Grading question...

[DiceX]

Would this be acceptable if you bought a book that was listed as a 2.0 and had an undisclosed detached centerfold?

Or is this standard on 2.0s?

 

 

[MagnusX]

Would this be acceptable if you bought a book that was listed as a 2.0 and had an undisclosed detached centerfold?

Or is this standard on 2.0s?

 

 

[font:Book Antiqua]I think you are going to figured that by yourself, buttercup.[/font]

 

[lizards2]

Would this be acceptable if you bought a book that was listed as a 2.0 and had an undisclosed detached centerfold?

Or is this standard on 2.0s?

 

I've seen disclosed CGCs in the 6.0 to 6.5 range. It should be disclosed, but maybe not worth mentioning at that grade level :shrug:

[nocutename]

I purchase low graders and if the defect is within grade then the seller may not disclose the defect. 2.0 allows for detached CF. I tend to ask the seller beforehand about certain defects that I don't want to collect.

 

Now, if he is downgrading the book because of the detached CF, personally, I would like that disclosed. But I am still told that this is additional info for a seller to produce and not mandatory from a seller's perspective. Anything within grade is allowable. I like more disclosure but it is time consuming for lower grade books.

[lscomics]

I purchase low graders and if the defect is within grade then the seller may not disclose the defect. 2.0 allows for detached CF. I tend to ask the seller beforehand about certain defects that I don't want to collect.

 

Now, if he is downgrading the book because of the detached CF, personally, I would like that disclosed. But I am still told that this is additional info for a seller to produce and not mandatory from a seller's perspective. Anything within grade is allowable. I like more disclosure but it is time consuming for lower grade books.

+1

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

As a general rule, I disclose defects that are not visible from a scan, irrespective of how low a grade the book might be.

 

Case in point...

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=248056&Number=5439881#Post5439881

 

Even amongst low-grade collectors, there are certain defects that they would prefer to avoid, so you have to give them that information.

 

As a general rule, you should be proactively disclosing everything you know about a book, whether it bothers you or not.

 

I know that's not how some people want to play it, but it's how I want to play it.

[gadzukes]

How much does CGC down grade for "name stamps"? In the 30 or so books that I've sent in for grading, my grading has always been within half a grade of theirs. But I just got a Strange Tales 110 back from cgc that I had graded as a 6.5 to 7.0 and they graded it as a 5.5.

 

The comic had a name stamp on the back so I thought maybe that was the big difference.

 

I will try to post a photo.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Unless it's huge or messy, in that sort of grade range it won't make much difference.

[Scrooge]

Would this be acceptable if you bought a book that was listed as a 2.0 and had an undisclosed detached centerfold?

Or is this standard on 2.0s?

 

Yes, acceptable. Would prefer to know it before-hand but not anything I'd get pissed if I find it out after the sale.

[drbanner]

Would this be acceptable if you bought a book that was listed as a 2.0 and had an undisclosed detached centerfold?

Or is this standard on 2.0s?

Yes, acceptable. Would prefer to know it before-hand but not anything I'd get pissed if I find it out after the sale.

 

+1

 

It would be impossible to "disclose" all the defects on a 2.0 copy but if the book obviously looks better than a 2.0, probably worth asking about beforehand.

[lizards2]

I purchase low graders and if the defect is within grade then the seller may not disclose the defect. 2.0 allows for detached CF. I tend to ask the seller beforehand about certain defects that I don't want to collect.

 

That's interesting, as I collect high grade books, and do the same asking on both CGC and raw books. My pet peeve is corner creases, which in my opinion were more harshly treated in the olden days. Now you can get CGC 9.2s, 9.4s with corner creases, and I think some examples of even higher grades have been posted here in the past with this defect.

[NuffSaid57]

I really think the answer depends on price. If I am listing a lot of cheap 2.0ish readers I don't think it is reasonable to go over them with a magnifying glass and list every unseen scribble, small tears, loose centerfolds, etc. that contributed to the listed condition. That said if there are a lot of unseen defects that I know about I will try to include them in a general description.

 

On the other hand if I am selling books that have a higher value in 2.0 condition, like early ASM or Fantastic Four, I think larger defects not apparent in scans, like a loose centerfold, should be disclosed.

[gadzukes]

I recently bought an ASM 129 cgc 9.6 and when I got it I spent some time comparing it to many other 9.6 pics that I could find on ebay & heritage. They all seemed to meet the basic criterium for 9.6 but they looked vastly different because of the centering.

 

Do you think CGC should add a "centering" grade so that super high grade comics like 9.6s & 9.8s can be differentiated even more.

 

Right now CGC makes a note of the interior paper color, which is nice, but there is no mention on the label of "centering"

 

How about creating some kind of grade for "centering". To me centering is a huge deal. Not all 9.8s are created equal. Obviously a 9.8 with perfect centering is way more valuable than a 9.8 that is off center, or even worse a 9.8 that has tilted registration. I don't think CGC marks off at all for poor centering, and an investor that is paying top dollar for CGC services should probably get the heads up on centering too.

 

I don't think the centering grade would even have to come into effect until there is a grade of 9.0 or better.

 

CGC has evolved a little with their labels in the last 10 years, so maybe this could be one more evolution.

 

What do you think?

[etanick]

not a chance unless business dried up and there is a need to create a demand for a million resubs.

[lizards2]

not a chance unless business dried up and there is a need to create a demand for a million resubs.

:think:

[gadzukes]

If enough collectors wanted it, I think they'd do it.

 

Don't they have a centering grade with Baseball Cards?

[etanick]

not a chance unless business dried up and there is a need to create a demand for a million resubs.

:think:

 

i am hoarding all well centered high grade books because after the PQ issue is beaten to death, the next uncharted, not yet mined frontier is centering

 

...uh...now only if I can figure out how to slow down the stampeded on dreks submissions

[lizards2]

not a chance unless business dried up and there is a need to create a demand for a million resubs.

:think:

 

i am hoarding all well centered high grade books because after the PQ issue is beaten to death, the next uncharted, not yet mined frontier is centering

 

...uh...now only if I can figure out how to slow down the stampeded on dreks submissions

Funny - as a kid I would seek out the poorly centered books because they hid the spine wear better. Now I have more of an appreciation for nice centering, at least on the front of the book - the last laugh was on me ::

[etanick]

If enough collectors wanted it, I think they'd do it.

 

Don't they have a centering grade with Baseball Cards?

 

there is a long list of what collectors would like to change and yes, centering would be one of the them.

 

[Speedy-D]

Among a comic's possible defects, centering seems like one that you can pretty easily work out for yourself. :shrug: