The case of the ridiculous amount of overspray- PGM ASM 122

[GLCBrad]

[font:Arial Black]I am doing my best to stump the pros today. [/font]

 

 

[1904 Comics]

easy on that restoration. they call it touch up for a reason. but this is a tie die hippie's dream.

 

upper left corner edge, can't tell what that line is on lower right edge, lower right corner, and then there's that overspray which to me is just above water damage in terms of grade appearance. im gonna go blind at this monstrosity with a 5.5?

[timfinz]

3.0 IMHO! That in my opinion is an unsold copy that has been sprayed for return credit. Not a printing defect and certainly I don't think CGC would allow this anymore than a badly stained or soiled copy!

[1904 Comics]

3.0 IMHO! That in my opinion is an unsold copy that has been sprayed for return credit. Not a printing defect and certainly I don't think CGC would allow this anymore than a badly stained or soiled copy!

 

I was hesistant to say that but I do agree. I just don't get the how or why this was done

[cpannell]

4.0 or 4.5

[marvelcollector]

I'd say it's a...unique...5.5...

[Red84]

Could this get a qualified green label 7.0? To me, that would be the most fair way to grade this book.

[DR.X]

I read the title and thought it was a lost Perry Mason episode.

[GLCBrad]

I read the title and thought it was a lost Perry Mason episode.

 

I was going for Encyclopedia Brown

[jaeldubyoo]

3.0 IMHO! That in my opinion is an unsold copy that has been sprayed for return credit. Not a printing defect and certainly I don't think CGC would allow this anymore than a badly stained or soiled copy!

 

Did they spray copies that they returned? I thought the distributors sprayed the top edge so they would be able to identify which comics they distributed if they were returned. It was done while the comics were still bundled. I also thought CGC is a little more lenient on overspray if it wasn't too excessive because it was common practice by the distributors to spray the edges. Doesn't really matter in this case as the overspray is way too excessive and so obtrusive visually. Somebody had a really bad aim and/or got carried away It's a real shame. I don't think too many people would consider buying this comic unless it's priced very cheap.

[makeminemego]

While it can't be counted as a printing or production defect, I still don't think it's in the same category as a water stain. Structurally, it looks like @ a 6.0. CGC would likely ding the book 2 full points due to that overspray.

 

I'll say 4.0. I've got an ASM 124 and 125 that are kissing cousins to this book.

 

 

[01TheDude]

I read the title and thought it was a lost Perry Mason episode.

 

I was going for Encyclopedia Brown

 

my dog saw this thread and started barking-- I said "what is it, boy? Is little Timmy stuck in the well?"

 

 

 

 

FULL DISCLOSURE: in keeping with the honesty policy on this board, I must admit I have no dog, no dog was barking in my house. This was a pure fabrication strictly for entertainment purposes.

 

Green River Comics, LLC

 

[timfinz]

3.0 IMHO! That in my opinion is an unsold copy that has been sprayed for return credit. Not a printing defect and certainly I don't think CGC would allow this anymore than a badly stained or soiled copy!

 

I was hesistant to say that but I do agree. I just don't get the how or why this was done

I am not sure what the policy is today on unsold comic books but back when comics were distributed to cigar stores and pharmacies etc., unsold copies were returned for credit so that the store would not have to pay for them. It was common practice at the time to remove the top portion or in some cases the entire front cover. Some areas it was common practice to pile the unsold copies and spray paint the spines to more or less "speed up the process" of marking the unsold copies. This was done to "devalue" the book so that it could not be sold after the fact.

I am sure there are others on the boards who are familiar with this "midieval" practice and may want to express an opinion or two?

[timfinz]

3.0 IMHO! That in my opinion is an unsold copy that has been sprayed for return credit. Not a printing defect and certainly I don't think CGC would allow this anymore than a badly stained or soiled copy!

 

Did they spray copies that they returned? I thought the distributors sprayed the top edge so they would be able to identify which comics they distributed if they were returned. It was done while the comics were still bundled. I also thought CGC is a little more lenient on overspray if it wasn't too excessive because it was common practice by the distributors to spray the edges. Doesn't really matter in this case as the overspray is way too excessive and so obtrusive visually. Somebody had a really bad aim and/or got carried away It's a real shame. I don't think too many people would consider buying this comic unless it's priced very cheap.

Hi jd, (can I call you jd for short?)

Distributors did spray the top edge to identify their books and each territory I believe had a different colour. Also see my response to Mike above.

[fastballspecial]

Its return spray I think. The mis-wrap caused it to stick out and get more spray.

 

I once had a GS X-men 1 with purple spray all around the cover.

 

I will say 5-5.5 and dont think they will grade it that harshly.

 

[jaeldubyoo]

3.0 IMHO! That in my opinion is an unsold copy that has been sprayed for return credit. Not a printing defect and certainly I don't think CGC would allow this anymore than a badly stained or soiled copy!

 

I was hesistant to say that but I do agree. I just don't get the how or why this was done

I am not sure what the policy is today on unsold comic books but back when comics were distributed to cigar stores and pharmacies etc., unsold copies were returned for credit so that the store would not have to pay for them. It was common practice at the time to remove the top portion or in some cases the entire front cover. Some areas it was common practice to pile the unsold copies and spray paint the spines to more or less "speed up the process" of marking the unsold copies. This was done to "devalue" the book so that it could not be sold after the fact.

I am sure there are others on the boards who are familiar with this "midieval" practice and may want to express an opinion or two?

 

(thumbs u I learned something new today.

[KPR Comics]

Is this the one that was on ComicConnect as an 8.0?

[GLCBrad]

That's a good question- I bought it on metropolis as an 8.0 with a "distributor's spray" notation. (I'm not sure about the relationship between comic connect and metropolis is). I will be returning it regardless!! I just wanted to develop my grading skills in the meantime and learn something about the impact of something like this. Big thanks to all that spoke up! (thumbs u

[KPR Comics]

One and the same, essentially. I must've looked at this book a dozen times on there and could never commit b/c I couldn't convince myself that it was near an 8.0 w/all that ink. I would say 5.0 to 6.0. Wide range, I know, but hard to tell how much deduct they would give the ink.

[Peter Loves Gwen]

I'd call it about a Fine or so without the ink spray, but how to grade that also is tough. Given the mid grade, I wouldn't penalize it very much. On a high grade book, the ink would kill the grade, but below the VF range I'd be lenient.

 

A stain(water etc) is a very bad thing, any ink stain is no harm to a book, just a visual detractor. I'd call it a Fine and expect the value to be lower, say in that 4-5 range.