• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

A second copy of CGC 9.0 Action Comics #1 on the census (7/22/14)

Started by valiantman,

1,507 posts in this topic

Tom473

Tom473

Posted
Posted
I wouldn't be surprised if it was comped as was suggested. Not sure they want even the threat of a certain competitor's label on that book . Who knows. But I could see it getting comped

 

At the time this was graded, there was no competitor

The book was graded 7/18/2014. I can think of three competitors that existed on that date.

 

Interesting that's the date that's been plugged in.

 

I want you to think about something, if you think the book was "really" graded on 7/18/14, how'd the pictures get to print on an OSPG that gets printed in January and Feb of 2014.

I've heard from multiple sources book was graded last year and withheld from the census to coincide with the ospg ad release

 

Why can't they at least backdate it to the actual grading date, is that technically impossible because of how the census DB works? It is a little shady that the date used is last Friday, because it implies that the book could have been graded by a certain competitor (that cannot be named), but the owner 'chose' CGC instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
valiantman

valiantman

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I wouldn't be surprised if it was comped as was suggested. Not sure they want even the threat of a certain competitor's label on that book . Who knows. But I could see it getting comped

 

At the time this was graded, there was no competitor

The book was graded 7/18/2014. I can think of three competitors that existed on that date.

 

Interesting that's the date that's been plugged in.

 

I want you to think about something, if you think the book was "really" graded on 7/18/14, how'd the pictures get to print on an OSPG that gets printed in January and Feb of 2014.

I've heard from multiple sources book was graded last year and withheld from the census to coincide with the ospg ad release

 

Why can't they at least backdate it to the actual grading date, is that technically impossible because of how the census DB works? It is a little shady that the date used is last Friday, because it implies that the book could have been graded by a certain competitor (that cannot be named), but the owner 'chose' CGC instead.

 

They can definitely backdate to the actual grading date... now.

 

To put it in the database, but not have it show up until the correct time, they may have had to "future date" it. (Simple work-around trick.)

 

Now that it is the correct time, they can go into the database and correct the grading date.

 

If I were them, I would make sure that the grading date will only be wrong for a week... if that long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted
My guess is this books was as scrutinized , grade wise, as any book cgc has graded. There is an issue(s) on bc that keeps grade where it is.

 

You pull the notes, Gator? I was thinking about it. That FC looks absolutely sick!

No notes. Someone that is familiar with the book told me this

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom473

Tom473

Posted
Posted
My guess is this books was as scrutinized , grade wise, as any book cgc has graded. There is an issue(s) on bc that keeps grade where it is.

 

You pull the notes, Gator? I was thinking about it. That FC looks absolutely sick!

No notes. Someone that is familiar with the book told me this

 

Is that to prevent knowledge of flaws/unique features from entering the public domain? To prevent counterfeiters in case of another Cage-like incident?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted
My guess is this books was as scrutinized , grade wise, as any book cgc has graded. There is an issue(s) on bc that keeps grade where it is.

 

You pull the notes, Gator? I was thinking about it. That FC looks absolutely sick!

No notes. Someone that is familiar with the book told me this

 

Is that to prevent knowledge of flaws/unique features from entering the public domain? To prevent counterfeiters in case of another Cage-like incident?

I'm sure a back cover scan will be available sooner or later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lazyboy

Lazyboy

Posted
Posted
How, how is it possible to get a book to to look that good that came out in 1938? Where and how was this thing stored?

 

That's why I think it might have come from right in Winnipeg where Pristine is. All of the (few ) Canadian pedigrees have had great page quality and the Edgar church collection isn't far from us either... neither was Spokane. White pages on a 38 book might suggest a northern climate and winnipegs as cold as it gets for cities with any kind of population base in 1938

 

Pristine Comics in Winnipeg (Pembina Highway) went under nearly 7 years ago.

 

The current owner:

 

West Coast Cards and Games/Pristine Comics

Federal Way, Washington

253 941 1986

darrenwccg@aol.com

 

hm That's weird. Pristine Comics in Winnipeg was owned by a Darren and he moved out to B.C. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comeaux

comeaux

Posted
Posted

Grader Notes:

Bottom Back Cover Small Lite Stain

Bottom Back Cover Small Tear

Bottom Spine Bindary Tear

Left Center Back Cover Small Tear

Top Spine Bindary Tear

Top Staple Small Multiple Tear

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom473

Tom473

Posted
Posted
Grader Notes:

Bottom Back Cover Small Lite Stain

Bottom Back Cover Small Tear

Bottom Spine Bindary Tear

Left Center Back Cover Small Tear

Top Spine Bindary Tear

Top Staple Small Multiple Tear

 

What constitutes a small tear in CGC standards, less than a quarter inch, less that 1/8" ?

 

Guess this explains the 9.0, but the FC is still almost beyond belief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lou_fine

lou_fine

Posted
Posted
Grader Notes:

Bottom Back Cover Small Lite Stain

Bottom Back Cover Small Tear

Bottom Spine Bindary Tear

Left Center Back Cover Small Tear

Top Spine Bindary Tear

Top Staple Small Multiple Tear

 

CGC is definitely not going to be happy with you! (tsk)

 

They were hoping to sell this information to all potential bidders and all of the nosy lookie loo's at $15 bucks a shot. lol

 

Definitely looks way better than the Cage copy from the front cover alone, but I guess it does not tell the whole story. Still, I would definitely take this one over the Cage copy if I had the money. :cloud9:

 

I guess he's going to have to go after the CVA sticker on this one here. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted

The immaculate front cover more than outweighs the small defects-I still think it's a 9.2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing