PGM Phantom Lady 17

[JvR11]

I need some help on this one. Any and all assistance appreciated! It has a super tiny chip glued on the top corner...barely noticeable. It also has a tear that extends into the A.

 

What do you all think?

 

 

 

[piper]

I'm not sure if the glue qualifies as resto, but I would say 5.0.

[TFL-migration]

4.5 IMHO

[Dale Roberts]

Sorry, no chance it grades that high. You would be better off removing the chip as it will get a purple label. The tear and the other defects will keep it from being any higher than a 3.0. The chip won't affect this grade.

[Point Five]

3.0 seems right...too bad about the tear! I'd leave the chip tho. Still looks nice.

[piper]

I'll take my -1.

[Point Five]

I'll take my -1.

I already took mine.....

[JvR11]

I'm hoping for a 4.5. I think a 3.0 seems a little low. The debate is about the corner chip. If it's a super small thing maybe CGC might just note it on the label. But, to get a purple label for smething so small..I'd rather take it off.

[plady69]

3.5

 

So you're the guy that snagged this off Ebay! Congrats. Here are my two. First is a qualified 4.0 (also with chip replacement and tape repairs) and second a 4.0.

 

 

 

[capt_comics]

I'd take 3.0 Phantom Ladys like this all day. Especially if discounted

 

This is one of those books where the structural grade may be a 3 or 3.5, but the apparent grade is much higher

 

 

[JohnT]

To me this book looks closer to a 4.0 than a 3.0, although the spine looks pretty weak from the back scan. It's got nice eye appeal...although it would be hard for this issue to have bad eye appeal.

 

[JvR11]

"girl" but I'll forgive you

 

Thanks for posting your scans, helps give me some ideas. I'm hoping for a 4.5 but maybe a 4.0 might be it. I think that big tear on the A could kill the grade...shame.

 

3.5

 

So you're the guy that snagged this off Ebay! Congrats. Here are my two. First is a qualified 4.0 (also with chip replacement and tape repairs) and second a 4.0.

 

 

[Dale Roberts]

I'd take 3.0 Phantom Ladys like this all day. Especially if discounted

 

This is one of those books where the structural grade may be a 3 or 3.5, but the apparent grade is much higher

 

 

And this is one of those books where you price the book much more according to eye appeal than structural grade. It is still a great, pretty book. Just not really a book to get slabbed in my opinion.

[rjpb]

Superb eye appeal - but a tear that big would probably keep it under 4.0. I'd leave the chip unless you were going to slab it. Personally - I'd leave the book raw.

[G.A.tor]

I could live with a 3.5, even though it may appear better, the tear technically "hurts" it

[Theagenes]

I think it can get an eye appeal bump to 3.5, but I just can't see a solid 4.0 with that large tear. It is a great looking 3.5 though.

[Bunky Brian]

I see it,

 

Very Good

 

IMHO

B

[Count]

I need some help on this one. Any and all assistance appreciated! It has a super tiny chip glued on the top corner...barely noticeable. It also has a tear that extends into the A.

 

What do you all think?

 

 

I almost bid on that book

 

I got the claire voyant from the same seller

 

Congrats (thumbs u

[PovertyRow]

Superb eye appeal - but a tear that big would probably keep it under 4.0. I'd leave the chip unless you were going to slab it. Personally - I'd leave the book raw.

 

I doubt it. I had a Mister Mystery 13 graded Universal 5.5 - sorry - make that 5.0 - that had a tear in the back cover about 3/4" and in the middle of the spine a "spiderweb tear" that branched out well over 1/2" in three directions.

 

The glue may be small enough to pass the GA barrier. But forget about the bit of glue. Yes, there is a largish tear. But 3.0? I think that just does not hack it. The cover of this book with its attendant spine creases etc was pretty damned close to my 5.5 that had the two sets of tears. The book, at least form the sacn, has a rahter nice midgrade spine and a good lack of typical GA defects from a book that has obviously been read and handled. Where is this 3.0 coming from?

[rjpb]

Superb eye appeal - but a tear that big would probably keep it under 4.0. I'd leave the chip unless you were going to slab it. Personally - I'd leave the book raw.

 

I doubt it. I had a Mister Mystery 13 graded Universal 5.5 that had a tear in the back cover about 3/4" and in the middle of the spine a "spiderweb tear" that branched out well over 1/2" in three directions.

 

The glue may be small enough to pass the GA barrier. But forget about the bit of glue. Yes, there is a largish tear. But 3.0? I think that just does not hack it. The cover of this book with its attendant spine creases etc was pretty damned close to my 5.5 that had the two sets of tears. The book, at least form the sacn, has a rahter nice midgrade spine and a good lack of typical GA defects from a book that has obviously been read and handled. Where is this 3.0 coming from?

 

Given the other wear on the book it looks around a 5.0 without the tear. So how much would you deduct? I agree 3.0 is to harsh - 3.5 was my pick - but I'd go 4.0 before 3.0 - regardless, eye-appeal trumps in this grade range (unless a book is brittle) - and I would take this copy over many a 4.0 blue label for the same money. I don't think I'm alone - which is why I'd leave the book raw - even for resale - after all a book isn't actually a PLOD until it's slabbed.