THE AMAZING FANTASY #15 CLUB 39 39

[delekkerste]

17 hours ago, G.A.tor said:

I must be doing a bad job at clearly expressing my views  I can’t imagine anyone prefers Mc over like copy without Mc  That hardly seems debatable  ...

to clarify, my point was I am ok with Mc sized localized piece out where as I am a lot less ok with Mc books. This I’m not sure if I’m majority or minority 

I don't know if that's the majority or minority view, but, personally, I would much prefer MC on an edge than a localized piece missing.  To me, the latter is a bigger eyesore and more distracting to the eye than a little chipping spread across a broader area.  Just my opinion, though.  

[Sweet Lou 14]

8 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

I don't know if that's the majority or minority view, but, personally, I would much prefer MC on an edge than a localized piece missing.  To me, the latter is a bigger eyesore and more distracting to the eye than a little chipping spread across a broader area.  Just my opinion, though.  

Although I would never buy a book with any piece missing, if forced to choose I would agree with you.  Generally, chipping results in missing pieces that do not take away from the art.  A larger piece is much more likely to mean that some of the words and/or art on the cover is missing.

[Callaway29]

9 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

I don't know if that's the majority or minority view, but, personally, I would much prefer MC on an edge than a localized piece missing.  To me, the latter is a bigger eyesore and more distracting to the eye than a little chipping spread across a broader area.  Just my opinion, though.  

In this camp

[zhamlau]

17 hours ago, blazingbob said:

"The Market"?  So basically it doesn't matter that CGC factored in the chipping and graded it a 6.0.  "The ambiguous Market" felt it was a 5.0?  

How does that make sense?

Or are you "the market"

 

No, the market is made up of the buyers who on a neutral playing field decided (including dealers looking for resale value) that this book was worth as much as a good 5.0 and bid accordingly.

[zhamlau]

16 hours ago, blazingbob said:

For me and when I'm selling a "chipped" copy the bottom line is that this is paper loss.  It is reflected in the grade and unfortunately it causes your eyes to be drawn to it unless there is something else more pronounced on the book.  

The hobby has put a name to it because they know what caused it. 

If you could identify every time somebody tore a piece of the book I'm sure we would have a rippedoffis stigma out there.

If you think about it, by your standard trimming a book shouldn't give it a qualified grade than? If all that matters is the paper loss not how it happened, shouldn't trimming a book just lower the grade and not give it a qualified since all that matters is the paper loss?

[blazingbob]

Trimming gets a qualified?  Trimming gets a restored label since the intent was to remove the defect(s) and can be detected.

Paper loss from Marvel chipping is explainable per the many definitions already given on how it is caused.  Marvel chipping isn't intentional.    

If a person tears off a corner of a book that has color touch on it to get a blue label who knows that?  Would the grading company know that if the piece wasn't with the book when it was sent in?

  

 

 

[ProcessedMeatMan]

These are my copies. I'd love to own a copy without MC, but with the premium they bring in mid-grade, I doubt I'd ever be able to afford one anymore. So, while I'm not a fan of MC, but I do have an acceptable level. The 5.0 has very minor MC. The 1.0 technically has no MC, but has pieces falling off all over. I'm happy and that's what counts!

[zhamlau]

Sorry my bad restored. But same concept. If paper loss is paper loss regardless of if coming from a bad cut or normal hand wear (which is what you say they keeping in mind while grading) Than you seem to be saying "cause doesn't matter". It's all about the paper loss only. They aren't going light on MC because of the 'why' they are treating it like normal wear and grading the same as if it was normal wear/tears.

I don't think they are. CGC have clearly established (to me anyway) cause does matter, hence why trimming a book doesn't just count as paper lost but as a unique set of circumstances that causes this version of paper loss to get a wholly worse/less desirable grade (restored).

If paper is lost due to post production cutting, its given a much less desirable grade (restored).

If paper is lost due to post production wear, its given a standard more desirable grade in line with normal wear.

If paper is lost due to pre-production flaws, its treated as a bindery defect and from my experience is partially forgiven/written off in the final desirable grade.

 

Its not just a formula of what percentage is missing from what ive seen, but of how that paper loss occurred.

 

Edited April 27, 2018 by zhamlau

[blazingbob]

I have not been told by Matt that marvel chips are treated as bindery defect and partially forgiven.

As I said I spoke to him yesterday and he said it was based on how much paper was missing.

If you speak to him and get a different answer by all means post it or better yet have them come on the boards and clear this up.

Edited April 27, 2018 by blazingbob

[Jordysnordy]

This is up on eBay now - no reserve auction. Should be fun to see where it winds up.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/AMAZING-FANTASY-15-CGC-8-0-Spiderman-1st-App/282942160250?hash=item41e0aabd7a:g:~-YAAOSw-uda4y2q

 

Edited April 28, 2018 by Jordysnordy

[namisgr]

18 hours ago, paul747 said:

Obviously there are a couple of camps on this issue. I personally would not spend 20, 30, or 40 grand or higher on a book with pieces missing At least one that is so common, I understand the argument that with out the chipping its a 8.0 or better, but it has the chipping, it should be a 5.0.  The chipping In my opinion should be discounted even more. Like I and others have mentioned, it just seems like it is going to continue to chip. Its a bad defect.

As Roy pointed out earlier, it's a matter of severity.  There's many, many degrees of chipping and pre-chipping/Marvel tears.  I don't think blanket statements about desirability or how many grading units chipping should deduct as a rule are especially useful.

Sometimes, like this, a comic can have chipping and look great, essentially the same as it did the day it hit the newsstand over 50 years prior:

 

And then there are examples with extensive pre-chipping that have yet to lose a chip in 55 years.  I think if an early SA Marvel has pre-chips that have survived five decades, they're not at risk and are highly likely to survive many more.  This Pacific Coast copy is a near mint without the heavy pre-chipping, and as you can tell by the number CGC hits high grade books especially hard for extensive pre-chipping.

Edited April 27, 2018 by namisgr

[blazingbob]

VG+ in a 9.0 holder

Clearly this got the pedigree bump as well as the marvel chipping sliding scale grade

 

Edited April 27, 2018 by blazingbob

[Sweet Lou 14]

3 hours ago, blazingbob said:

VG+ in a 9.0 holder

Clearly this got the pedigree bump as well as the marvel chipping sliding scale grade

 

But on a serious note, do you agree that this book would likely be 9.2 or even 9.4 without that chipping?  Impossible to say from the scan alone, but it looks that way.  This would back up what's already been said that chipping is in fact factored into the grade.

[namisgr]

9 minutes ago, Sweet Lou 14 said:

But on a serious note, do you agree that this book would likely be 9.2 or even 9.4 without that chipping?  Impossible to say from the scan alone, but it looks that way.  This would back up what's already been said that chipping is in fact factored into the grade.

You don't need to ask Bob.  I used to own the Twin Cities Strange Tales #107, and it was a 9.4/9.6 without the chipping.  I'm pretty certain everyone knows already that CGC detracts from numerical grades for chipping and pre-chipping, with the magnitude of the detraction depending on how high the grade would otherwise be (the higher the grade the greater the detraction and the lower the grade the lesser the detraction) and how severe the chipping or pre-chipping is.

Edited April 28, 2018 by namisgr

[Sweet Lou 14]

2 minutes ago, namisgr said:

You don't need to ask Bob.  I used to own the Twin Cities Strange Tales #107, and it was a 9.4/9.6 without the chipping.  I'm pretty certain everyone knows already that CGC detracts from numerical grades for chipping and pre-chipping, with the magnitude of the detraction depending on how high the grade would otherwise be and how severe the chipping or pre-chipping is.

You're saying "everyone knows" -- and it's certainly always been my understanding -- but it seems to me like some people are hotly debating that.

Edited April 28, 2018 by Sweet Lou 14

[porcupine48]

16 hours ago, Foley said:

AF 15 with chips, AF 15 without chips, AF 15 that smells like fish and chips, AF 15 with chipmunk chews, I'd just be happy to own one.

Maybe some day 

What about mushy peas?

[namisgr]

1 hour ago, Sweet Lou 14 said:

You're saying "everyone knows" -- and it's certainly always been my understanding -- but it seems to me like some people are hotly debating that.

They're thinking of low grade books, where the accumulation of major defects blunts the contribution of the chipping.

And while the discussion here has focused on how much is missing cumulatively from chipping and how the detraction compares to when a single piece is missing from handling wear, the Pac Coast JIM90 shows unequivocally that no chips need to be missing at all in order for the grade detraction to be substantial - if the pre-chipping is extensive and the comic otherwise high grade, the grade will be several units lower.

Edited April 28, 2018 by namisgr

[Readcomix]

25 minutes ago, porcupine48 said:

What about mushy peas?

You're thinking of the AF15 Dr Seuss variant 

[VintageComics]

20 hours ago, namisgr said:

As Roy pointed out earlier, it's a matter of severity.  There's many, many degrees of chipping and pre-chipping/Marvel tears.  I don't think blanket statements about desirability or how many grading units chipping should deduct as a rule are especially useful.

Correct.

There is an infinite amount of degrees between 'no chipping' and 'lots of chipping'.

Here is a book with very slight chipping on the right edge. It's right next to the ! on the right edge (next to the word "HULK!")

Do you think it's value should be discounted because of it? Maybe it should sell for 9.0 money?

 

Here is another book with Marvel Chipping. What a clunker.

 

 

 

Edited April 28, 2018 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

My point is that each book needs to be judged on it's own merits and not just whether it has chipping or no chipping as each case will vary.