• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Amazing Fantasy #15 in 7.5 up fer grabs

Started by ivegotneatstuff,

101 posts in this topic

FatComicMafia

FatComicMafia

Posted
Posted
I think they might be afraid it might grade lower...look at those chips on the right side

 

right, in regards to why they are not getting a new CGC case.

 

Who would want to buy a 45+K book with several large cracks and scratches on the case ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Freddie-migration

Freddie-migration

Posted
Posted
I think they might be afraid it might grade lower...look at those chips on the right side

 

right, in regards to why they are not getting a new CGC case.

 

Who would want to buy a 45+K book with several large cracks and scratches on the case ?

 

With a book of that nature, it would'nt bother me, as long as the book was undamaged. After all, I have read that the old labels are more likely to be graded tighter or meaner. Would that mean that there is more chance this book would be worth an extra half grade?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe_collector

joe_collector

Posted
Posted
[Would that mean that there is more chance this book would be worth an extra half grade?

 

I'd say it's the opposite, as CGC graded some books lower than now and some higher. Those chips, production or not, are certainly going to hammer the comic down and CGC has been getting tougher on significant defects like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Freddie-migration

Freddie-migration

Posted
Posted
[Would that mean that there is more chance this book would be worth an extra half grade?

 

I'd say it's the opposite, as CGC graded some books lower than now and some higher. Those chips, production or not, are certainly going to hammer the comic down and CGC has been getting tougher on significant defects like this.

 

Thanks for clarifying, but I'm a bit confused.

I thought the grading standards were set in stone by Overstreet? If that is so, should'nt they have been the same in 2000 as they are now, or have I missed something in my reading material, and they have been changed over the years ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe_collector

joe_collector

Posted
Posted
I thought the grading standards were set in stone by Overstreet? If that is so, should'nt they have been the same in 2000 as they are now, or have I missed something in my reading material, and they have been changed over the years ???

 

CGC didn't even fully adopt OS standards until late in 2003, and even so, there are marked differences between CGC and OS even now. Plus, CGC's grading criteria (admittedly) continues to evolve, with some very dramatic shifts here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Freddie-migration

Freddie-migration

Posted
Posted
I thought the grading standards were set in stone by Overstreet? If that is so, should'nt they have been the same in 2000 as they are now, or have I missed something in my reading material, and they have been changed over the years ???

 

CGC didn't even fully adopt OS standards until late in 2003, and even so, there are marked differences between CGC and OS even now. Plus, CGC's grading criteria (admittedly) continues to evolve, with some very dramatic shifts here and there.

 

Great. Again many thanks for clarifying, just when I thought I was getting a handle on understanding grading lol

So grading is as clear as mud then? doh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing