My old Suscha News ASM - now a 9.9 ???

[TSwift25]

I'm not even going to pretend I know what this seller's mindset is, but if I were the one with the book, I'd be very reluctant to resub it on the premise it could be a 9.9. Those corners, especially the lower left, just look too soft for me.

 

Then again, I have to say I'm very confident in my grading ability and I have no idea what a 9.9 "is." Seems entirely too arbitrary to me.

[joe_collector]

To me, the real question is, why the hell is CGC giving 9.9s to books with miswraps?

 

CGC doesn't care if a book was spit out the azz end of the printer in 5 different pieces, it's only the preservation once it leaves the publisher that counts. It's too bizarre for words as every other major collectible hobby has strict rules on production quality.

 

But again, the CGC Member Firms (dealers) designed this whole "fox in the henhouse" plan and they didn't want their freakshow books getting less $$$ from grading.

[Davenport]

Seems entirely too arbitrary to me.

For '9.9 Mint' do all three graders have to agree?

 

If so the odds are astronomical. If it's only the "head" grader/finalizer, then yeah, arbitrary covers it.

[joe_collector]

The whole pressing thing has been beaten to death with a stick on these boards ... but my understanding is that CGC's position is that they would not be able to reliably distinguish the pressed from the unpressed.

 

It's important to understand that doesn't mean CGC cannot distinguish pressed books, as they obviously can (as has been demonstrated by resto experts) but that they can't do it 100% of the time.

 

But what can be distinguished 100% of the time? Probably nothing, as trimming, color touch and other resto has regularly slipped by CGC, yet they still *attempt* to find it and note it where possible.

 

CGC just doesn't want to stop pressing, as it makes them money and they even own a press shop themselves.

[VintageComics]

To me, the real question is, why the hell is CGC giving 9.9s to books with miswraps?

 

CGC doesn't care if a book was spit out the azz end of the printer in 5 different pieces, it's only the preservation once it leaves the publisher that counts. It's too bizarre for words as every other major collectible hobby has strict rules on production quality.

 

But again, the CGC Member Firms (dealers) designed this whole "fox in the henhouse" plan and they didn't want their freakshow books getting less $$$ from grading.

 

CGC does taking production defects into account. That's indisputable. They just do it differently than some (or many) collectors would.

 

 

[joe_collector]

CGC does taking production defects into account.

 

Wrong, otherwise this book would never get a 9.9.

 

They may take SEVERE prod defects, like rips, missing covers, pieces off, etc. but that's not what we're talking about. Important aspects like centering are paramount in both sportscards and coins and there is no way in heck that an offstruck/off-center piece would ever get a 9.9 (or equivalent).

 

It's even there in black and white in their grading criteria, which interestingly, CGC has and never will, release.

[VintageComics]

CGC does taking production defects into account.

 

Wrong, otherwise this book would never get a 9.9.

 

They may take SEVERE prod defects, like rips, missing covers, pieces off, etc. but that's not what we're talking about. Important aspects like centering are paramount in both sportscards and coins and there is no way in heck that an offstruck/off-center piece would ever get a 9.9 (or equivalent).

 

It's even there in black and white in their grading criteria, which interestingly, CGC has and never will, release.

 

There is a scale as to which level of miswraps are allowed in which grades. Like I said, you might disagree with their standard but they definitely take production defects into account. There is no question on that point.

[joe_collector]

Sure, I guess if half the cover is missing, it doesn't qualify for a 9.9, right?

 

That's your definition of "taking production defects into consideration"? ::

[Doc Joe]

also, I believe, a consideration is the 50 books they graded before than one and the one in the pile next to it.

 

If you have been looking at a bunch of 7.5 bronze dreks all day, (and had some 50 shades of grey wife loving the night before so you are in a generally good mood) when a nice 9.8 pops up it may look better that it seems compared to all the other things they have looked at.

 

Sort of like drinking beer a lot when you are a student, things look better than they do the next day.

[Doc Joe]

and...it really is impossible to prove or be sure there actually is a miswrap in there until it gets a CVA label, I would be all excited to get it back and see if there is one! Hope we see the result!!!

[conditionfreak]

I can easily see several collectors sitting around looking at this book and saying "Why Not? Give it a try dude".

 

So "Dude" sends it in for a straight re-sub. After paying for a bronze 9.8 Spidey book in the first place. $100 bucks is nothing. Because just think. You might get a 9.9! If not, you most likely will be where you started from. A 9.8 pedigree Spidey bronze age book.

 

People play this game often. A press may have been done, but likely not.

 

As to CGC's grading of this book. hmmm.... this is their site. So I will leave that unaddressed.

 

But there is diffinitely a conflict with grading a book that you pressed. Not saying a press job was done in this case though.

 

When you think about it. CGC wants you (us) to send in books for grading. The more the merrier. They also want you (us) to send in the same book several times. Gambling on an upgrade (often after a pressing), or for any reason.

 

So, it is not a far leap to believing that a book pressed by them or by anyone, may often get an upgrade. If there were very few upgrades given after presses, then the flow of books to CGC would naturally slow. Thus, less money for them.

 

I am not saying anything was done wrong, in this case or any case. I am just saying out loud, how the normal thought process goes through a collectors head.

 

It is the best interest of any company, to get their customers to return, return, and return again. Matters not to them what book or why. Just pay up. If you can grade a million books in ten years, then two million books in ten years is awesome. A little delay is not a big deal. So, an incentive to gamble on already graded books being re-graded, has to be thought of. plus, CGC recommends re-slabbing every seven years anyway.

 

Which brings me to a question I have always pondered. If they recommend re-slabbing every 7 years, why don't they have a slabbed date on the label? So that potential buyers know what they are getting. The book might have been slabbed way past the recommended time period. Sort of like the odometer on a car being messed with. Not really, but sort of.

 

As stated right on their slabs. Grading is their opinion. There do not have a published grading criteria. Thus, they can not be proven wrong, for an opinion.

 

It is a great business model. You pay me for my opinion and I deposit your money. Disagree with me, and, well, we just disagree. But I am the recognized expert. You will be back.

[drbanner]

and...it really is impossible to prove or be sure there actually is a miswrap in there until it gets a CVA label, I would be all excited to get it back and see if there is one! Hope we see the result!!!

Exactly, without the CVA label how are we supposed to tell the quality of the wrap!

 

Here's what a magazine in my office looks like, newsstand-fresh:

 

 

Here's what an old magazine in my office looks like after it's been sitting under a pile of magazines for a year or more:

 

 

This is what pressing does to books...

[etanick]

i like to bring this out every time there is a debate of how much miwrap is taking into account.

[/img]

 

 

[DiceX]

Just don't post that COW Wolverine 1.

 

 

[rjpb]

The differences between a 9.8 and 9.9 are arbitrary enough, that I doubt even the most practiced grader could send in 50 9.8 candidates, and after being told one book got a 9.9, be able to guess which book it was.

 

I'm guessing that the ratio of 9.9 to 9.8 BA books is somewhere between 1:50 and 1:100, and the ratio of 9.8 to 9.6 is around 1:4, which explains the head-spinning multiples some collectors are willing to pay for a 9.9

 

If one were to resub 100 BA 9.8s, selected to eliminate soft 9.8s, there would still be some books that come back as a 9.6, but also a strong chance that at least one would come back a 9.9, and that's without pressing.

 

I don't have the time or inclination to figure out if the cost of 100 resubs of non-key BA minus the loss of a few inevitable downgrades to 9.6 would be worth it for the mathematical chance but not guarantee of one or two 9.9s, but it might.

[Timely]

It does not surprise me someone would try it, no risk, no reward? I sold a 9.6 Mile High copy back in 2002 and the buyer cracked it out and pressed it hoping to get a 9.8.

[NewWorldOrder]

I think what is happening is CGC is loosening up their standards just a hair on how tough it is to get a 9.9.

 

To quote another heavy submitter "They're tighter than a frog's a22 right now".

 

 

Sorry meant to say post 1980.

 

Check the c-link auctions for the past 8 months.

[Spideydan]

I wonder what it will go for now?

 

+1

 

Only one silver age ASM, no#19. Then the next doesn't come along until no# 73 the next is this 125. Coincidentally there is a 126 9.9 and then a 130. At that point I got bored of trolling the census. I am a little surprised there has been no 9.9 129 given that it has a yellow cover and the number of submissions.

 

The 19 sold for $29k in 2009 and the 73 for $11200 in 2009 a 135 9.9 sold for $9500 In September 2009. Those dates are all before the decline in bronze prices. I have no idea what you can extrapolate from them.

 

 

 

thanks for your expert price analysis

[comicwiz]

and...it really is impossible to prove or be sure there actually is a miswrap in there until it gets a CVA label, I would be all excited to get it back and see if there is one! Hope we see the result!!!

Exactly, without the CVA label how are we supposed to tell the quality of the wrap!

 

Here's what a magazine in my office looks like, newsstand-fresh:

 

 

Here's what an old magazine in my office looks like after it's been sitting under a pile of magazines for a year or more:

 

 

This is what pressing does to books...

 

[InvstmntComcSuply]

The differences between a 9.8 and 9.9 are arbitrary enough, that I doubt even the most practiced grader could send in 50 9.8 candidates, and after being told one book got a 9.9, be able to guess which book it was.

 

I'm guessing that the ratio of 9.9 to 9.8 BA books is somewhere between 1:50 and 1:100, and the ratio of 9.8 to 9.6 is around 1:4, which explains the head-spinning multiples some collectors are willing to pay for a 9.9

 

If one were to resub 100 BA 9.8s, selected to eliminate soft 9.8s, there would still be some books that come back as a 9.6, but also a strong chance that at least one would come back a 9.9, and that's without pressing.

 

I don't have the time or inclination to figure out if the cost of 100 resubs of non-key BA minus the loss of a few inevitable downgrades to 9.6 would be worth it for the mathematical chance but not guarantee of one or two 9.9s, but it might.

 

If you do it under the Standard tier @ $60 book x 75 =$4500 + shipping + insurance

 

I think it would hinge on whether you could squeak them in under the economy tier @$35 book x 75 = $2625 + shipping + insurance

 

Also if the ratio is larger than 75:1 which I suspect, the risk would be even greater