad]

Good grief. Some of you guys can't tell a VG+ from a FN+. Please sell all of your VG+s on ebay so I can buy them all.

 

The waviness on the back is due to the glued spine and is very common on squarebounds. CGC considers it a production issue and many, many 9.4 or better books have this.

 

This book would be a CGC 6.0 or 6.5. It might even be a 7.0 if not for the slight spine tear at the bottom.

 

:sumo:

[comic_lot]

6.0/6.5. According to Overstreet Grading Guide (3rd Ed.), maximum grade in which a spine split (1/8") is allowed is 6.5. Nice looking book.

[Point Five]

I'll guess 6.0 as well.

 

In defense of the guys who graded lower, I will say that IMO, GS X-Men #1s usually don't present very well in scans. The spine usually looks disproportionately warped and ugly in scans, and a little soiling goes a long way. My first take on a mid-grade GS X-Men is usually quite a bit lower than reality.

[alwaysbronze]

initial thought... 5.5

[Mr.Diggler]

looks good to me at least a 6.0

[october]

Good grief. Some of you guys can't tell a VG+ from a FN+. Please sell all of your VG+s on ebay so I can buy them all.

 

The waviness on the back is due to the glued spine and is very common on squarebounds. CGC considers it a production issue and many, many 9.4 or better books have this.

 

This book would be a CGC 6.0 or 6.5. It might even be a 7.0 if not for the slight spine tear at the bottom.

 

Seriously. If someone doesn't know how to grade they shouldn't be offering an opinion.

 

4.5 is way harsh. The back cover "defects" are production related and should be ignored in any grade under 9.4.

 

6.5

[Shadow]

Good points. I also thought a 6.5, maybe soft 7.0. No way it's lower than a 6.0. The rippling effect is common with Giant Size issues due to the glue. Spine splits are also more common. Nice book.

[TFL-migration]

While I may of been harsh. My CGC 6.5 is much better looking than this book is. CGC seems to go a little easier on square bounds. I'll revise up to 5.5