"Buy the book, not the label": A visual demonstration...

[COI]

Why not resubmit then? I'd resubmit my 9.6 #122 before I ever sold it as it too looks more 9.8 than 9.6.

 

The 124 has a very minor problem on the BC that I believe can be pressed out.

 

Similarly, the 122 may have some NCB defect that may be holding it back.

 

I'm not resubbing for the same reason you haven't resubbed your 122 yet. If I'm not selling, why bother?

 

These posts are incomplete if you don't call CGC for grader's notes. Usually when a book looks better than the grade, there's a defect holding it back that's difficult or impossible to see through the case.

 

True, but I appreciate books that looks much better than their grade, even if they aren't technically nicer, like your FF 13.

 

 

[slym2none]

I'll get the ball rolling. I've seen 9.8s for both these issues that don't present nearly as well:

 

Why not resubmit then? I'd resubmit my 9.6 #122 before I ever sold it as it too looks more 9.8 than 9.6.

 

These posts are incomplete if you don't call CGC for grader's notes. Usually when a book looks better than the grade, there's a defect holding it back that's difficult or impossible to see through the case. The best example I have is a 9.2 that looks like a 9.8. You can actually see what's holding it back in this scan, but it's so friggin subtle, most people won't catch it (hint -- it's not a tear, crease, bend, or fold of any kind). Drummy resubmitted it before I owned it without catching the defect and got back the exact same grade and had to call for grader's notes to find out what the heck happened.

 

 

Is that a stain on the very top edge, above the word "comic" in "Worlds greatest comic magazine!" ?

 

 

 

-slym

[VintageComics]

Scans are small, but from what I can see, those look SHARP.

 

In terms of pure bang for your buck, nothing beats a nice 9.0/9.2.

 

Here's a 9.0 I used to own that looked like a solid 9.6/9.8 from the front. Rich colors, perfectly sharp corners, and not a single stress on the spine. I was recently told that it's now residing in a collection, unslabbed.

 

 

I bought that. It's now owned by an ASM collector in Toronto who's thrilled to own it. The book is raw.

 

(thumbs u

 

That book was 9.6/9.8 beautiful.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

I appreciate books that looks much better than their grade, even if they aren't technically nicer, like your FF 13.

 

Absolutely, but half the story on these is why they're lower than they look. Such as your Spidey 78 -- what held it back? I agree, the thing looks flawless from the front.

[VintageComics]

 

These posts are incomplete if you don't call CGC for grader's notes. Usually when a book looks better than the grade, there's a defect holding it back that's difficult or impossible to see through the case. The best example I have is a 9.2 that looks like a 9.8. You can actually see what's holding it back in this scan, but it's so friggin subtle, most people won't catch it (hint -- it's not a tear, crease, bend, or fold of any kind). Drummy resubmitted it before I owned it without catching the defect and got back the exact same grade and had to call for grader's notes to find out what the heck happened.

 

 

Is that a stain on the very top edge, above the word "comic" in "Worlds greatest comic magazine!" ?

 

 

 

-slym

 

That's what I thought too...stain. Man that is an impossible book in that grade. I had a raw copy that graded 9.0 and when I called for notes the grader was impressed as he told me he never sees that book in grade.

 

R.

 

[VintageComics]

And then there's always this CGC 6.5;

 

 

Harry, I want it.

 

 

Makes this gem that I was proud of look low grade by comparison.

 

[fantastic_four]

Is that a stain on the very top edge, above the word "comic" in "Worlds greatest comic magazine!" ?

 

Yep, it's a water stain. Steve Lauterbach later told drummy and I that he submitted this book, and if I remember correctly, some water dripped off his car onto the side of a stack of books he was carrying back from the home of the original owner. BAM, top-census FF #13 de-fanged into the best-looking 9.2 I've ever seen.

[COI]

I appreciate books that looks much better than their grade, even if they aren't technically nicer, like your FF 13.

 

Absolutely, but half the story on these is why they're lower than they look. Such as your Spidey 78 -- what held it back? I agree, the thing looks flawless from the front.

 

It had an indentation on the edge of the back cover, most likely from a string or an elastic band that was holding it in a bundle with other copies. It was pretty deep. Also, there was quite a bit of ink transfer on the back, which tells me that it was stacked with other copies for quite a while. Other than that, it was flawless.

[VintageComics]

These are some of my books that look nicer than the assigned grade.

 

8.0 with back cover stain

 

 

 

 

8.5 with back cover wear

 

 

 

8.0 with tiny Marvel pre chip out.

 

 

 

9.0 with back cover wear

 

[october]

These are some of my nicer looking deslabbed copies for their respective grades (7.5, 6.5, 4.5, 5.5).

 

 

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Makes this gem that I was proud of look low grade by comparison.

 

 

 

What's the defect? Looks like a 9.4 in the scan!

[fantastic_four]

It had an indentation on the edge of the back cover, most likely from a string or an elastic band that was holding it in a bundle with other copies. It was pretty deep. Also, there was quite a bit of ink transfer on the back, which tells me that it was stacked with other copies for quite a while. Other than that, it was flawless.

 

In retrospect, do you now think most of that damage was reversible via pressing?

[DrWatson]

CGC has always blasted stains and cover scratches. A light cover scratch is what takes that Nortland X-Men #55 down from a 9.4, in my opinion.

[COI]

It had an indentation on the edge of the back cover, most likely from a string or an elastic band that was holding it in a bundle with other copies. It was pretty deep. Also, there was quite a bit of ink transfer on the back, which tells me that it was stacked with other copies for quite a while. Other than that, it was flawless.

 

In retrospect, do you now think most of that damage was reversible via pressing?

 

There were attempts to press that book after I sold it, and they were unsuccessful. I guess it was a little too deep.

 

I regret selling it, only because I'll probably never find a copy that presents as nicely for the price I paid.

[namisgr]

Killer 9.2:

 

 

[slym2none]

Is that a stain on the very top edge, above the word "comic" in "Worlds greatest comic magazine!" ?

 

Yep, it's a water stain. Steve Lauterbach later told drummy and I that he submitted this book, and if I remember correctly, some water dripped off his car onto the side of a stack of books he was carrying back from the home of the original owner. BAM, top-census FF #13 de-fanged into the best-looking 9.2 I've ever seen.

 

 

I will give the new flat-panel LCD monitors this - if I hadn't stood up and looked at my monitor from an angle, the defect would not have "stood out" as much as just looking at it head-on.

 

 

 

-slym

[COI]

Here's a killer ASM 41 9.0 that I sold to Wally. I think he can attest to this copy's awesomeness. Sold it because I had a 9.2, but I think this copy looked nicer.

 

 

 

[supapimp]

 

nice deep color strike.

[supapimp]

 

BC stain killed grade, but the FC looks sweet.

[VintageComics]

Makes this gem that I was proud of look low grade by comparison.

 

 

 

What's the defect? Looks like a 9.4 in the scan!

 

There is a tiny tear at the bottom left edge, One spine stress, some surface indentations from a kid tracing Thor and a back cover moisture ripple. Looks about 8.0/8.5 in hand.

 

I do so love it.

 

R.