CGC 9.8s With Spine Stress?

[Jackhartmann]

Any time these threads appear. It becomes time to release....The Beast!

 

 

Pretty big spine tick. I would given it a 9.6.

[Hado]

Any time these threads appear. It becomes time to release....The Beast!

 

 

Pretty big spine tick. I would given it a 9.6.

I prefer to think its a 10 that sunk to a lowly 9.8

[Jackhartmann]

.

 

Here are the photos. These defects were very difficult to photograph and they look much worse in hand. Yes, I know they are not terrible, but I don't think that they belong on a 9.8.

 

 

Good photos. You make a good case.

 

I run into these with PGCS/NGC graded coins. There will always be errors in grading. Sight unseen is always lower in the Blue Sheets vs. Sight seen in the Grey sheets.

 

You have a tough decision on what to do. I would hunt out a nice 9.8 and just sell that one.

[500Club]

My standards have developed from years of seeing CGC books in various grades, and getting a feel for what is strong or weak for a given grade. I am not applying my standards to CGC; I am applying standards defined by CGC.

 

If you look at a book that has been graded 9.8 and say it is not a 9.8, then you are not applying cgc's standards, in fact what you are doing is questioning their standards, almost the opposite of applying them.

 

I think, in effect, he's questioning the grades.

 

I wouldn't confuse the grade with the standards.

 

I'd agree. It sounds like he is comparing this 9.8 to a representative sample of previously obtained 9.8s. How would that not be applying CGC's standards? I've had plenty of books in 9.8 holders that I was disappointed with and didn't deserve the label, IMHO. Likewise for many apparently flawless books in 9.6 holders. Its seemingly a coin flip at this level many times.

You guys are correct. 'Representative sample' is a great way of looking at it. We all have a feel for the grades based on experience with CGC books.

 

Is it OK to question the grades? Do grades exist in varying strengths? Does CGC make mistakes? I say yes to all. What I noted above would be midpoint levels of defects that I've come to associate with varying grades. Obviously, there are outliers. CGC does miss the mark. I'm sure you could present them with many books where they'd like a do-over.

 

[500Club]

But they are all subject to cgc standards. How do you single one book out as not meeting the standards when the standards are not published. And cgc obviously thinks it does meet the standard for a 9.8.

 

Rather than excluding the new book it should be incorporated into your pool of reference.

Good points. Good debate. (thumbs u

 

I do and will incorporate them into the pool of reference. At this point, they end up being outliers. If I see enough of them, I shift my perception of defects acceptable in grade.

 

You're also right that CGC doesn't publish its standards. That makes it necessary to go by experience and feel, based on books seen. And, at this point, my gut says a notable stress mark is not consistent with a 9.8, based on 9.8s I've seen.

[The-Collector]

But they are all subject to cgc standards. How do you single one book out as not meeting the standards when the standards are not published. And cgc obviously thinks it does meet the standard for a 9.8.

 

Rather than excluding the new book it should be incorporated into your pool of reference.

Good points. Good debate. (thumbs u

 

I do and will incorporate them into the pool of reference. At this point, they end up being outliers. If I see enough of them, I shift my perception of defects acceptable in grade.

 

You're also right that CGC doesn't publish its standards. That makes it necessary to go by experience and feel, based on books seen. And, at this point, my gut says a notable stress mark is not consistent with a 9.8, based on 9.8s I've seen.

 

Cheers, it is good to have a non heated discussion of comics.

 

My argument falls apart when you include mistakes like the tape pull

9.8.

 

Biggest problem is knowing when it is a genuine mistake or when we have guessed the standards wrong.

 

I would say big noticeable stress marks aren't consistent with most 9.8s either.

 

[NewWorldOrder]

Well this guy gives out 9.6's easier than anyone I have ever met.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Spider-Man-1-Platinum-NM-M-Todd-Mcfarlane-INCLUDES-ORIGINAL-LETTER-/281160323597?pt=US_Comic_Books&hash=item417676120d

 

 

I am very glad he is passing a CGC 9.6 worthy book to a buyer as a good gesture.

 

What a D-bag.

 

I guess CGC will be passing a 9.0 right back to the buyer.

[Bosco685]

Cheers, it is good to have a non heated discussion of comics.

 

[Illustrious]

Does CGC grade the back cover spines less harsh than the front, or is it treated the same?

[DiceX]

Less harsh.

 

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

Less harsh.

 

 

What do you know?

[rjpb]

Does CGC grade the back cover spines less harsh than the front, or is it treated the same?

 

There are those on the boards who claim that CGC's policy as well as their own grading standards treat back cover flaws as equal to front cover flaws, but I'll believe it when I see it.

[Illustrious]

Interesting.....I ask because I have some books that look flawless on the front, but have 1-2 color breaking spine ticks on the back, mostly when the back is a black colored ad.

[DiceX]

Less harsh.

 

 

What do you know?

 

Just repeating what one of the CGC guys said here on the boards a month or two ago.

 

 

[B-Smooth]

Does CGC grade the back cover spines less harsh than the front, or is it treated the same?

 

There are those on the boards who claim that CGC's policy as well as their own grading standards treat back cover flaws as equal to front cover flaws, but I'll believe it when I see it.

I don't buy it, either.

[Paul_Maul]

This has driven me crazy for years now. People post a book in the "Can You Spare a Grade" area, and if it has one color breaking spine tick, it's declared to be a 9.0 or 9.2. Then I look at ebay and see tons of 9.6's with such defects.

 

Here's the spine of a 9.6 currently on ebay:

 

 

Is my copy of Hulk 181, shown below, really any worse than this?

 

 

 

[Bosco685]

This has driven me crazy for years now. People post a book in the "Can You Spare a Grade" area, and if it has one color breaking spine tick, it's declared to be a 9.0 or 9.2. Then I look at ebay and see tons of 9.6's with such defects.

 

They also seem to grade all books the same, no matter the age or known defects. But that is why you have to make a judgement call for yourself what the final results may be. All they are providing is suggestions based on the limited pictures provided.

[VintageComics]

This has driven me crazy for years now. People post a book in the "Can You Spare a Grade" area, and if it has one color breaking spine tick, it's declared to be a 9.0 or 9.2. Then I look at ebay and see tons of 9.6's with such defects.

 

They also seem to grade all books the same, no matter the age or known defects. But that is why you have to make a judgement call for yourself what the final results may be. All they are providing is suggestions based on the limited pictures provided.

 

Not replying to anyone in particular but saying "spine tick" alone is not enough to describe how severe the defect is.

 

How many, how deep they run, how long they are, how much colour they break and even what colour cover they appear all will all factor into how CGC assigns a grade, IMO.

 

 

[Paul_Maul]

This has driven me crazy for years now. People post a book in the "Can You Spare a Grade" area, and if it has one color breaking spine tick, it's declared to be a 9.0 or 9.2. Then I look at ebay and see tons of 9.6's with such defects.

 

They also seem to grade all books the same, no matter the age or known defects. But that is why you have to make a judgement call for yourself what the final results may be. All they are providing is suggestions based on the limited pictures provided.

 

I'm not complaining about "Can You Spare a Grade" participants...I just think the level of strictness generally used there is light years away from how strict CGC actually is these days. If the "spare a grade" guys are stating what THEY think the book should be, I'm largely in agreement with them...but if they're trying to predict CGC's grade, they're way too strict, because CGC is nowhere near strict enough (anymore)....IMHO.

[Paul_Maul]

Not replying to anyone in particular but saying "spine tick" alone is not enough to describe how severe the defect is.

 

How many, how deep they run, how long they are, how much colour they break and even what colour cover they appear all will all factor into how CGC assigns a grade, IMO.

 

 

I'm sure all that's true. But no amount of intellectualizing on the subject can change the fact that books with this many spine dings would NEVER have been called NM+ 20 years ago....at least not by a reputable dealer. Pre-CGC, I found the use of NM+ as a descriptor to be extremely uncommon, and saved for truly pristine books. Way too many 9.6's these days look like 9.2's.