Another PGX grading job well done!

[Columbia Comics]

I still stand behind my grade of weak 6.0 (solid 5.5).

 

I can't stand the chipping and frankly books should be crushed for it. But it does get a pass and you have to grade books with it as such.

 

If someone truly believes that's a 3.0, then please sell me all your books

[Quicksilver Signs]

I still stand behind my grade of weak 6.0 (solid 5.5).

 

I can't stand the chipping and frankly books should be crushed for it. But it does get a pass and you have to grade books with it as such.

 

If someone truly believes that's a 3.0, then please sell me all your books

 

+1000

[Tony S]

I'm fairly certain this is the same book that Ryan Elliott (aka djbrady4u) was trying to sell for a while. He was trying to sell another 7.0 to Harley or Terry, and they didn't want anything to do with it. Hell, it might have been the same book.

 

I thought we had seen this book before in a thread. I'm sure you are right. DJbrady4u had this for sale earlier. And as I recall it sold for a whole lot less than a 7.0 Hulk 1 normally sells for. Perhaps the current seller was the purchaser? Seems plausible.

 

BTW, Ryan Elliott and Brady Galore (DJBrady4u) are two different people. Clearly they have an arrangement. Maybe Brady just lets Ryan sell under his account. But they are not the same person. They are friends to each other on FB, they live in the same area.

[kav]

I still stand behind my grade of weak 6.0 (solid 5.5).

 

I can't stand the chipping and frankly books should be crushed for it. But it does get a pass and you have to grade books with it as such.

 

If someone truly believes that's a 3.0, then please sell me all your books

 

+1000

 

put your money where your mouth is and buy this 3.0 then. it has no chipping.\

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hulk-1-CGC-3-0-Marvel-1962-Key-Silver-Age-RARE-113-cm-/281083396566?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4171e041d6

[kav]

Ok, so maybe not a 7.0. But I'd be surprised if it fell below a 6.0. That's not to say I'd be happy with it at 6.0. To be honest I'm not sure I'd buy it at 4.0, but I hate Marvel chipping.

 

That's why even a 6.0 is total BS - it's a 3.0

 

that would be the grade I would give it.

 

No way is that a 3.0

 

Nice back cover, just the Marvel chipping holding it back

 

You can pooh pooh on Marvel chipping all you want, majority give it a pass, especially CGC. maybe not fair but dat's the way it is.

 

perhaps you didn't notice the spine wear. chipping isn't the only problem. You may be overgrading your books....

[Tony S]

I still stand behind my grade of weak 6.0 (solid 5.5).

 

I can't stand the chipping and frankly books should be crushed for it. But it does get a pass and you have to grade books with it as such.

 

If someone truly believes that's a 3.0, then please sell me all your books

 

+1000

 

put your money where your mouth is and buy this 3.0 then. it has no chipping.\

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hulk-1-CGC-3-0-Marvel-1962-Key-Silver-Age-RARE-113-cm-/281083396566?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4171e041d6

 

Discussion is getting silly here. This CGC 3.0 book doesn't look near as nice as the PGX 7.0 under discussion. Creases and very worn spine.

 

Everyone agrees that the 7.0 being discussed here does not have a FN/VF appearance. But it's a lot nice than GD/VG. It's 5.0'ish and you can find CGC graded books at 5.0 with this appearance and substantial chipping.

 

The situation is bad enough on it's own with resorting to drama and hyperbole.

Just sayin....

 

[kav]

i seriously think the 3.0 is the same as that 7-better spine better edges but has some fading and back cover wear. equal in my eyes. no hyperbole or hyperdrive or anything.

'very worn spine'? it has far fewer stress marks than the 7's spine....

I'm not seeing any creases-could you point them out to me? unless you mean that tiny triangular stress mark under the 'H'.....

[NTHstars]

I turned in a Hulk 181 with significant chipping on the bottom right recently, and they gave it a 9.2. The book was a 9.4 otherwise I thought. So a one grade hit maybe.

[DR.X]

I'd like to see a scan of that book.

[Designer Toast]

I'm fairly certain this is the same book that Ryan Elliott (aka djbrady4u) was trying to sell for a while. He was trying to sell another 7.0 to Harley or Terry, and they didn't want anything to do with it. Hell, it might have been the same book.

 

I thought we had seen this book before in a thread. I'm sure you are right. DJbrady4u had this for sale earlier. And as I recall it sold for a whole lot less than a 7.0 Hulk 1 normally sells for. Perhaps the current seller was the purchaser? Seems plausible.

 

BTW, Ryan Elliott and Brady Galore (DJBrady4u) are two different people. Clearly they have an arrangement. Maybe Brady just lets Ryan sell under his account. But they are not the same person. They are friends to each other on FB, they live in the same area.

 

This info was posted a while ago, but always bears repeating. I posted a screenshot showing their relationship a long time ago along with that of Terrence Leder and Elliott - they're no longer friends on FB. Elliott lives in Eugene and Gaylor lives in Creswell. Gaylor's a used car salesman by day, part time DJ.

 

 

[Quicksilver Signs]

i seriously think the 3.0 is the same as that 7-better spine better edges but has some fading and back cover wear. equal in my eyes. no hyperbole or hyperdrive or anything.

'very worn spine'? it has far fewer stress marks than the 7's spine....

I'm not seeing any creases-could you point them out to me? unless you mean that tiny triangular stress mark under the 'H'.....

 

That's a nice looking 3.0 I'd re-sub that for sure, course it could have internal issues since CGC puts no useful info on the label.

 

Still doesn't change my mind on the other book

[kav]

i seriously think the 3.0 is the same as that 7-better spine better edges but has some fading and back cover wear. equal in my eyes. no hyperbole or hyperdrive or anything.

'very worn spine'? it has far fewer stress marks than the 7's spine....

I'm not seeing any creases-could you point them out to me? unless you mean that tiny triangular stress mark under the 'H'.....

 

That's a nice looking 3.0 I'd re-sub that for sure, course it could have internal issues since CGC puts no useful info on the label.

 

Still doesn't change my mind on the other book

 

fair enough. i could revise my estimate up to a 5.0

6.0 would be pushing it though.

[rjpb]

i seriously think the 3.0 is the same as that 7-better spine better edges but has some fading and back cover wear. equal in my eyes. no hyperbole or hyperdrive or anything.

'very worn spine'? it has far fewer stress marks than the 7's spine....

I'm not seeing any creases-could you point them out to me? unless you mean that tiny triangular stress mark under the 'H'.....

 

Barring unseen problems with either copy, I'd take the CGC Hulk 3.0 over the PGX 7.0 any day. The spine wear on the 3.0 is far less obtrusive than the chipping on the "7.0", which looks like it would be a 6.0 even if it didn't have chipping.

 

A lot of people go along with the leniency on Marvel chipping because CGC does it, but that doesn't make it acceptable to everyone, including me. Put that same chipping on a DC book and it's a 3.0. Sure, if I had a Marvel key with chipping, I'd probably slab it to sell it, because buyers are foolish enough to go along with the grade. I'd be leaving money on the table otherwise, as unless it was a low grade book to start with, I doubt I would give it as high a grade raw as CGC would, but I'm not going to change my own standards just because CGC chooses to have a different standard for early Marvels with missing pieces along the edge than it does for other books.

[makeminemego]

The book is considerably nicer than a 3.0. Looks 5.0 or so to my eyes.

[mackenzie999]

Do I understand correctly that the reason for CGC's leniency on marvel chipping is that the paper quality was chip-prone and the blades were not kept sharp enough during trimming? The logic to this being that chipping is a manufacturing flaw? If so...I'd be pretty surprised (and please correct me if I'm wrong) if these issues appeared like that on the news stands, all raggedy-edged like that.

So, if they appeared unchipped on the stands, wouldn't that make any subsequent chipping due to inadequate preservation, just like pretty much every other condition flaw a book can have? Makes no sense to me, but then that's why I ask.

[epowe10097]

I still stand behind my grade of weak 6.0 (solid 5.5).

 

I can't stand the chipping and frankly books should be crushed for it. But it does get a pass and you have to grade books with it as such.

 

If someone truly believes that's a 3.0, then please sell me all your books

 

+1000

 

put your money where your mouth is and buy this 3.0 then. it has no chipping.\

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hulk-1-CGC-3-0-Marvel-1962-Key-Silver-Age-RARE-113-cm-/281083396566?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4171e041d6

 

Discussion is getting silly here. This CGC 3.0 book doesn't look near as nice as the PGX 7.0 under discussion. Creases and very worn spine.

 

Everyone agrees that the 7.0 being discussed here does not have a FN/VF appearance. But it's a lot nice than GD/VG. It's 5.0'ish and you can find CGC graded books at 5.0 with this appearance and substantial chipping.

 

The situation is bad enough on it's own with resorting to drama and hyperbole.

Just sayin....

 

Are you saying the PGX 7.0 looks better because you know how CGC handles Marvel chipping or that if there was no such thing as Marvel chipping, the 7.0 would still look better?

[rjpb]

Do I understand correctly that the reason for CGC's leniency on marvel chipping is that the paper quality was chip-prone and the blades were not kept sharp enough during trimming? The logic to this being that chipping is a manufacturing flaw? If so...I'd be pretty surprised (and please correct me if I'm wrong) if these issues appeared like that on the news stands, all raggedy-edged like that.

So, if they appeared unchipped on the stands, wouldn't that make any subsequent chipping due to inadequate preservation, just like pretty much every other condition flaw a book can have? Makes no sense to me, but then that's why I ask.

 

Yes, yes and yes, and you are correct, it makes no sense.

[Unca Ben]

Do I understand correctly that the reason for CGC's leniency on marvel chipping is that the paper quality was chip-prone and the blades were not kept sharp enough during trimming? The logic to this being that chipping is a manufacturing flaw? If so...I'd be pretty surprised (and please correct me if I'm wrong) if these issues appeared like that on the news stands, all raggedy-edged like that.

So, if they appeared unchipped on the stands, wouldn't that make any subsequent chipping due to inadequate preservation, just like pretty much every other condition flaw a book can have? Makes no sense to me, but then that's why I ask.

 

Yes, yes and yes, and you are correct, it makes no sense.

 

because $

[mackenzie999]

 

because $

 

Without even looking at the question this will be the right answer most of the time.

[joe_collector]

Do I understand correctly that the reason for CGC's leniency on marvel chipping is that the paper quality was chip-prone and the blades were not kept sharp enough during trimming? The logic to this being that chipping is a manufacturing flaw? If so...I'd be pretty surprised (and please correct me if I'm wrong) if these issues appeared like that on the news stands, all raggedy-edged like that.

So, if they appeared unchipped on the stands, wouldn't that make any subsequent chipping due to inadequate preservation, just like pretty much every other condition flaw a book can have? Makes no sense to me, but then that's why I ask.

 

Yes, yes and yes, and you are correct, it makes no sense.

 

because $

 

Exactly - CGC has always been about financially protecting dealers, investors, auction houses, and major collectors, so whatever was the accepted "modus operandi" they supported was automatically adopted by CGC.

 

So totally illogical stuff like chipping, pedigree sigs and ink stains gets a total pass when grading, while a tiny back cover ink mark or stain gets hammered.