RockMyAmadeus Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 4 copies exist in 9.8. 2 of the 4 deserve the grade. This one is the clear leader with no defects. Just bumping this to look at it again. Just amazing. Whoever has this book is lucky. Edit: AND its a newsstand. Didn't even see that, at first. That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects. By the time they swapped out the plates, something recalibrated. You don't see newsstand copies with (as much of) these tear defects as you do direct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin76 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 4 copies exist in 9.8. 2 of the 4 deserve the grade. This one is the clear leader with no defects. Just bumping this to look at it again. Just amazing. Whoever has this book is lucky. Edit: AND its a newsstand. Didn't even see that, at first. That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects. By the time they swapped out the plates, something recalibrated. You don't see newsstand copies with (as much of) these tear defects as you do direct. Wrong. The only plate that changes is the black plate. The tears on the spine has nothing to do with a plate change directly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMyAmadeus Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 4 copies exist in 9.8. 2 of the 4 deserve the grade. This one is the clear leader with no defects. Just bumping this to look at it again. Just amazing. Whoever has this book is lucky. Edit: AND its a newsstand. Didn't even see that, at first. That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects. By the time they swapped out the plates, something recalibrated. You don't see newsstand copies with (as much of) these tear defects as you do direct. Wrong. The only plate that changes is the black plate. The tears on the spine has nothing to do with a plate change directly. Didn't say it did. Reading is fundamental to comprehension. Read it again, paying particular attention to the phrase "by the time" and the word "something" in the second sentence. "Swapped out the plates" = one (old) black plate plus one (new) black plate = TWO black plates, plural. Funny how that works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin76 Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 4 copies exist in 9.8. 2 of the 4 deserve the grade. This one is the clear leader with no defects. Just bumping this to look at it again. Just amazing. Whoever has this book is lucky. Edit: AND its a newsstand. Didn't even see that, at first. That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects. By the time they swapped out the plates, something recalibrated. You don't see newsstand copies with (as much of) these tear defects as you do direct. Wrong. The only plate that changes is the black plate. The tears on the spine has nothing to do with a plate change directly. Didn't say it did. Reading is fundamental to comprehension. Read it again, paying particular attention to the phrase "by the time" and the word "something" in the second sentence. "Swapped out the plates" = one (old) black plate plus one (new) black plate = TWO black plates, plural. Funny how that works. It takes 2 minutes to change a plate, I know what you said. You said "something recalibrated by the time they swapped out the plates" I said the tears are not related directly to the plate change. You also said "That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects" Then brought up the plate change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMyAmadeus Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 4 copies exist in 9.8. 2 of the 4 deserve the grade. This one is the clear leader with no defects. Just bumping this to look at it again. Just amazing. Whoever has this book is lucky. Edit: AND its a newsstand. Didn't even see that, at first. That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects. By the time they swapped out the plates, something recalibrated. You don't see newsstand copies with (as much of) these tear defects as you do direct. Wrong. The only plate that changes is the black plate. The tears on the spine has nothing to do with a plate change directly. Didn't say it did. Reading is fundamental to comprehension. Read it again, paying particular attention to the phrase "by the time" and the word "something" in the second sentence. "Swapped out the plates" = one (old) black plate plus one (new) black plate = TWO black plates, plural. Funny how that works. It takes 2 minutes to change a plate, I know what you said. You said "something recalibrated by the time they swapped out the plates" I said the tears are not related directly to the plate change. You also said "That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects" Then brought up the plate change. Don't get twitterpated, Kevin; you didn't read and/or understand what I said, but commented anyways. I know what I said, too...it's still in this quote nest. Let me spell it out for you: "That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects" is a statement relating to the book being a NEWSSTAND, rather than a DIRECT copy. "By the time" refers to WHEN something happened, not WHAT happened or HOW it happened. I never said...nor even implied...that the plateS (plural) being swapped (because there are TWO black plateS) had anything to do with the tears. I said by the time the newsstand run was being printed, something (NOT THE PLATE SWAPPING) in the line recalibrated, because you don't see these tears AS MUCH on the newsstand run as you do on the Direct run. Nothing further than that was implied, nor should be inferred. Easy cheesy. I shouldn't have to spell things out like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin76 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 4 copies exist in 9.8. 2 of the 4 deserve the grade. This one is the clear leader with no defects. Just bumping this to look at it again. Just amazing. Whoever has this book is lucky. Edit: AND its a newsstand. Didn't even see that, at first. That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects. By the time they swapped out the plates, something recalibrated. You don't see newsstand copies with (as much of) these tear defects as you do direct. Wrong. The only plate that changes is the black plate. The tears on the spine has nothing to do with a plate change directly. Didn't say it did. Reading is fundamental to comprehension. Read it again, paying particular attention to the phrase "by the time" and the word "something" in the second sentence. "Swapped out the plates" = one (old) black plate plus one (new) black plate = TWO black plates, plural. Funny how that works. It takes 2 minutes to change a plate, I know what you said. You said "something recalibrated by the time they swapped out the plates" I said the tears are not related directly to the plate change. You also said "That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects" Then brought up the plate change. Don't get twitterpated, Kevin; you didn't read and/or understand what I said, but commented anyways. I know what I said, too...it's still in this quote nest. Let me spell it out for you: "That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects" is a statement relating to the book being a NEWSSTAND, rather than a DIRECT copy. "By the time" refers to WHEN something happened, not WHAT happened or HOW it happened. I never said...nor even implied...that the plateS (plural) being swapped (because there are TWO black plateS) had anything to do with the tears. I said by the time the newsstand run was being printed, something (NOT THE PLATE SWAPPING) in the line recalibrated, because you don't see these tears AS MUCH on the newsstand run as you do on the Direct run. Nothing further than that was implied, nor should be inferred. Easy cheesy. I shouldn't have to spell things out like this. If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divad Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 I think it's absolutely silly that anyone even cares about this defect . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMyAmadeus Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 4 copies exist in 9.8. 2 of the 4 deserve the grade. This one is the clear leader with no defects. Just bumping this to look at it again. Just amazing. Whoever has this book is lucky. Edit: AND its a newsstand. Didn't even see that, at first. That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects. By the time they swapped out the plates, something recalibrated. You don't see newsstand copies with (as much of) these tear defects as you do direct. Wrong. The only plate that changes is the black plate. The tears on the spine has nothing to do with a plate change directly. Didn't say it did. Reading is fundamental to comprehension. Read it again, paying particular attention to the phrase "by the time" and the word "something" in the second sentence. "Swapped out the plates" = one (old) black plate plus one (new) black plate = TWO black plates, plural. Funny how that works. It takes 2 minutes to change a plate, I know what you said. You said "something recalibrated by the time they swapped out the plates" I said the tears are not related directly to the plate change. You also said "That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects" Then brought up the plate change. Don't get twitterpated, Kevin; you didn't read and/or understand what I said, but commented anyways. I know what I said, too...it's still in this quote nest. Let me spell it out for you: "That's the only reason it (mostly) didn't have the defects" is a statement relating to the book being a NEWSSTAND, rather than a DIRECT copy. "By the time" refers to WHEN something happened, not WHAT happened or HOW it happened. I never said...nor even implied...that the plateS (plural) being swapped (because there are TWO black plateS) had anything to do with the tears. I said by the time the newsstand run was being printed, something (NOT THE PLATE SWAPPING) in the line recalibrated, because you don't see these tears AS MUCH on the newsstand run as you do on the Direct run. Nothing further than that was implied, nor should be inferred. Easy cheesy. I shouldn't have to spell things out like this. If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Albert Einstein "Explaining to the simple is not the same as a simple explanation." - RMA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jessebrook1 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Found today at Flea Market, $1 decent copy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverdream Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I think it's absolutely silly that anyone even cares about this defect . . . I think it's silly they wouldn't give a single copy of this book a 9.8 for because of this tear in over 14 years, even thought it's a well known production defect. Yet, I have seen plenty of books with worse production defects at 9.8 ASM 361 is the most obvious one. Chunks missing from the bottom cover.. NO PROBLEM. 9.8 all.day. Many moderns have the top corners of the spine clipped with a small tear, seen hundreds if not thousands of moderns in 9.8 like this. Sure Wolverine 35 was not a highly submitted book, and the defect is not a common one, but a little research would be nice. Otherwise, what are you paying for? Now that it's a very well known defect, will they plop them in 9.8 slabs en masse? If not, why? I don't see how its any different than any other printing defect that gets a pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mysterio Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I think it's absolutely silly that anyone even cares about this defect . . . I think it's silly they wouldn't give a single copy of this book a 9.8 for because of this tear in over 14 years, even thought it's a well known production defect. Yet, I have seen plenty of books with worse production defects at 9.8 ASM 361 is the most obvious one. Chunks missing from the bottom cover.. NO PROBLEM. 9.8 all.day. Many moderns have the top corners of the spine clipped with a small tear, seen hundreds if not thousands of moderns in 9.8 like this. Sure Wolverine 35 was not a highly submitted book, and the defect is not a common one, but a little research would be nice. Otherwise, what are you paying for? Now that it's a very well known defect, will they plop them in 9.8 slabs en masse? If not, why? I don't see how its any different than any other printing defect that gets a pass. I think it is silly they would give a copy that had the tear(s) a 9.8. I've never been a big fan of giving production defects a pass, because there is nothing wrong with the best graded copy being a 9.6 if that is all the book should get. And, as they learned here, there may be a better copy out there that truly deserves the grade. ASM #361s with gripper marks shouldn't get 9.8s either, because there are 9.8s without them too. So would all the gripper marked books be 9.9 or 10 otherwise? Seems unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeypost Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Found today at Flea Market, $1 decent copy Any color breaks on the back? Book is also notorious for the back cover as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loadstone Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Just finished reading this whole damned thing. Only 5 copies at 9.8 on census since this epic thread kicked off such a massive scavenger hunt. 3 Universal and 2 SS and only 1 SS sales entry in GPA for $599 and I guess 1 Universal copy referenced on here sold for $800. I guess the flood never happened. Did submissions go down, was demand satisfied with just those 5 copies, or did the grading tighten up after that last pristine copy got graded? I think that flawless copy should have been given a 9.9 at least if they were going to honor the production flaw for 9.8's. Tempted to look in my 90's bin but might not be worth the disappointment for the effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jessebrook1 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Found today at Flea Market, $1 decent copy Any color breaks on the back? Book is also notorious for the back cover as well. Clean as a babies butt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollobuzz Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Dang it fellas! I read this whole thread start to finish yesterday and now I'm obsessing over this book. And I'm a bronze collector! It just isn't right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loadstone Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Found today at Flea Market, $1 decent copy Any color breaks on the back? Book is also notorious for the back cover as well. Clean as a babies butt Looks like the back cover has 4 spine stress lines that seem to break color slightly on the top half of the spine and a tiny bindery tear on the top spine corner. 9.2-9.4 territory. 9.6 on a loose day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jessebrook1 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I can agree with that grade, i was mostly referring to the lower back corner, its nice and clean. Found today at Flea Market, $1 decent copy Any color breaks on the back? Book is also notorious for the back cover as well. Clean as a babies butt Looks like the back cover has 4 spine stress lines that seem to break color slightly on the top half of the spine and a tiny bindery tear on the top spine corner. 9.2-9.4 territory. 9.6 on a loose day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeypost Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 That's the rub with this book. Over the years I have found many copies that look like 9.8 candidates based on the front covers condition only to have the air let out of my sails when the back cover has tiny color breaks on it. Still I was fortunate enough to bring the first 2 9.8 copies to market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 You could probably pick almost any nondescript modern out of a hat and wonder why there aren't more copies in 9.8 on the census. That might just be about the worst basis there is to overpay a large amount of money for a generic modern book. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethal_Collector Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 (edited) You could probably pick almost any nondescript modern out of a hat and wonder why there aren't more copies in 9.8 on the census. That might just be about the worst basis there is to overpay a large amount of money for a generic modern book. -J. Not necessarily, if it's rare and there is a market for it, I'm sure someone would pay some dough to sub it as a possible 9.8 candidate. If it does turn out to be a 9.8, I'd expect to see a small wave of interested parties, including but not limited to: http://comics.www.collectors-society.com/registry/comics/PeopleSetDetail.aspx?PeopleSetID=1456 http://comics.www.collectors-society.com/registry/comics/PeopleSetDetail.aspx?PeopleSetID=66919 http://comics.www.collectors-society.com/registry/comics/PeopleSetDetail.aspx?PeopleSetID=71937 Jerome Edited January 20, 2015 by jump_ace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
