I just freed my Silver Surfer #4 from it's slab!!!

[chromium]

Yes, it's the first I have freed-very liberating. I will just hunt down a nicer copy either already slabbed or slab worthy. No, if you take your time it's fairly easy.

 

It's a lot of fun isn't it Liberating your first slab....

 

The easy-to break seals on the outer well....the careful sliding out of the inner well....the surprise the label just slides out....the head-scratching on how to cut open the inner-well.

The trembling when cutting the plastic of said inner-well

The careful sliding out of the comic...the warm welcome of the distinct comic-smell

 

ahhhh heaven...

 

team liberated over 50 comics and counting....

[valiantman]

OK-FN+/6.5 is not accurate, but it's no less than FN-/5.5, and it was free to grade. So, I feel they were of a full (1) or grade..so crack it open and return it to the raw run!!!!

Ok, that makes more sense... here's the big question...

 

IF you were to ever sell this book "raw"... would you divulge that it had once

been slabbed by CGC as 4.5?

[currincomics]

No, I'd say it's 5.5 to 6.0 range if I were to sell it, but I want my raw run 1-18 to stay whole for awhile. I paid $105 for it, so I'd at least try to make my money back. However, my initial plan was to sell the entire run raw 1-18..eventually, so I'm back to that game plan. Plus, CGC, is not the end-all-know-all to me.

[drbanner]

....the careful sliding out of the inner well....the surprise the label just slides out....

 

Forgot 'bout that! Hmmm...the CGG label is sealed into the inner well, probably b/c they used to only put the books in the inner well without the hard, outer shell.

[currincomics]

No, I would not, as I said I did not agree, and they are a service, not the end all-know all of comic book grading-they like all of us are subjective.

[chromium]

Damn CGG bum-buddy

[valiantman]

No, I would not, as I said I did not agree, and they are a service, not the end all-know all of comic book grading-they like all of us are subjective.

It's obviously not the same thing, but what if a "restored book" was freed from the holder

and sold in the FN 5.5 to 6.0 range?

What if your book was CGC 3.0 and you sold it raw as FN 5.5 to 6.0 range?

What if your book was CGC 4.5 and you sold it raw as FN 5.5 to 6.0 range?

 

(See my point?)

[garthgantu]

Are you insinuating that currincomics would dare to tell a prospective buyer that a raw book is 6.5 when he knows that CGC have graded the book at 4.5 ?

 

That's almost the same as selling a (known) PLOD as unrestored...

 

We've had this discussion before, and there's no real consensus on what's 'acceptable' in terms of disclosure, at least that's the way I recall the thread going.

 

Personally, I don't think you're obligated to cite CGC's grade if the book is no longer slabbed. If the book in question had come back from CGC as PLOD, I think you'd be obligated to note the restoration. But CGC's grade is simply one source's opinion of the book's condition - they're not the "comic book grading police," for cryin' out loud. Now, if you thought the book was VF+ and CGC graded the book FN-, you might want to at least factor in their grading and find a happy medium, or call for the graders' notes to see if you'd overlooked something that CGC caught, like a clipped coupon or missing staple or whatever...

[currincomics]

Once again, that was CGC opinion of the grade of the comic. Grading is subjective, just because CGC says it's whatever does not make it the holy grail-they are a service, and some times a service can do a bad job.

[valiantman]

Personally, I don't think you're obligated to cite CGC's grade if the book is no longer slabbed. If the book in question had come back from CGC as PLOD, I think you'd be obligated to note the restoration. But CGC's grade is simply one source's opinion of the book's condition - they're not the "comic book grading police," for cryin' out loud. Now, if you thought the book was VF+ and CGC graded the book FN-, you might want to at least factor in their grading and find a happy medium, or call for the graders' notes to see if you'd overlooked something that CGC caught, like a clipped coupon or missing staple or whatever...

I agree... it's a minor distinction... but sometimes that's a major difference.

If a H181 is CGC 9.2, but when it is cracked and sold raw it's described as 9.6...

That's only 0.4 difference... but it is a known difference... does anyone care?

I know I would care if I was thinking the book had any shot at CGC 9.6...

[kryptonitecomics]

I would simply post large scans on the aution and then state in your opinion the comic is in X condition, and leave it up to the buyer to decide. As long as you state the flaws and put up decent scans, the buyer has a fair shake at deciding if it meets the assigned condition via his or her own grading criteria.

 

 

By the way I still don't see the bleepin crease, which is killing me. The scan is coming across very dark on my PC, so I will look when I get home

[OldGuy]

Are you insinuating that currincomics would dare to tell a prospective buyer that a raw book is 6.5 when he knows that CGC have graded the book at 4.5 ?

 

That's almost the same as selling a (known) PLOD as unrestored...

 

Except CGC it self has graded a book 8.5 then later graded it 9.2 so who's to say CGC wouldn't do the same with this book? If CGC can disagree with their own grade then why can't anyone else disagree with it?

[drbanner]

Damn CGG bum-buddy

 

[currincomics]

Excellent point Old Guy, but I hated breaking up my raw run, so this baby will not see the slabbery again, but very solid point!!!

[The_End_At_Last]

My comment was 'tongue in cheek'.

 

However what is the case is that people who think the grade is, say, FN, and then get a grade back from CGC at VFN- (yes, I have seen this happen), never say 'CGC have overgraded this, it should be only FN'. In other words, people will use CGC to their advantage and if it doesn't work their way they keep quiet.

 

Am I complaining about this ? No, because I always look at a raw book and decide what I think its grade is. CGC's 'opinion' carries little weight with me.

 

Restoration is a different matter. I won't buy an expesnive book unless I've got some sort of come back with the buyer if CGC state that it is restored.

[garthgantu]

I think if you bought a Hulk 181 as "raw 9.6" and it returned as a 9.2, you'd be happy...especially if you purchased it off eBay !

 

Now, to your point, if the seller had submitted it to CGC and it came back a 9.2, then the seller cracked the slab and put it up on eBay as a 9.6, would the seller be doing something wrong/unethical? That's a good question. As long as the seller didn't imply that CGC would consider it a 9.6, I think the seller would be in the clear (though only barely.)... If the auction read "In my opinion, this book is in the 9.6 range," that would be accurate, per the seller's opinion. If the seller wrote "this is a CGC 9.6 candidate!" or something, that would be unethical because the seller KNOWS what CGC thought of the book already, and it wasn't viewed as a 9.6 by CGC.

[valiantman]

By the way I still don't see the bleepin crease, which is killing me. The scan is coming across very dark on my PC, so I will look when I get home

There is no way that the book looks like this "in real life"...I'm sure the colors

are much much brighter... and the overall appeal is much, much higher...

but this adjusted image view allows the "flaws" to be seen wherever they are...

[garthgantu]

My comment was 'tongue in cheek'.

I would sincerely suggest that, if you don't want your posts misconstrued in future, you use a graemlin to signify when you're being tongue in cheek (as just one example). I speak from experience when I say, it's very easy to have your posts misunderstood, and the time it takes to explain your original thinking/stance is far greater than the time it takes to add a to your post.

 

However what is the case is that people who think the grade is, say, FN, and then get a grade back from CGC at VFN- (yes, I have seen this happen), never say 'CGC have overgraded this, it should be only FN'.

Not true. We've seen examples of eBay auctions (links posted on these boards) of sellers doing just that - saying that CGC overgraded a given book, and in some cases, why the seller believes it was overgraded. Does it happen frequently? No - but it does happen...

[The_End_At_Last]

Lots of e-bay sellers already try this.

 

'Graded by CGC at 9.0, they must have just come back from lunch, this is 9.4 material. I' ve compared it with other 9.4s on my desk. Prime for re-sub'.

[The_End_At_Last]

Forgive us Brits, but sarcasm is just our second language.

 

When a seller does say he thinks it is overgraded, why does he do this ? Because he wants (a) your sympathy and (b) your money. He hopes that this will cause several bids and that the price will reflect the CGC grade, and not the supposedly real, lower grade.