Flash 104, does it look like an 8.5?

[batman_fan]

It doesn't look like an 8.5 to me. Look at the upper left corner and the lower right corner. I have an 8.0 Batman 49 that has much better eye appeal. Am I being picky? Flash 104

[garthgantu]

We're pretty much ALL picky on these boards I'd agree, that's a very generous 8.5 .... I'd give it a VF- 7.5 myself, with all that edge wear and the munched ULC...maybe it's got great "production quality" and is really solid and tight, things you can't really gauge from a scan... still, looks somewhat overgraded from the pic.

 

Is that an eraser mark or something, in the dude below the words "The Flaming Darkness!" ? Or is that on the scan, I wonder?

[Doug014-migration]

It looks like a pretty generous grade to me. I'd say 7.0 or 7.5 at best.

[143ksk]

Yeah, I'd call it a VF- 7.5

[kryptonitecomics]

I might go an 8.0 on it if the stars aligned, but I agree that the ULC should have knocked it down into the 7's

[Timely]

It doesn't look like an 8.5 to me. Look at the upper left corner and the lower right corner. I have an 8.0 Batman 49 that has much better eye appeal. Am I being picky? Flash 104

 

I'm on the fence with this one, it may very well be an 8.0. That upper right corner is an eye sore, but keep in mind I've seen many 9.6 books where both corners have binder chips missing! This one appears to be more of a color scrape, I believe the paper is still there, just the top color layer is missing.

 

Since almost the entire cover is a uniform red the scrape looks a lot worse, and perhaps due to that we believe it may be overgraded. It's a tough call. Since the book has OW/W pages which is rare for late Flashes perhaps CGC gave it the extra nod.

 

I sure would not compain if it were in my collection, would you?

 

Timely

[lou_fine]

Probably in agreement with Timely here since you have to remember the following factors:

 

1) CGC tends to be more lenient when it comes to Golden Age books,

2) CGC tends to be more lenient when it comes to pedigree books, and

3) CGC tends to be more lenient when it comes to scare books.

 

Three factors possibly helping to push it to a higher grade than it normally would have received.

[joe_collector]

3) CGC tends to be more lenient when it comes to scare books.

 

Time to break out those Horror comics!

[sfilosa]

I have no problem with the 8.5 grade. Basically because the wear on the book is very NATURAL WEAR.

 

I honestly believe that wear right on the corners, some slight overhang (or bottom wear) and light spine stress, is not downgraded as much because it's natural storage and reading wear. Once you get to tears and long creases (even very light), it implies that the book at some point was not handled correctly.

 

I also agree that being a pedigree book (and probably having very nice colors and great gloss), it might have gotten a slight BONUS for those featuers (which I also have no problem with).

[FlyingDonut]

It looks 100% like an 8.5. There's an 8.5 on the blue label, so therefore, it is, by definition, a CGC 8.5.

[Doug014-migration]

It looks 100% like an 8.5. There's an 8.5 on the blue label, so therefore, it is, by definition, a CGC 8.5.

 

That's a good point. It is CGC's grading system after all, so if they say it's an 8.5 I guess it's an 8.5!

[garthgantu]

It looks 100% like an 8.5. There's an 8.5 on the blue label, so therefore, it is, by definition, a CGC 8.5.

 

That's a good point. It is CGC's grading system after all, so if they say it's an 8.5 I guess it's an 8.5!

 

I'd say that's more of a glib comment than a good point...? CGC may have slabbed the book, and they may have scrutinized the book in person, but they DO make mistakes, and this may well be one of them...

 

I'm going to assume 'Donut's comment was made in jest, perhaps with a dash of frustration...