VALPARAISO SPIDEY 55 9.8................SOLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[NewWorldOrder]

While I understand your point about judging a book by a medium-sized scan, do you really not think that there are 9.6s sitting in 9.8 holders, or vice versa?

I know of a certain collector who has done really well on straight resubs at the 9.6/9.8 level. I also currently own an ASM 122 9.6 with NO visible flaws, let alone the 3 we can see on this 9.8.

 

 

Sure - CGC ain't perfect, and mis-grading happens. But 2 of the 3 flaws you're talking about is a production defect and a pen-mark, neither of which influence the grade, so we're once again back to that solitary spine-thingamagingy.

 

I have a tuff time to actually rationalize when someone or a group of people say Productions defects should not be a down gradable aspect of CGC grading.

 

I am not saying you, but just a general statement.

 

A defect is a defect no matter where it happens.

 

[COI]

While I understand your point about judging a book by a medium-sized scan, do you really not think that there are 9.6s sitting in 9.8 holders, or vice versa?

I know of a certain collector who has done really well on straight resubs at the 9.6/9.8 level. I also currently own an ASM 122 9.6 with NO visible flaws, let alone the 3 we can see on this 9.8.

 

 

Your ASM 122 probably has a thumb dent. They are invisible in the case due to the slight smushing (sorry for the technical term) effect of the slab. It needs potentialisation. The last two "perfect" 9.6s I cracked both had thumb dents. I was actually worried about them keeping the 9.6, but they both did.

 

Leave me to my delusions, Sean. It's so very, very pretty, and I need something to believe in.

 

When you say "thumb dent", do you mean along the top of the book?

 

Usually right by the top staple. Like where your thumb would be if you were holding the book open in your one hand and turning the pages with another. I don't know if it even is what other people call a thumb dent, but I do b/c I am left handed and it is exactly the type of mark that my left thumb makes if I am not careful when reading comics.

 

It was my understanding that a thumb dent refers to a dent along the top of a book, occuring when you pull a book out of a mylar that may be too tight.

[Sal]

While I understand your point about judging a book by a medium-sized scan, do you really not think that there are 9.6s sitting in 9.8 holders, or vice versa?

I know of a certain collector who has done really well on straight resubs at the 9.6/9.8 level. I also currently own an ASM 122 9.6 with NO visible flaws, let alone the 3 we can see on this 9.8.

 

 

Your ASM 122 probably has a thumb dent. They are invisible in the case due to the slight smushing (sorry for the technical term) effect of the slab. It needs potentialisation. The last two "perfect" 9.6s I cracked both had thumb dents. I was actually worried about them keeping the 9.6, but they both did.

 

Leave me to my delusions, Sean. It's so very, very pretty, and I need something to believe in.

 

When you say "thumb dent", do you mean along the top of the book?

 

Usually right by the top staple. Like where your thumb would be if you were holding the book open in your one hand and turning the pages with another. I don't know if it even is what other people call a thumb dent, but I do b/c I am left handed and it is exactly the type of mark that my left thumb makes if I am not careful when reading comics.

 

It was my understanding that a thumb dent refers to a dent along the top of a book, occuring when you pull a book out of a mylar that may be too tight.

 

historically, that's where most occur, although i find myself referring to any semicircular or arcing NCB indentation on a cover as a thumb dent

[seanfingh]

While I understand your point about judging a book by a medium-sized scan, do you really not think that there are 9.6s sitting in 9.8 holders, or vice versa?

I know of a certain collector who has done really well on straight resubs at the 9.6/9.8 level. I also currently own an ASM 122 9.6 with NO visible flaws, let alone the 3 we can see on this 9.8.

 

 

Sure - CGC ain't perfect, and mis-grading happens. But 2 of the 3 flaws you're talking about is a production defect and a pen-mark, neither of which influence the grade, so we're once again back to that solitary spine-thingamagingy.

 

I have a tuff time to actually rationalize when someone or a group of people say Productions defects should not be a down gradable aspect of CGC grading.

 

I am not saying you, but just a general statement.

 

A defect is a defect no matter where it happens.

 

What do you mean? Everyone knows that they don't downgrade for overspray or miscuts. Back in the day those were serious defects. So what are you saying, that CGC needs to change to recognize these production defects? If so, you are more likely to fart twelve quatrains of Shakespeare than for that to happen.

[Sal]

maybe he's talking about an ideal world.

 

 

it would be nice if a defect was a defect was a defect, rather than something that may or may not be ignored if it occurred in production rather than in the process of procuring or reading

[MCMiles]

I've always thought of thumb dents/ finger dents to be the very light crescent shaped dents in the covers that come from to much pressure or weight being placed on the free side of a cover when held in hand. Some books may have one, some books are littered with them.

[seanfingh]

 

i find myself referring to any semicircular or arcing NCB indentation on a cover as a thumb dent

 

Me too. Thanks for translating!

[NewWorldOrder]

While I understand your point about judging a book by a medium-sized scan, do you really not think that there are 9.6s sitting in 9.8 holders, or vice versa?

I know of a certain collector who has done really well on straight resubs at the 9.6/9.8 level. I also currently own an ASM 122 9.6 with NO visible flaws, let alone the 3 we can see on this 9.8.

 

 

Sure - CGC ain't perfect, and mis-grading happens. But 2 of the 3 flaws you're talking about is a production defect and a pen-mark, neither of which influence the grade, so we're once again back to that solitary spine-thingamagingy.

 

I have a tuff time to actually rationalize when someone or a group of people say Productions defects should not be a down gradable aspect of CGC grading.

 

I am not saying you, but just a general statement.

 

A defect is a defect no matter where it happens.

 

What do you mean? Everyone knows that they don't downgrade for overspray or miscuts. Back in the day those were serious defects. So what are you saying, that CGC needs to change to recognize these production defects? If so, you are more likely to fart twelve quatrains of Shakespeare than for that to happen.

 

Yes, those should all be defects and down graded accordingly.

 

Will CGC change their stance, no way.

 

Just my opinion.

[NewWorldOrder]

maybe he's talking about an ideal world.

 

 

it would be nice if a defect was a defect was a defect, rather than something that may or may not be ignored if it occurred in production rather than in the process of procuring or reading

 

(thumbs u

[COI]

I don't guess it doesn't really matters what anyone other then CGC and the buyer thinks. Most of us want our 9.8 to look better then every 9.6 out there, but as is evident, there are also plenty of people that don't worry about that as much.

 

It just makes for an interesting discussion, when you consider the price disparity between the two grades. Something that's worth 16.5K one day, may have been worth only 2K on another. This hobby is really bate crazy, when you think about it that way.

 

I'm also fascinated by one collector's unrelenting desire to have the best, or what he perceives to be the best, regardless of what it costs. It's not as if he's driven by competition, as I have to think that the second best Marvel collection out there is still a distant second.

[Sal]

I've always thought of thumb dents/ finger dents to be the very light crescent shaped dents in the covers that come from to much pressure or weight being placed on the free side of a cover when held in hand. Some books may have one, some books are littered with them.

 

next time you should just wait to see if i've already addressed the subject. would save you some writing time.

 

 

 

 

[Sal]

I don't guess it doesn't really matters what anyone other then CGC and the buyer thinks. Most of us want our 9.8 to look better then every 9.6 out there, but as is evident, there are also plenty of people that don't worry about that as much.

 

It just makes for an interesting discussion, when you consider the price disparity between the two grades. Something that's worth 16.5K one day, may have been worth only 2K on another. This hobby is really bate crazy, when you think about it that way.

 

I'm also fascinated by one collector's unrelenting desire to have the best, or what he perceives to be the best, regardless of what it costs.

 

you could set a boxcar full of psych post-doctoral students loose on this one, and they'd be busy for a decade

[MCMiles]

While I understand your point about judging a book by a medium-sized scan, do you really not think that there are 9.6s sitting in 9.8 holders, or vice versa?

I know of a certain collector who has done really well on straight resubs at the 9.6/9.8 level. I also currently own an ASM 122 9.6 with NO visible flaws, let alone the 3 we can see on this 9.8.

 

 

Sure - CGC ain't perfect, and mis-grading happens. But 2 of the 3 flaws you're talking about is a production defect and a pen-mark, neither of which influence the grade, so we're once again back to that solitary spine-thingamagingy.

 

I have a tuff time to actually rationalize when someone or a group of people say Productions defects should not be a down gradable aspect of CGC grading.

 

I am not saying you, but just a general statement.

 

A defect is a defect no matter where it happens.

 

What do you mean? Everyone knows that they don't downgrade for overspray or miscuts. Back in the day those were serious defects. So what are you saying, that CGC needs to change to recognize these production defects? If so, you are more likely to fart twelve quatrains of Shakespeare than for that to happen.

 

It's probably too late to make a drastic change like that either way.

Grading the infinite amount of defects is a large enough chore as it is. It would be even more difficult for CGC to be consistent if they factored in quality of production as well. At least with most production defects, they are visible and the buyer can determine for themselves what the value of one 9.8 over another with lesser QP is. It's clearly that way now. Other then registry points, QP and PQ are probably taken in to consideration most of the time so I don't see a real problem with the system. I mean, people have to be able to think for themselves somewhat.

[COI]

While I understand your point about judging a book by a medium-sized scan, do you really not think that there are 9.6s sitting in 9.8 holders, or vice versa?

I know of a certain collector who has done really well on straight resubs at the 9.6/9.8 level. I also currently own an ASM 122 9.6 with NO visible flaws, let alone the 3 we can see on this 9.8.

 

 

Your ASM 122 probably has a thumb dent. They are invisible in the case due to the slight smushing (sorry for the technical term) effect of the slab. It needs potentialisation. The last two "perfect" 9.6s I cracked both had thumb dents. I was actually worried about them keeping the 9.6, but they both did.

 

Leave me to my delusions, Sean. It's so very, very pretty, and I need something to believe in.

 

When you say "thumb dent", do you mean along the top of the book?

 

Usually right by the top staple. Like where your thumb would be if you were holding the book open in your one hand and turning the pages with another. I don't know if it even is what other people call a thumb dent, but I do b/c I am left handed and it is exactly the type of mark that my left thumb makes if I am not careful when reading comics.

 

It was my understanding that a thumb dent refers to a dent along the top of a book, occuring when you pull a book out of a mylar that may be too tight.

 

historically, that's where most occur, although i find myself referring to any semicircular or arcing NCB indentation on a cover as a thumb dent

 

So a thumb dent is any dent made by a thumb, or in a thumb-like shape, irrespective of its location. Seems simple enough.

[mschmidt]

I don't think people are saying that CGC or OS does not allow a Color breaking spine tick per book to achieve 9.8 status. I think people are saying they shouldn’t.

 

No, you're saying they shouldn't.

 

But seeing that you're not a grading authority (unlike CGC and OS, I might add), which defects you think should and shouldn't be allowed in a grade is irrelevant, and has zero bearing on the actual grade of the book.

[MCMiles]

I've always thought of thumb dents/ finger dents to be the very light crescent shaped dents in the covers that come from to much pressure or weight being placed on the free side of a cover when held in hand. Some books may have one, some books are littered with them.

 

next time you should just wait to see if i've already addressed the subject. would save you some writing time.

 

 

 

 

 

I only read COI's posts.

[Sal]

 

historically, that's where most occur, although i find myself referring to any semicircular or arcing NCB indentation on a cover as a thumb dent

 

So a thumb dent is any dent made by a thumb, or in a thumb-like shape, irrespective of its location. Seems simple enough.

 

that's just my shorthand.

 

ymmv

[DrWatson]

I've always thought of thumb dents/ finger dents to be the very light crescent shaped dents in the covers that come from to much pressure or weight being placed on the free side of a cover when held in hand. Some books may have one, some books are littered with them.

 

next time you should just wait to see if i've already addressed the subject. would save you some writing time.

 

 

 

 

 

I only read COI's posts.

It's very hard to ignore Sal's posts when you keep quoting him.

[seanfingh]

I've always thought of thumb dents/ finger dents to be the very light crescent shaped dents in the covers that come from to much pressure or weight being placed on the free side of a cover when held in hand. Some books may have one, some books are littered with them.

 

next time you should just wait to see if i've already addressed the subject. would save you some writing time.

 

 

 

 

 

I only read COI's posts.

It's very hard to ignore Sal's posts when you keep quoting him.

 

It's also useless for me to have The_Question? on ignore when everyone quotes him all the time.

[DrWatson]

I don't think people are saying that CGC or OS does not allow a Color breaking spine tick per book to achieve 9.8 status. I think people are saying they shouldn’t.

 

No, you're saying they shouldn't.

 

But seeing that you're not a grading authority (unlike CGC and OS, I might add), which defects you think should and shouldn't be allowed in a grade is irrelevant, and has zero bearing on the actual grade of the book.

I don't like seeing color breaking spine ticks on 9.8 books, but I have seen several that have them. That is why I no longer buy CGC books sight unseen. This also why when I find a 9.6 CGC book that doesn't have one, I buy it.