50 CENT LONG BOX Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 it just has a production defect, which many of you think it's hard to find in high grade. it's not. I don't think this book is possible in 9.8. There probably isn't a one. When the book was damaged in production, it had been printed, folded and assembled. From what I can tell, the damage happened when the book was being saddle stitched. (in bindery, as noted by several) Most saddle stitching machines from that era operated pretty much the same. The folded book travels spine-up along a rail or guide, it's stapled and then moved along the rail to be dropped down onto a table or conveyor to be put in boxes. From where the damage is at, it looks like as it was running through the machine the tolerances for the thickness weren't set properly and each book got damaged on the way through. The machines are designed to be adjusted to the thickness of the book being fed through. Whether it's a 32 page book or a 64-page book, someone has to set the machine how thick the book is to run it through. All it takes is an operator who didn't look carefully at the book when they set the machine up. He probably ran a couple dozen or so books to set it up, and then sat there at the front of the machine and loaded them, never looking to see how they came out. A bindery person is going to be careful that he doesn't damage the final product, but come on - everyone has a day that they just aren't paying attention. Who knows? The folding machine could have saddle stiched the book at the same time, damaging the book, too. Big printers have lots of automated machines that are set up once, and then not looked at unless there's a jam. I know that there's a lot of people who want to think that things like off-color holograms (left over make-readies), or altered color/out of register (overlooked by quality-control), or books with production flaws are "rare" - but the bottom line is that all those book are is testaments to human error, and there's nothing that special about it. "He probably ran a couple dozen or so books to set it up" and then gave them to his buddy Ryan Elliott over at PGX. ( Cue X-files music) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Balls Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 "He probably ran a couple dozen or so books to set it up" and then gave them to his buddy Ryan Elliott over at PGX. ( Cue X-files music) The only way you'll ever see a Wolverine 35 graded at 9.8 is to give it to PGX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 it just has a production defect, which many of you think it's hard to find in high grade. it's not. I don't think this book is possible in 9.8. I don't know if we can call this done yet on an assessment there will never be a 9.8 of this book. CGC has periodically taken production flaws into consideration. Even with the flawed copies shown here, a few folks mentioned looking at their examples and seeing very light defects in the common flawed area. Hopefully, they submit these books. Let's see as the census grows how many land at the under-grades. 5 submissions into CGC doesn't average a high sample of submissions for most any book. But the end story may be none achieve a 9.8 grade. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Balls Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 True. I should have said - there's probably no chance of an undamaged 9.8. I guess I would be left to wonder what CGC sees as the difference between production "flaws" and production "damage"? Or if there is such a determination? Captain America 241 has a CGC-noted flaw, and that also appears to have happened in bindery, most likely during folding. Under the loupe, you can see the ink dots wrap around the crease. To me, this is a fairly simple production flaw to deduce - which might be why CGC gives it that designation. Wolverine #35, might not be so cut and dry for CGC - and they may not have enough information about it. That book has major color breaks, Cap 241 has no color breaking in the folding. Perhaps therein lies the difference. The other issue, which doesn't get brought up much, is that CGC has assigned rarity notations to books with simple production issues - which leads me to believe that CGC might not have had a printing consultant in the past to help them determine issues with book. Since there are five on the registry, CGC may not be able to "change" their view on Wolverine 35 because they have already factored the color breaks in determining the grade on those five books? I don't have the answer for that. I sure wish I could find that copper age thread that had several people showing off books that are slabbed with rarity notations. There were several (not all) that were clearly not rarities, but make-ready books that CGC gave incorrect notations to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supapimp Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 don't believe the hype. history will repeat itself. just look at the damn effin census that bosco put up. sheesh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWatson Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 don't believe the hype. history will repeat itself. just look at the damn effin census that bosco put up. sheesh So what if it does? At least then everyone who wants a 9.8 Wolverine 35 can have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWatson Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Wolverine #35, might not be so cut and dry for CGC - and they may not have enough information about it. That book has major color breaks, Cap 241 has no color breaking in the folding. Perhaps therein lies the difference. It's not color breaks. The spine is torn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vane Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Wolverine #35, might not be so cut and dry for CGC - and they may not have enough information about it. That book has major color breaks, Cap 241 has no color breaking in the folding. Perhaps therein lies the difference. I sure wish I could find that copper age thread that had several people showing off books that are slabbed with rarity notations. There were several (not all) that were clearly not rarities, but make-ready books that CGC gave incorrect notations to. How much more information CGC needs to account for the production flaw. Another question comes to mind. Around 2005 CGC changed their grading standards on how they were grading on page quality. So books before 2005 had Off-White to White pages got a PQ bump if you re-submitted in. What made them to change their grading standards on Page quality?? Was their some kind of revolt here on the board? I sure wish I could find that copper age thread that had several people showing off books that are slabbed with rarity notations. There were several (not all) that were clearly not rarities, but make-ready books that CGC gave incorrect notations to. I really like this idea!! If it had a production flaw, it should not get a down grade because of that BUT CGC should put a notation on the label what production flaw it has. That totally makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Balls Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Wolverine #35, might not be so cut and dry for CGC - and they may not have enough information about it. That book has major color breaks, Cap 241 has no color breaking in the folding. Perhaps therein lies the difference. It's not color breaks. The spine is torn. Could that be a reason why it's not regarded as a production flaw? I would say tearing is a much more serious flaw than a fold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Wolverine #35, might not be so cut and dry for CGC - and they may not have enough information about it. That book has major color breaks, Cap 241 has no color breaking in the folding. Perhaps therein lies the difference. It's not color breaks. The spine is torn. Could that be a reason why it's not regarded as a production flaw? I would say tearing is a much more serious flaw than a fold. That's why the few copies mentioned without the tears are going to be interesting to see what they come back as if submitted. Most shown on here have the tear defect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FFB Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Wolverine #35, might not be so cut and dry for CGC - and they may not have enough information about it. That book has major color breaks, Cap 241 has no color breaking in the folding. Perhaps therein lies the difference. It's not color breaks. The spine is torn. Could that be a reason why it's not regarded as a production flaw? I would say tearing is a much more serious flaw than a fold. That's why the few copies mentioned without the tears are going to be interesting to see what they come back as if submitted. Most shown on here have the tear defect. If any significant portion of the print run (newsstand vs. direct market) does not have that flaw, there are plenty of 9.8 copies out there. Print runs were pretty high in 1991 and probably half or more of the copies sold are in NM+ or better condition still, aside from the production damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worldsbestcomics Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 I personally believe a 9.8 copy of Wolverine 35 will turn up. But this isn't as simple as CGC submission stats as you might think Supa. I was the first one to get a 9.8 copy from CGC on thirty-nine different issues in the Wolverine 1988 run. Those were examples of low submissions. All of them have multiple 9.8 copies on the census now. Wolverine 35 is very different. I have been looking for this book very diligently for over 5 years and reviewed literally hundreds of copies - maybe a thousand. I have never seen a direct edition without the bindery tears. I have reviewed newsstand editions and they also have the tears in almost every case. However, I have seen at least one without the tears and I have been told by someone whose opinion I trust that they saw another. Both of those books had other flaws such as creases and cover wear which made 9.8 impossible. In this case, I think the low number of submissions is a consequence of people realizing that that their copies are not 9.8 or books and not submitting them and probably also some copies failing a 9.8 pre-screen. I am in the process of submitting my finest newsstand copy and I am not confident it will get 9.8. But I do believe that if even only a small fraction of the newsstand copies were bound without tearing, then eventually a 9.8 will come to market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvelfangirl Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 I personally believe a 9.8 copy of Wolverine 35 will turn up. But this isn't as simple as CGC submission stats as you might think Supa. I was the first one to get a 9.8 copy from CGC on thirty-nine different issues in the Wolverine 1988 run. Those were examples of low submissions. All of them have multiple 9.8 copies on the census now. Wolverine 35 is very different. I have been looking for this book very diligently for over 5 years and reviewed literally hundreds of copies - maybe a thousand. I have never seen a direct edition without the bindery tears. I have reviewed newsstand editions and they also have the tears in almost every case. However, I have seen at least one without the tears and I have been told by someone whose opinion I trust that they saw another. Both of those books had other flaws such as creases and cover wear which made 9.8 impossible. In this case, I think the low number of submissions is a consequence of people realizing that that their copies are not 9.8 or books and not submitting them and probably also some copies failing a 9.8 pre-screen. I am in the process of submitting my finest newsstand copy and I am not confident it will get 9.8. But I do believe that if even only a small fraction of the newsstand copies were bound without tearing, then eventually a 9.8 will come to market. :wishluck: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeypost Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 I personally believe a 9.8 copy of Wolverine 35 will turn up. But this isn't as simple as CGC submission stats as you might think Supa. I was the first one to get a 9.8 copy from CGC on thirty-nine different issues in the Wolverine 1988 run. Those were examples of low submissions. All of them have multiple 9.8 copies on the census now. Wolverine 35 is very different. I have been looking for this book very diligently for over 5 years and reviewed literally hundreds of copies - maybe a thousand. I have never seen a direct edition without the bindery tears. I have reviewed newsstand editions and they also have the tears in almost every case. However, I have seen at least one without the tears and I have been told by someone whose opinion I trust that they saw another. Both of those books had other flaws such as creases and cover wear which made 9.8 impossible. In this case, I think the low number of submissions is a consequence of people realizing that that their copies are not 9.8 or books and not submitting them and probably also some copies failing a 9.8 pre-screen. I am in the process of submitting my finest newsstand copy and I am not confident it will get 9.8. But I do believe that if even only a small fraction of the newsstand copies were bound without tearing, then eventually a 9.8 will come to market. :wishluck: I have yet to come across a copy that is remotely close to 9.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Grimm Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 I have yet to come across a copy that is remotely close to 9.8. I still have no interest in owning this issue, but I've sure as hell been looking for it. Not because I want to make a huge premium on it, but only because this thread has gotten me interested in the fact that it's so hard to find. In my opinion, I've yet to come across anything better than a 9.2-9.4. I even checked the last LCS in my area. They didn't even have a copy of Wolverine #35... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 Another question comes to mind. Around 2005 CGC changed their grading standards on how they were grading on page quality. So books before 2005 had Off-White to White pages got a PQ bump if you re-submitted in. What made them to change their grading standards on Page quality?? Was their some kind of revolt here on the board? My understanding is that it was due to a number of factors, including a revision of their PQ criteria and a change in the way the grading room was illuminated. Board revolt was not one of the factors I've heard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worldsbestcomics Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 Another question comes to mind. Around 2005 CGC changed their grading standards on how they were grading on page quality. So books before 2005 had Off-White to White pages got a PQ bump if you re-submitted in. What made them to change their grading standards on Page quality?? Was their some kind of revolt here on the board? My understanding is that it was due to a number of factors, including a revision of their PQ criteria and a change in the way the grading room was illuminated. Board revolt was not one of the factors I've heard It was earlier than 2005. It was when they moved to Florida. And it was because of better facilities/illumination for judging PQ more accurately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMyAmadeus Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8milemax Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Went to 2 LCS and looked at all the wolverines 35 and they all had the same defect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worldsbestcomics Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Welcome back! Not much new. I did send my Wolverine 35 newsstand off to get pressed and graded on-site at Megacon in a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
