Sale of the Year - New Mutants #98 CGC 9.9 for $12,250 5 5

[VintageComics]

 

 

I think if the NM #98 was cracked out and resubbed it has a really good chance at coming back a 9.8 instread of a 9.9 just becuse from 9.8 to 9.9 is definitely subjective.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

That is the essence of what I have said (hopefully not in vain) this entire thread....

 

 

I'll disagree with John. He's saying that 9.0-9.8 is pretty cut and dry and then all of a sudden 9.8-9.9 isn't. I'd argue and say that 9.8-9.9 is the easiest to grade (besides 10.0-9.9) because you are dealing with the least amount of variables possible.

 

To Mr. Corbett, is say: that was definitely an interesting way of explaining the $12K purchase...and it makes sense form the perspective that some people simply want the book and not have to put in the effort of finding one so they find a way of assigning a value to what they want (without the work involved).

 

RMA. Dude, state what your point is clearly and succinctly.

 

Use once sentence and state it, cause honestly I don't even fully understand it...and I've been in this thread from the first page.

[NewWorldOrder]

 

 

I think if the NM #98 was cracked out and resubbed it has a really good chance at coming back a 9.8 instread of a 9.9 just becuse from 9.8 to 9.9 is definitely subjective.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

That is the essence of what I have said (hopefully not in vain) this entire thread....

 

 

I'll disagree with John. He's saying that 9.0-9.8 is pretty cut and dry and then all of a sudden 9.8-9.9 isn't. I'd argue and say that 9.8-9.9 is the easiest to grade (besides 10.0-9.9) because you are dealing with the least amount of variables possible.

 

 

 

I said 8.5 to 9.8 is cut and dry.

 

I could give you ten books that got 9.9's and I bet you would call most of them 9.8's after I cracked them out for you to re-grade.

 

Especially if Vodka was involved.

 

...but you know me I would give most books that CGC gives a 9.8 a 9.6 grade.

 

Edited November 26, 2009 by spiderman-on-tilt

[jimjum12]

I was talking to Steve Borock at a show about the huge gap from 8.0 to 9.0 with only one grade to separate....he said that an 8.7 grade or so should have been there...with all the money at stake at that level in GA and some SA. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

P.S. I think when you get to the 9.8 level there should be defects that are simply not allowed....like spine stress. To me if it has spine stress it ain't a 9.8

[VintageComics]

I was just going by what you said here:

 

 

Honestly I like to think that the .5 difference in grade range from .05 to 8.0 is very subjective, but from 8.5 to 9.8 is pretty cut and dry.

 

 

I think if the NM #98 was cracked out and resubbed it has a really good chance at coming back a 9.8 instread of a 9.9 just becuse from 9.8 to 9.9 is definitely subjective.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

I thought that since there are less defect to worry about 9.8 and up that these grades would be much more easy to "nail" because there are less variables to worry about.

 

Less variables = easier to hit the nail on the head.

 

I could give you ten books that got 9.9's and I bet you would call most of them 9.8's after I cracked them out for you to re-grade.

 

Maybe and maybe not. Would CGC regrade them as 9.9 books.

 

That is the real question.

[RockMyAmadeus]

There are WEAK 9.8s. 9.70?

 

There are AVERAGE 9.8s.

 

There are STRONG 9.8s. 9.85?

 

 

 

 

Smarty pants.

 

But yes, you could call weak 9.8s "9.7"

 

And eventually....they will.

 

 

Not weak books just weak GRADERS.

 

Once again you will never see 9.7 or 9.5, unless your that stupid company called Wizard.

 

 

When the 9.7s and 9.5s come out...ignore Wiztard, that has nothing to do with this....will you come back and say "ok, RMA was right"....?

 

 

(And whether it's a weak book, or weak graders, the end result is still the same.)

 

It doesn;t make sense to break down the grading scale anymore.

 

It's not going to happen.

 

The book is the same the end result is determined by the grader.

 

Sure, it doesn't make sense to you. It doesn't make sense to a lot of people.

 

But that doesn't mean it doesn't make sense to the market...especially with the vast differences paid between the uber grades.

 

MS61, MS62, MS64...those grades didn't make sense to a lot of people, either.

 

Look, CGC didn't really HAVE to have a 9.9, did they? I mean, 9.8 and 10 would have worked fine, right....?

 

So why do they have a 9.9?

 

And wouldn't a 9.7 alleviate some of the problems with cracking and resubbing, hoping for 9.8s?

[Foolkiller]

There are WEAK 9.8s. 9.70?

 

There are AVERAGE 9.8s.

 

There are STRONG 9.8s. 9.85?

 

 

 

 

Smarty pants.

 

But yes, you could call weak 9.8s "9.7"

 

And eventually....they will.

 

 

Not weak books just weak GRADERS.

 

Once again you will never see 9.7 or 9.5, unless your that stupid company called Wizard.

 

 

When the 9.7s and 9.5s come out...ignore Wiztard, that has nothing to do with this....will you come back and say "ok, RMA was right"....?

 

 

(And whether it's a weak book, or weak graders, the end result is still the same.)

 

It doesn;t make sense to break down the grading scale anymore.

 

It's not going to happen.

 

The book is the same the end result is determined by the grader.

 

Sure, it doesn't make sense to you. It doesn't make sense to a lot of people.

 

But that doesn't mean it doesn't make sense to the market...especially with the vast differences paid between the uber grades.

 

MS61, MS62, MS64...those grades didn't make sense to a lot of people, either.

 

Look, CGC didn't really HAVE to have a 9.9, did they? I mean, 9.8 and 10 would have worked fine, right....?

 

So why do they have a 9.9?

 

And wouldn't a 9.7 alleviate some of the problems with cracking and resubbing, hoping for 9.8s?

 

The one difference is that 9.8 and below did correlate to the traditional OS grading designations. 9.9 is the only creation off the grading scale.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

RMA. Dude, state what your point is clearly and succinctly.

 

Use once sentence and state it, cause honestly I don't even fully understand it...and I've been in this thread from the first page.

 

Oh please.

 

I've already said it, over and over again, but I'll say it yet again:

 

Grading is subjective when you're dealing with half and quarter grades.

 

What could be a 9.8 on one day could easily be 9.9 on another day, and vice versa.

 

What could be a 9.6 on one day could easily be a 9.4 on another day, and vice versa.

 

Conclusion: paying huge premiums for a difference in label designation, when the difference in actual quality is negligible, and in some cases, non-existent, is not wise.

 

So long as the buyer knows this and accepts this, more power to them..but if they're being told "oh, yeah, there's totally a difference between a 9.8 and a 9.9...see, the label says so right here!", then we have a problem.

 

[VintageComics]

Dude, you are making it sound like a dartboard guess.

 

It isn't. There is always going to be some fuzziness on the edges...meaning a small percentage of books in a given census number might be off.

 

Nobody expects perfection.

 

The majority will return in the same grade no matter how many times you resub.

 

R.

 

[Foolkiller]

What could be a 9.8 on one day could easily be 9.9 on another day, and vice versa.

 

What could be a 9.6 on one day could easily be a 9.4 on another day, and vice versa.

 

Untrue. But the overall point that there is subjectivity in the grading is true. It's not wholly arbitrary, and I agree with Roy that most 9.6s will grade the same, just as most 9.8s will. But there are some that won't make it because they were on the borderline to begin with.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

 

I think if the NM #98 was cracked out and resubbed it has a really good chance at coming back a 9.8 instread of a 9.9 just becuse from 9.8 to 9.9 is definitely subjective.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

That is the essence of what I have said (hopefully not in vain) this entire thread....

 

 

I'll disagree with John. He's saying that 9.0-9.8 is pretty cut and dry and then all of a sudden 9.8-9.9 isn't. I'd argue and say that 9.8-9.9 is the easiest to grade (besides 10.0-9.9) because you are dealing with the least amount of variables possible.

 

 

 

I said 8.5 to 9.8 is cut and dry.

 

I could give you ten books that got 9.9's and I bet you would call most of them 9.8's after I cracked them out for you to re-grade.

 

Especially if Vodka was involved.

 

...but you know me I would give most books that CGC gives a 9.8 a 9.6 grade.

 

I'd be willing to test that theory at a panel at SD next year.

 

Same book, three different grades...9.8. 9.9. 10.

 

Then, with a couple of independent, trustworthy witnesses, de-slab all the books, and have everyone pick which ones they thought graded what at CGC....

 

Then, after that's done, reveal what was what.

 

Then, after that's done....send the books back, under different accounts (so you can keep track of which book was which), and see if they all come back the same original grades.

 

It would probably work best with onsite slabbing, over a weekend.

[Foolkiller]

 

 

I think if the NM #98 was cracked out and resubbed it has a really good chance at coming back a 9.8 instread of a 9.9 just becuse from 9.8 to 9.9 is definitely subjective.

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

That is the essence of what I have said (hopefully not in vain) this entire thread....

 

 

I'll disagree with John. He's saying that 9.0-9.8 is pretty cut and dry and then all of a sudden 9.8-9.9 isn't. I'd argue and say that 9.8-9.9 is the easiest to grade (besides 10.0-9.9) because you are dealing with the least amount of variables possible.

 

 

 

I said 8.5 to 9.8 is cut and dry.

 

I could give you ten books that got 9.9's and I bet you would call most of them 9.8's after I cracked them out for you to re-grade.

 

Especially if Vodka was involved.

 

...but you know me I would give most books that CGC gives a 9.8 a 9.6 grade.

 

I'd be willing to test that theory at a panel at SD next year.

 

Same book, three different grades...9.8. 9.9. 10.

 

Then, with a couple of independent, trustworthy witnesses, de-slab all the books, and have everyone pick which ones they thought graded what at CGC....

 

Then, after that's done, reveal what was what.

 

Then, after that's done....send the books back, under different accounts (so you can keep track of which book was which), and see if they all come back the same original grades.

 

It would probably work best with onsite slabbing, over a weekend.

 

Deslabbing a 10 is dicey. Any handling damage might affect the grade. But I think with 9.6 and 9.8, that'd be interesting. I think if you chose 9.4, 9.6, 9.8 -- you'd find that the books would likely come back in those grades.

[Nexus]

And, yes, if a comic is cheap enough, you can keep re-submitting your book in the hopes that someday a grader will award it the higher grade. Given the odds on New Mutants #98, there are approximately 400 -- okay, 396, just so we're exact and don't cause Senor Amadeus to suffer a stroke -- 9.8's available for re-submission. Assuming the 9.9 is no better than the 9.8s, and I have yet to capitulate to that fact, then you have a 1 in 400 shot at getting a 9.9. 400 submissions x $30 CGC submission fee = $12,000. If you add the price of the book ($250), you now have $12,250. Where have I heard this number before? God, ain't the vagaries of the marketplace a funny thing?

 

Not even sure where to start...but if this is how it works, then in another 400 9.8-level submissions (new or otherwise), there will be another 9.9. Actually, wasn't this 9.9 submitted a few years ago? How many 9.8s were in the census back then? If the number of 9.9s is a function of submissions, then the ratio is likely a good bit lower than 1/400.

 

My own guess is that, at best, 9.9s are completely random and at worst, doled out intermittently to keep things interesting for label-chasers. Either way, banking on CGC's infallibility at this level is a bad gamble to me. I know, I know...I'm not an economics professor, it's all relative, your mileage may vary, blah, blah, blah...

 

 

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Dude, you are making it sound like a dartboard guess.

 

It isn't. There is always going to be some fuzziness on the edges...meaning a small percentage of books in a given census number might be off.

 

Nobody expects perfection.

 

The majority will return in the same grade no matter how many times you resub.

 

R.

 

 

No, not at all. It is not a "dartboard guess."

 

And neither is it an exact science.

 

You prove my point. So "the majority" comes back the same grade...and I don't dispute this at all...but if even ONE book doesn't come back the same grade...what is the point of paying the huge premium for the one that has a higher label number...?

 

What are you paying for? A book that is in better condition than all the 9.8s? Or just a label that says 9.9 (or 9.8, or 9.6, or insert whatever "one of one", or two of two, or whatever book there is)....?

[VintageComics]

My own guess is that, at best, 9.9s are completely random and at worst, doled out intermittently to keep things interesting for label-chasers. Either way, banking on CGC's infallibility at this level is a bad gamble to me. I know, I know...I'm not an economics professor, it's all relative, your mileage may vary, blah, blah, blah...

 

I think we are at the point of the discussion (actually have been for a while now) where really, what we are discussing is are CGC able to tell the difference between 9.8 and 9.9. Not every time, but the majority of the time.

 

That is what this entire thread boils down to.

 

I say yes.

 

I say that grades are not just dart board guesses (or gifts that are thrown out like raw meat to feed the hungry dogs) and that the majority of books, if they were to be cracked and resubbed, would come back in the same grades.

 

 

[Foolkiller]

Dude, you are making it sound like a dartboard guess.

 

It isn't. There is always going to be some fuzziness on the edges...meaning a small percentage of books in a given census number might be off.

 

Nobody expects perfection.

 

The majority will return in the same grade no matter how many times you resub.

 

R.

 

 

No, not at all. It is not a "dartboard guess."

 

And neither is it an exact science.

 

You prove my point. So "the majority" comes back the same grade...and I don't dispute this at all...but if even ONE book doesn't come back the same grade...what is the point of paying the huge premium for the one that has a higher label number...?

 

What are you paying for? A book that is in better condition than all the 9.8s? Or just a label that says 9.9 (or 9.8, or 9.6, or insert whatever "one of one", or two of two, or whatever book there is)....?

 

Paying for a label.

 

No doubt about it -- in many cases.

 

Roy -- I've long held that above 9.6, the grades are arbitrary. You can't tell me that 9.8s, 9.9s and 10s have discernible, consistent differences.

[RockMyAmadeus]

What could be a 9.8 on one day could easily be 9.9 on another day, and vice versa.

 

What could be a 9.6 on one day could easily be a 9.4 on another day, and vice versa.

 

Untrue. But the overall point that there is subjectivity in the grading is true. It's not wholly arbitrary, and I agree with Roy that most 9.6s will grade the same, just as most 9.8s will. But there are some that won't make it because they were on the borderline to begin with.

 

I already discussed this when I talked about weak, average, and strong grades.

 

I didn't say every 9.6 could be a 9.4. But a weak 9.6 could easily be a strong 9.4 on another day.

 

Most 9.6s WILL grade the same...but if even one doesn't (and we know that it's not just one, but hundreds), then the idea of paying a huge premium for one grade over another begins to not make much sense.

 

 

[Foolkiller]

What could be a 9.8 on one day could easily be 9.9 on another day, and vice versa.

 

What could be a 9.6 on one day could easily be a 9.4 on another day, and vice versa.

 

Untrue. But the overall point that there is subjectivity in the grading is true. It's not wholly arbitrary, and I agree with Roy that most 9.6s will grade the same, just as most 9.8s will. But there are some that won't make it because they were on the borderline to begin with.

 

I already discussed this when I talked about weak, average, and strong grades.

 

I didn't say every 9.6 could be a 9.4. But a weak 9.6 could easily be a strong 9.4 on another day.

 

Most 9.6s WILL grade the same...but if even one doesn't (and we know that it's not just one, but hundreds), then the idea of paying a huge premium for one grade over another begins to not make much sense.

 

 

Bottom line is that I agree with your fundamental thesis -- which is that 9.8/9.9/10 is extremely arbitrary. There's no way they can be graded by anyone on the planet with consistency.

[RockMyAmadeus]

My own guess is that, at best, 9.9s are completely random and at worst, doled out intermittently to keep things interesting for label-chasers. Either way, banking on CGC's infallibility at this level is a bad gamble to me. I know, I know...I'm not an economics professor, it's all relative, your mileage may vary, blah, blah, blah...

 

I think we are at the point of the discussion (actually have been for a while now) where really, what we are discussing is are CGC able to tell the difference between 9.8 and 9.9. Not every time, but the majority of the time.

 

That is what this entire thread boils down to.

 

I say yes.

 

I say that grades are not just dart board guesses (or gifts that are thrown out like raw meat to feed the hungry dogs) and that the majority of books, if they were to be cracked and resubbed, would come back in the same grades.

 

 

I agree with you 100%....

 

But are you with me when I say that the rationale for paying a huge premium one grade over another begins to crumble if even ONE book comes back a different grade on reslabbing...?

 

That whoever paid $97,000 for the Spidey #5 in 9.8 could have owned the exact same book, in the exact same condition, for about $60,000 less, had they simply bought it when it was a 9.6....?

 

That's the crux, right there.

[Nexus]

Okay... Had to respond to this. I completely respected your post until I clicked on your "homepage" icon and got sent to a website touting "Comic Art," the most subjective and over-priced hobby in the world of comics. And, to top it all off, the "GEM" of the website is the original artwork of nothing other than frickin' G.I. Joe #21! Not just one page, or even two pages... BUT EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF ART FOR THAT ISSUE! I seriously can't see the computer screen as I'm laughing so hard. Hard to type.

 

... G.I. Joe issue #21, even if a 9.9 pops up, is still worth crapola, and I will never ever own a copy. Why? It has absolutley ZERO intrinsic value for me (and G.I. Joe really really does suck donkey ballz).

 

Going back to this...pretty sure Gene was just taking shots at the price paid, not NM #98 the comic. Most of us know that this is ALL goofy . Feel free to give Gene mess for what he paid for all that art (btw, not as much as that comic iirc)...but for a Rob Liefeld/Deadpool enthusiast to make fun of G.I. Joe...not exactly self-aware.

 

The comic art hobby has its share of mind-blowingly insane prices achieved for questionable art. But the G.I. JOE #21 is not seen like that...there's no "hey, if he can afford it, great". There are way fewer art collectors than comic collectors, but if you polled them all, I'll bet the G.I. JOE #21 art is seen as the less crazy buy.

 

 

 

 

[Nexus]

 

I'd be willing to test that theory at a panel at SD next year.

 

Same book, three different grades...9.8. 9.9. 10.

 

Then, with a couple of independent, trustworthy witnesses, de-slab all the books, and have everyone pick which ones they thought graded what at CGC....

 

Then, after that's done, reveal what was what.

 

Then, after that's done....send the books back, under different accounts (so you can keep track of which book was which), and see if they all come back the same original grades.

 

It would probably work best with onsite slabbing, over a weekend.

 

If I have a 9.8, I'm so participating in this. Who wants to bet they all come back 9.9/10 just to play it safe...and to further incentivize crack/resub?

 

If any of them come back lower, they always have the excuse that the book was handled poorly. But if any come back higher? They'd have a lot of splainin' to do...