Manufacturing or Production defects? Why make this distinction?

[Issa]

To help bridge a number of gaps in my knowledge of grading, I've decided to ask the following question.

 

Why does a book with microscopic breaks in color along the spine suffer a grading penalty, whereas a book thats been miscut is not penalized? I am not advocating one over the other, but I am trying to better understand the rationale behind grading these very different types of defects. How do these defects come about exactly? Thank you very much for your time.

 

-Issa

[joe_collector]

Because CGC, their investors, and the dealer "member firms" decided it, obviously for monetary reasons.

 

The more potential books that are subbed = $$$

[brasseye]

It does seem that way, not a single other dealer/comic trader on the planet discounted the notion of these in assessing the grade of a book, then when CGC came along, it was like some standard that had always been there in their eye's.

plus they're not even consistant about, Marvel chipping gets the thumb's down, while other manufacturing defects are not a factor of grade

 

 

 

 

[He11blazer]

There is some logic in it.

 

If a book rolls off the press with an off-center cover, it is still 'mint' is it not? 'Mint' by definition means the state it was in when newly 'minted'. If it was 'minted' at a funny angle, or without a staple, or with insufficient ink, then it is imperfect but still 'as new'.

 

Of course this logic is not the whole story, since CGC do grade these defects to some extent. A missing staple will get a GLOD. A bindery tear means no 9.9 or 10.0.

 

This is part of the distinction between mint and 'gem mint'. A gem is not only mint, but is also perfectly minted, right?

 

This is just how I see it by the way. I'm no expert, that's for sure.

 

[rza808]

There is some logic in it.

 

If a book rolls off the press with an off-center cover, it is still 'mint' is it not? 'Mint' by definition means the state it was in when newly 'minted'. If it was 'minted' at a funny angle, or without a staple, or with insufficient ink, then it is imperfect but still 'as new'.

 

Of course this logic is not the whole story, since CGC do grade these defects to some extent. A missing staple will get a GLOD. A bindery tear means no 9.9 or 10.0.

 

This is part of the distinction between mint and 'gem mint'. A gem is not only mint, but is also perfectly minted, right?

 

This is just how I see it by the way. I'm no expert, that's for sure.

makes sense to me :shrug: I agree

[joe_collector]

If a book rolls off the press with an off-center cover, it is still 'mint' is it not? 'Mint' by definition means the state it was in when newly 'minted'.

 

No it doesn't.

 

Other hobbies take into consideration that mint means "perfect minting", and errors, off-cuts, poorly struck, mis-cuts, out-of-focus, and other production issues are graded lower and can fetch much lower $$$ amounts than a pristine copy.

 

Only in comics can something that is mis-cut, off-center, low color, dented staples, and tons of printer creases get a 98/100 grade.

[Mr. Zipper]

If a book rolls off the press with an off-center cover, it is still 'mint' is it not? 'Mint' by definition means the state it was in when newly 'minted'.

 

No it doesn't.

 

Other hobbies take into consideration that mint means "perfect minting", and errors, off-cuts, poorly struck, mis-cuts, out-of-focus, and other production issues are graded lower and can fetch much lower $$$ amounts than a pristine copy.

 

Only in comics can something that is mis-cut, off-center, low color, dented staples, and tons of printer creases get a 98/100 grade.

 

Righto... a baseball card with printer's hickeys, bad registration and/or off-center is flawed and the grade is hammered accordingly.

[the blob]

One problem is that in some instances the bulk of an entire print-run seems to have these problems, like bad centering:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/CAPTAIN-MARVEL-26-BRONZE-AGE-JIM-STARLIN-CENTS-COPY_W0QQitemZ260217276140QQihZ016QQcategoryZ93472QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

Seriously, no doubt there's a good one out there, but every frigging copy of this book I've seen has a fair amount of white along the spine. I have had 4 copies of it in the last year and it's all the same. Now I'm down to 3.

 

Factoring in how common a defect is on any given issue and grading accordingly would be a monumental task and I understand why CGC doesn't want to do it, but saying that CM 26 can't grade out better than a 9.2 would be harsh too and, honestly, before CGC, I probably wouldn't have considered a book with all that white on the spine any better than a NM- even if perfect otherwise. Ebay (and the internet) makes it easier to see "wow, most of these have some problems"

[joe_collector]

One problem is that in some instances the bulk of an entire print-run seems to have these problems, like bad centering

 

Lots of sportscards and other collectibles have the SAME problem, but that just makes the "true NM/M" copies that much more prized and valuable.

 

And I think you've overstating the problem, and could it be that the majority of ones being sold have freakshow QP, and the "keepers" are the ones with good QP?

 

I have some nicely centered ones (I look for that when buying) and even this random purchase that I have in my pics folder, while not perfect, has better centering than the freakshow white border ones.

[Issa]

One problem is that in some instances the bulk of an entire print-run seems to have these problems, like bad centering:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/CAPTAIN-MARVEL-26-BRONZE-AGE-JIM-STARLIN-CENTS-COPY_W0QQitemZ260217276140QQihZ016QQcategoryZ93472QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

Seriously, no doubt there's a good one out there, but every frigging copy of this book I've seen has a fair amount of white along the spine. I have had 4 copies of it in the last year and it's all the same. Now I'm down to 3.

 

Factoring in how common a defect is on any given issue and grading accordingly would be a monumental task and I understand why CGC doesn't want to do it, but saying that CM 26 can't grade out better than a 9.2 would be harsh too and, honestly, before CGC, I probably wouldn't have considered a book with all that white on the spine any better than a NM- even if perfect otherwise. Ebay (and the internet) makes it easier to see "wow, most of these have some problems"

 

 

Your point is valid in that CGC should never look into how frequent a defect is when determining a grade for a book. Never!. I'm suggesting the opposite, that CGC take into consideration a strict set of guidelines regarding spine defects. Without such consideration, we have the following and just plain awful bias:

 

Let's say every single X-men#1 book was printed with varying degree of miscuts or off-centered spines and let's also assume the penalty for these defects is: These books can only be a 9.6/10 at BEST. Therefore, there will be NO 9.8 -10.0 books because every printed book is miscut or off-center. Essentially, a grade should be consistent across all issues and books...or at least time-periods, but I won't touch that one.

 

A 9.6 with a spine center is not the same IMHO as a 9.6 without this defect. If CGC were to give both books a 9.6. Then, well, we have a problem here, don't you think? OR If CGC finds a 9.6 with a spine defect or a 9.4 without this defect, we also have another problem with consistency of grading these types of flaws. Are the flaws that bring a book to a 9.4 consistent with the spine-defected 9.6?

 

Finally, if minute details such as microscopic breaks in color can bring a book down from a 9.8 to a 9.6, I don't see why an off-center or a miscut can have the same detrimental effect. This might bring into play the issue of how "presentable" a CGC slabbed book actually is, in which case, is completely up to the buyer. (a.k.a, us :thumbsup:)

[the blob]

And I think you've overstating the problem, and could it be that the majority of ones being sold have freakshow QP, and the "keepers" are the ones with good QP?

----------------------------------

 

It's possible, the one you show has some white too, but not enough that it would have ever been considered a problem. 4 of them in hand, plus 2 random ones on ebay, seemed to be a trend.

[joeypost]

One problem is that in some instances the bulk of an entire print-run seems to have these problems, like bad centering

 

Lots of sportscards and other collectibles have the SAME problem, but that just makes the "true NM/M" copies that much more prized and valuable.

 

And I think you've overstating the problem, and could it be that the majority of ones being sold have freakshow QP, and the "keepers" are the ones with good QP?

 

I have some nicely centered ones (I look for that when buying) and even this random purchase that I have in my pics folder, while not perfect, has better centering than the freakshow white border ones.

 

This is the best high grade slabbed copy I could find with minimal wrap-around.

 

[joe_collector]

It's possible, the one you show has some white too, but not enough that it would have ever been considered a problem.

 

 

Did you read my post? I stated I have several well-centered ones, and that was just a random scan I had in my pics folder. The fact that even a random one is not bad is my point. But I used to search for HG Starlin books like a madman early in my EBay career.

 

And to be honest, I've had more trouble finding a perfectly-centered copy of CM 33 than 26, as virtually every HG book I've seen either has a white border or is off-center in some way.

[the blob]

alright, stop slapping your head already, you didn't show me your well centered copies, just that one, which i didn't think showed how this doesn't impact a lot of this issue. joey's copy has a lot of wrap problem too as far as i'm concerned.

 

i'm not a stickler for these things, mind you, i'd just want to pay less for them, and I don't hunt this particularl book either, owning 4 copies was random. actually, i think one came from joey!

 

whatever, i'm not arguing with you. i assumed there are some nice ones out there that got tucked away, but it sure seems like the vast majority are a lot or a little F-ed up.

 

doesn't answer the question of how much and if this should impact the grade.

 

it seems to do so everywhere else in the world of collecting

 

but not with CGC

 

of course, OPG has been historically lazy on bumping up prices on books that are hard to find in top grade.

[the blob]

well, there goes my theory:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/CAPTAIN-MARVEL-26-1ST-THANOS-COVER-STARLIN-THING_W0QQitemZ120011066794QQihZ002QQcategoryZ33807QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQ_trksidZp1638.m118.l1247QQcmdZViewItem

 

granted, maybe the white part of the spine fell off this particular copy, it's hard to tell after the elephant walked on it

[joe_collector]

All I'll say is this:

 

When it comes down to trading, selling or otherwise divesting myself of dupes, and I have several NM- to NM+ copies to choose from, the freakshow QP books will be the first to go.

 

And I don't think I'm alone, and it's a well-known fact that freakshow QP CGC books are the new "hot potato" of the hobby.

 

And to answer your question more specifically, yes, several issues in that run have known QP problems, like CM 26 and 33, but these are not as prevalent as you think. You're just seeing the copies out there "on the open market", which naturally will contain more than few "hot potatoes".

 

I bet if you reefed through some serious raw collections, you'd find quite a few nicely centered copies.

[Mr. Zipper]

Your point is valid in that CGC should never look into how frequent a defect is when determining a grade for a book. Never!. I'm suggesting the opposite, that CGC take into consideration a strict set of guidelines regarding spine defects. Without such consideration, we have the following and just plain awful bias:

 

Let's say every single X-men#1 book was printed with varying degree of miscuts or off-centered spines and let's also assume the penalty for these defects is: These books can only be a 9.6/10 at BEST. Therefore, there will be NO 9.8 -10.0 books because every printed book is miscut or off-center.

 

I couldn't agree more. If a certain book rolls off the line with horrible production, the hobby might just have to live with the fact that a certain issue may only exist in 9.2 (or whatever) at BEST.

 

The same with some GA books... they are graded on a curve and the 9.6 or 9.8 really means "best copy available"... NOT a true 9.6 or 9.8.

 

However, as long as there is market pressure to have 9.6s/9.8s, this practice won't change.

[joeypost]

All I'll say is this:

 

When it comes down to trading, selling or otherwise divesting myself of dupes, and I have several NM- to NM+ copies to choose from, the freakshow QP books will be the first to go.

 

And I don't think I'm alone, and it's a well-known fact that freakshow QP CGC books are the new "hot potato" of the hobby.

 

And to answer your question more specifically, yes, several issues in that run have known QP problems, like CM 26 and 33, but these are not as prevalent as you think. You're just seeing the copies out there "on the open market", which naturally will contain more than few "hot potatoes".

 

I bet if you reefed through some serious raw collections, you'd find quite a few nicely centered copies.

 

I took a hit selling this copy due to the QP. Had it been nicely centered I

 

A) Might have kept it

B) Would have gotten more $$$

 

[the blob]

joey, a book like that is in need of a very fuzzy picture, don't you know anything?

[Issa]

QP?

OPG?

 

...Sorry, I'm new to some of these acronyms. :shrug: