Which would you buy? 7.0SA or 3.0 universal

[n2wdw]

At Chicago last weekend I ended up buying an ASM #1 7.0(SA). But there was a nice looking 3.0 that I was considering. I bought the restored book because it looked nicer, it was slightly restored (versus moderate or extensive), and in the end I'm a collector and not an investor (although money matters so future appreciation potential is definitely important - you never know when you might need cash). But it was a hard decision because the 3.0 looked better than 3.0, although it had a pretty significant tear in the back that would make it hard to get a higher grade with pressing (IMHO).

 

I'm still good with my choice, but I've been thinking about it a lot. Which would you have bought? Both were about the same price. And if you would have bought the 3.0, then why?

 

Here's the 7.0(SA):

 

 

 

And here's the 3.0 showing the tear in the back:

 

 

[THB]

That 3.0 looks sweet!

 

[THB]

I have a few plods and just like yourself they were for my PC and I was happy with them.

 

[monsterbento]

I would get the 3.0 because I don't collect restored books.

[thunsicker]

Hard to say. I try to avoid restored books, but then again the 7.0 with the resto removed might end up being higher grade than the 3.0. And as you said the problems with the back of the 3.0 do limit the upside for that one.

[n2wdw]

Hard to say. I try to avoid restored books, but then again the 7.0 with the resto removed might end up being higher grade than the 3.0. And as you said the problems with the back of the 3.0 do limit the upside for that one.

 

The restoration is "small color touch on cover, glue on spine and tear seals"

 

I've heard you can remove the tear seals -- but can you remove the color touch and glue?

[THE_BEYONDER]

 

 

 

Honestly....I think the 3.0 was a no-brainer at the same price. Who cares about the back cover? That's the kind of 3.0 I search for. All the defects on the back. The front cover of the 3.0 presents like a VF

[THE_BEYONDER]

Hard to say. I try to avoid restored books, but then again the 7.0 with the resto removed might end up being higher grade than the 3.0. And as you said the problems with the back of the 3.0 do limit the upside for that one.

 

The restoration is "small color touch on cover, glue on spine and tear seals"

 

I've heard you can remove the tear seals -- but can you remove the color touch and glue?

Could remove the glue.

 

Amateur color touch usually means it bleeds thru. Book will always be CGC restored.

[maloney414]

 

Honestly....I think the 3.0 was a no-brainer at the same price. Who cares about the back cover? That's the kind of 3.0 I search for. All the defects on the back. The front cover of the 3.0 presents like a VF

 

+1

 

I agree with this.

 

I'm a low grade collector myself, and back cover damage is the perfect thing to bring the price down on great presenting books.

 

I would have gone with the blue label 3.0.

[Dr-Doom]

For me, the 3.0 would have been the easy choice.

[Shaven Kev-migration]

I'd rather have the book with natural back cover damage that looks sweet from the front. How often are you going to look at or display the back? Never.

[DiceX]

And if the grade bothers you, with a black sharpie and a steady hand you can make that 3.0 into an 8.0 without a problem.

 

 

[oakman29]

I would get the unrestored 3.0. The one thing I have a problem with is the wall that you call a sig. line.

[NinjaSealed]

In this case, the 3.0. But personally for me often times I would go with(and have) the much higher grade S(A) book with a bit of color touch.

[Beige]

I would get the unrestored 3.0. The one thing I have a problem with is the wall that you call a sig. line.

 

[The Madness]

Personally, I never would take a restored book no matter how nice or how high the grade. I would've taken the 3.0 in a heartbeat. I just rather have a book in its original condition, no work done on it, nothing.

[rjpb]

Normally I'd go with the 7.0 with minor resto over an average 3.0, but in the case of that copy, which looked like a much higher grade from the front, I probably would have gone with it. Either way, they are both sweet looking copies for a relatively reasonable price. If I was planning on keeping it, I'd crack out the 7.0, so that the reminder of resto wasn't there every time I looked at it.

[SilverAgeDreams]

3.0 for me also front cover looks great .... its a buy

[scooter99]

I would get the unrestored 3.0. The one thing I have a problem with is the wall that you call a sig. line.

 

Did you have to chase some hoodlums off of your lawn today, Oak?

 

To answer the OP question, I'd go for the 3.0 Universal. The front cover is beautiful.

[oakman29]

I would get the unrestored 3.0. The one thing I have a problem with is the wall that you call a sig. line.

 

Did you have to chase some hoodlums off of your lawn today, Oak?

 

To answer the OP question, I'd go for the 3.0 Universal. The front cover is beautiful.

I guess to me a sig. line should just show off some of your collection,not the whole collection.