Took A Chance : What Do You Think?

[nik]

One of my two favorite early FF Doom covers, the other being #5. Although I know better than to take stupid chances, I pulled the trigger on this copy advertised as a NM, scan the size of half my finger and dark

[jimm94]

Hey Nikos,

 

Is that a small water stain at the bottom edge of the back cover? Looks to be a pretty solid 7.5ish copy if you don't mind dust shadows. I wouldn't throw it out of bed for eating crackers, but I hope you didn't pay too much for it.

 

Cheers,

 

-Jim

[uclapeterg]

I don't think it's a NM (obviously), more like F/VF. I have a CGC 7.5 that is similar but with less damage. It's still a solid copy, especially if you don't mind the sunshadows. How does the book look inside? How much did you pay?

[nik]

No water stain, dust shawdows on the inside covers as well. The overall structure of the book is pretty good IMO. Gloss is pretty sharp, book is very tight, pages are Cream to off-white.

[nik]

I paid $200 for the book. The sunshadows dont really bother me, but I know CGC will downgrade for this defect. Overall I think its a very sharp copy, which even with the tiny tear in the back cover, and with the shawdowing, it might still grade pretty good.

[rjpb]

Structurally it looks an 8.0/8.5, but the tanning on both the front & back would make it closer to a 7.0/7.5 in my book, but I don't know that CGC would be as hard on it. I've been looking for a VG to F copy myself, and have noticed that this is one of the few FFs that seems to always sell for around guide or more in the lower grades, which is why a cheap bastid like myself still doesn't have a copy.

[nik]

I think my LCS guy might have one, I will check for you tonight.

[divad]

I don't want to be the lone hater in the group . . . I agree with Petey 7.0 but with the dust shadows, the biased miscut FC; the small tear to the LEBC; the light wear to the TEBC, and the CRtoOW pages . . .

 

I think a 6.5 is possible.

 

[Arty]

You should press that top egde damage on back cover.

[Stronguy]

If it were in my collection I'd call it VF.

Early FFs are hard to find above that. Defintely not NM but $200 is a good price. Congrats.

[uclapeterg]

If it were in my collection I'd call it VF.

Early FFs are hard to find above that. Defintely not NM but $200 is a good price. Congrats.

 

Nikos, I would have sold you my CGC 7.5 for $200. Return the book.

[Silver Surfer]

Not NM but still nice copies. I wouldn't bother slabbing it because you probably won't be happy with the PQ and the grade when it comes out.

[nik]

The seller does not take returns

[divad]

The seller does not take returns

 

Still, an attractive copy!

[nik]

 

I think a 6.5 is possible.

 

[rjpb]

A CGC grade of 6.5 would be extremely harsh. There seems to be a tendency on these boards to undergrade scans in relation to how CGC actually grades the book. Not that CGC is entirely consistent themselves when it comes to evaluating the effect of tanning, and sun or dust shadows on the grade.

[divad]

A CGC grade of 6.5 would be extremely harsh. There seems to be a tendency on these boards to undergrade scans in relation to how CGC actually grades the book. Not that CGC is entirely consistent themselves when it comes to evaluating the effect of tanning, and sun or dust shadows on the grade.

 

One thing's for certain - this is the first time I've been accused of undergrading

[uclapeterg]

No, you're just harsh on OTHER's books.

[divad]

No, you're just harsh on OTHER's books.

 

C'mon and post one! I'll show you harsh!