How is this a 9.2?

[Mr.Illmannered]

maybe the book is mislabeled? seems to be the new fad

 

Ouch!

[seank]

Also, please do not forget that "lack of flaws" is not the same thing as "superior condition." The average flawless book is different from a book with edges and corners so razor sharp, they can cut, and gloss so thick and undisturbed, it looks like it was printed yesterday. As well, richness of color impacts the eye appeal, and hence the grade.

 

These things all have bearing, and are not things that can be seen in a picture, for the most part.

 

I don't think I can accept this argument as you seem to be saying that production quality plays a part in determining the grade of a book. If IIRC, CGC doesn't take into account production flaws when grading a book except for the most egregious which end up severly downgraded or in green labels. So, if you have three copies of the same book, one flawless, one flawless but with a bindery tear, and one flawless but with a slight miswrap, they should all grade the same. The first shouldn't grade higher than the other two.

[Brian48]

A lot of my 9.0s and 8.5s look like that so I agree it's a soft 9.2, but it's still a very nice copy. How much was the seller asking for this book? And how can I contact him/her

[jimjum12]

Sometimes CGC misses the boat. I just got an Adventure 300 back that I thought was an 8.5. 9.0 at best. They slabbed it at 9.4. A year ago, if someone had offered me $700 for it raw I would have jumped at the chance. Now? I just slab everything because every once in a while you get a nice grade you didn't expect....and that more than makes up for the occasional dud.

 

.....you're a very tough grader Andy.....I would expect your 9.0 to come back as a 9.2. As for the Bats 227....the angle of the camera flash is going to amplify any spine defects by a VERY significant degree....probably looks much better in hand....although, as of that show, it was still unsold. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[Mark 1]

A lot of my 9.0s and 8.5s look like that so I agree it's a soft 9.2, but it's still a very nice copy. How much was the seller asking for this book? And how can I contact him/her

 

Hi Brian, contact Haganland....they are on facebook...I don't have a number.

 

 

[Brian48]

Cool. I just sent them an email.

[chrisco37]

It's a soft 9.2.

 

Everyone gets it. It happens. This one got caught.

 

I sold a raw copy here a few years back that was better than this one. I sold it as a VF/NM (raw).

 

You win some, you lose some

[This is water]

It's a soft 9.2.

 

Everyone gets it. It happens. This one got caught.

 

I sold a raw copy here a few years back that was better than this one. I sold it as a VF/NM (raw).

 

You win some, you lose some

 

+1. It happens. I don't think CGC's reputation should be put in the cross-hairs. After all the grade is based off the overall defects. The rest of the bats is probably flawless and I'm sure it looks much better in hand. Personally, i'd be happier with an 8.5 with similar cover and a few flaws elsewhere. It is a softly graded book, but still is very nice.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Also, please do not forget that "lack of flaws" is not the same thing as "superior condition." The average flawless book is different from a book with edges and corners so razor sharp, they can cut, and gloss so thick and undisturbed, it looks like it was printed yesterday. As well, richness of color impacts the eye appeal, and hence the grade.

 

These things all have bearing, and are not things that can be seen in a picture, for the most part.

 

I don't think I can accept this argument as you seem to be saying that production quality plays a part in determining the grade of a book. If IIRC, CGC doesn't take into account production flaws when grading a book except for the most egregious which end up severly downgraded or in green labels. So, if you have three copies of the same book, one flawless, one flawless but with a bindery tear, and one flawless but with a slight miswrap, they should all grade the same. The first shouldn't grade higher than the other two.

 

No, not production quality. Gloss that looks like the book was printed yesterday isn't (necessarily) production quality. After all, most of the books coming off the press at the same time had much the same gloss. Most of the books coming off the priess at the same time had much the same sharpness of corner and edges. These are wear issues, not production issues, and above average sharpness that remains does, and should, have a positive effect on the net grade of the book.

 

Regardless, the bottom line on that book is that no one can pronounce it good or bad until it's seen in person.

[Sal]

Also, please do not forget that "lack of flaws" is not the same thing as "superior condition." The average flawless book is different from a book with edges and corners so razor sharp, they can cut, and gloss so thick and undisturbed, it looks like it was printed yesterday. As well, richness of color impacts the eye appeal, and hence the grade.

 

These things all have bearing, and are not things that can be seen in a picture, for the most part.

 

I don't think I can accept this argument as you seem to be saying that production quality plays a part in determining the grade of a book. If IIRC, CGC doesn't take into account production flaws when grading a book except for the most egregious which end up severly downgraded or in green labels. So, if you have three copies of the same book, one flawless, one flawless but with a bindery tear, and one flawless but with a slight miswrap, they should all grade the same. The first shouldn't grade higher than the other two.

 

No, not production quality. Gloss that looks like the book was printed yesterday isn't (necessarily) production quality. After all, most of the books coming off the press at the same time had much the same gloss. Most of the books coming off the priess at the same time had much the same sharpness of corner and edges. These are wear issues, not production issues, and above average sharpness that remains does, and should, have a positive effect on the net grade of the book.

 

Regardless, the bottom line on that book is that no one can pronounce it good or bad until it's seen in person.

 

Speaking to those who wouldst gnash thy teeth and commenceth the rending of garments o'er this Batman Two-Twenty-Seven;

 

HELLO, PEOPLE! If this highlighted bit had been in post #2, we could have put this thread in the ground and had a nice reminiscence over some beers about it.

 

Some people can get close - ON AGGREGATE - to being able to accurately grade from a scan or picture, devoid of commentary about said book's flaws & etc. But the only way we can know for sure whether or not CGC got it "right" or didn't is to hold the dang thing in our hands and ideally, flip through it.

 

All this other stuff is just jerking off

[blazingbob]

Give it some viagra and pass the tissues

[BigLeagueCHEW]

I don't want to all over Mark 1's great convention thread, so I separated this out.

 

He posted this picture of some Batmans for sale at the con:

 

 

I wonder how that 227 got 9.2 with the exceptionally crunched and color-broken lower left corner, not to mention the spider-creases along the spine? It seems to me that the book should be an 8.0 at best. I've seen better-looking books with much lower grades. Is this an example of a gift-grade? Am I missing something? Did the book get graded the morning after someone got laid? Inquiring minds need to know.

 

Looks like a 9.2 to me, I have a 9.4 with a few less spine ticks and the lower left corner is blunted with color loss so I would say it looks like its grade.

[Brian48]

I like the white pages. I got a response from them. They didn't quote an actual price, but hinted at $700 being the going rate for one in this grade and was willing to field offers. Thinking about it, but I'm not sure I can raise the funds quickly enough for it.

[supapimp]

ask for a Hi Res scan.

[Mark 1]

I like the white pages. I got a response from them. They didn't quote an actual price, but hinted at $700 being the going rate for one in this grade and was willing to field offers. Thinking about it, but I'm not sure I can raise the funds quickly enough for it.

 

The last sale on GPA of a 9.2 was $457 in 2010...

 

The last sale of a 9.4 was $1,100 in June 2011...

 

Last sale of an 8.5 was $350 in May 2011....

 

I think asking $700 is a bit high but I could be wrong.

[the blob]

What does a 5.0 go for?

 

I picked one up raw for $7 not too long ago.

 

That's a book you can make money on buying it raw for OPG.

[supapimp]

I like the white pages. I got a response from them. They didn't quote an actual price, but hinted at $700 being the going rate for one in this grade and was willing to field offers. Thinking about it, but I'm not sure I can raise the funds quickly enough for it.

 

The last sale on GPA of a 9.2 was $457 in 2010...

 

The last sale of a 9.4 was $1,100 in June 2011...

 

Last sale of an 8.5 was $350 in May 2011....

 

I think asking $700 is a bit high but I could be wrong.

 

i paid $575 for my 227 here from FK. GPA is not the end all

[seank]

I like the white pages. I got a response from them. They didn't quote an actual price, but hinted at $700 being the going rate for one in this grade and was willing to field offers. Thinking about it, but I'm not sure I can raise the funds quickly enough for it.

 

Since consensus here is that if this book is truly a 9.2, it is a weak 9.2, I'd wait for a better copy to come along or consider purchasing this copy only if it was a true bargain.

 

Batman 227 is not a hard book to find.

[Ken Aldred]

I like the white pages. I got a response from them. They didn't quote an actual price, but hinted at $700 being the going rate for one in this grade and was willing to field offers. Thinking about it, but I'm not sure I can raise the funds quickly enough for it.

 

Since consensus here is that if this book is truly a 9.2, it is a weak 9.2, I'd wait for a better copy to come along or consider purchasing this copy only if it was a true bargain.

 

Batman 227 is not a hard book to find.

 

Possibly it has excellent internal structure / PQ, but as a presentation obsessive this wouldn't be the copy for me.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Bats #227 is, indeed, not a hard book to find. This obsession with it that the market has had for the last 5 years is beyond bizarre. Yes, it's got an awesome cover. But it's Neal Adams, and they're ALL awesome. It's an homage to 'Tec #31. So?

 

If it had Neal Adams art inside, and contained a major first appearance, sure....

 

...but for what it is, it's no different from a bunch of killer Adams covers. 'Tec #405 is just as good as this, and people don't fall all over themselves to buy it.