Amazing Fantasy #15 Club

[Will Baxton]

I purchased the http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p5197.c0.m619&item=290556539346&category=32739 and joined the club

 

I don't think I overpaid, nor good deal, just glad to own my first 5.0 AF15

 

Datestamp + chips - not my first choice, but good mid grade. Now to crack it open (...maybe) and check it out / mylar the thing.

 

Woo hoo!

 

-WB

 

P.S. And umm, heck yes I would want the 6.0 above me over mine ...

[VintageComics]

Mylar + cool books =

[thedude]

welcome to the club...AND the boards.

[scooter99]

Mr. Storms just listed this beauty....

 

http://www.highgradecomics.com/article.php?dynamic=book_details&id=82925

 

Very sharp looking book.

 

 

[MCJ]

Wow. Sharp 8.5! Sigh...

[peewee22]

Nice book but man it has a dirty back !!

[etanick]

that dirty back does bother me more than it should.

[sufunk]

That is a SHARP front cover but im a little surprised that got a 8.5 as dirty as the back is. Back cover doesnt usually bother me but that one is pretty dirty.

[showcase22gr1959]

Yeah, that dirt really is a "little" turn-off Decent colors and centered is a plus.

[VintageComics]

I suppose if it was cleaner it would be a 9.0 and a $150K book.

 

 

My experience is that scanners can sometimes make defects look worse (or better) than they really are when in hand so I'd keep that in mind.

 

(thumbs u

[showcase22gr1959]

I know the Curator was a 9.0 and if cleaner a 9.0 too. I agree, the actual details looks better in hand. Great pricing for the book though.

[sufunk]

I suppose if it was cleaner it would be a 9.0 and a $150K book.

 

 

My experience is that scanners can sometimes make defects look worse (or better) than they really are when in hand so I'd keep that in mind.

 

(thumbs u

 

Doesn't really matter since i'll never have that in hand! I definitely dont have an extra 125k laying around at the moment (thumbs u

 

Whatevers going on with the back, the front is definitely WICKED! The top, bottom and side are freaking razor sharp in the scan

[peewee22]

I suppose if it was cleaner it would be a 9.0 and a $150K book.

 

 

My experience is that scanners can sometimes make defects look worse (or better) than they really are when in hand so I'd keep that in mind.

 

(thumbs u

 

Good point. That could be a bad scan and not numerous dirty areas on the BC.

 

[fantastic_four]

I suppose if it was cleaner it would be a 9.0 and a $150K book.

 

I suspect CGC doesn't downgrade it for the same reason they don't downgrade for dust shadows--it's all safely removable and doesn't affect the structure or effective age of the book.

[joeypost]

I suppose if it was cleaner it would be a 9.0 and a $150K book.

 

I suspect CGC doesn't downgrade it for the same reason they don't downgrade for dust shadows--it's all safely removable and doesn't affect the structure or effective age of the book.

 

CGC deducts for dust shadows.

[fantastic_four]

I suppose if it was cleaner it would be a 9.0 and a $150K book.

 

I suspect CGC doesn't downgrade it for the same reason they don't downgrade for dust shadows--it's all safely removable and doesn't affect the structure or effective age of the book.

 

CGC deducts for dust shadows.

 

How can you tell? I've seen scores of 9.6 books with dust shadows all the way down an edge. The most infamous example is the Allentown Tec 38 CGC 9.4 with a dark, thick, angled dust shadow down one edge.

[VintageComics]

I suppose if it was cleaner it would be a 9.0 and a $150K book.

 

I suspect CGC doesn't downgrade it for the same reason they don't downgrade for dust shadows--it's all safely removable and doesn't affect the structure or effective age of the book.

 

CGC deducts for dust shadows.

 

How can you tell? I've seen scores of 9.6 books with dust shadows all the way down an edge. The most infamous example is the Allentown Tec 38 CGC 9.4 with a dark, thick, angled dust shadow down one edge.

 

CGC downgrades for all defects.

 

The era, the size and depth of the defect and where the defect is can all affect the final grade.

 

A light, thin short shadow may be allowed on a 9.6 or even a 9.8 if it is unobtrusive enough.

 

A thick, heavy, long shadow won't be.

 

It's all determined on a sliding scale and based on their interpretation of that scale.

[peewee22]

I suppose if it was cleaner it would be a 9.0 and a $150K book.

 

I suspect CGC doesn't downgrade it for the same reason they don't downgrade for dust shadows--it's all safely removable and doesn't affect the structure or effective age of the book.

 

CGC deducts for dust shadows.

 

How can you tell? I've seen scores of 9.6 books with dust shadows all the way down an edge. The most infamous example is the Allentown Tec 38 CGC 9.4 with a dark, thick, angled dust shadow down one edge.

 

CGC downgrades for all defects.

 

The era, the size and depth of the defect and where the defect is can all affect the final grade.

 

A light, thin short shadow may be allowed on a 9.6 or even a 9.8 if it is unobtrusive enough.

 

A thick, heavy, long shadow won't be.

 

It's all determined on a sliding scale and based on their interpretation of that scale.

 

"their interpretation"

[sufunk]

I got this book in the March CC auction and i know i heard more than a couple people person_without_enough_empathying about it and using this particular book as proof that the Sucha news books were getting "gift" grades.

 

The dust shadow on the back cover doesnt look quite as bad in hand as the scan. I saw people saying no way this book should have gotten a 9.6 with the shadow but imo, it probably got knocked down from a 9.8 to a 9.6 because of it. In hand, it looks more like a 9.8 than a 9.6. I would guess that without it, it would have gotten a 9.8 so i think CGC does deduct for dust shadows but clearly you can still get a 9.6 with a back cover full length shadow.

 

 

 

[fantastic_four]

I would guess that without it, it would have gotten a 9.8 so i think CGC does deduct for dust shadows but clearly you can still get a 9.6 with a back cover full length shadow.

 

Front cover full-length height-wise shadows can also get 9.6...I don't recall seeing a 9.8 with one but I may be forgetting. I suspect as you seem to that they don't allow it at that level.