• 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.

TOMB OF DRACULA #10 CGC MT 9.9!!!!!!!!!!!!

Started by drdonaldblake,

228 posts in this topic

Ze-man

Ze-man

Posted
Posted

In my view there is no place in the 'best of the best' catagory for books that display ANY defects, whether they be handling, structural, production or otherwise.

 

I agree.

If you took 10 people who did not know comics, showed them a room with CGC 9.9 comics hanging on the wall.

Told them these are the finest known CGC examples of the paticular comic.

I wonder if they would ask.."why is this cover off center?, I cant see all the art... is that White part supposed to be there?"

 

And to me THAT is what this comes down to.

Call it a personal preference, or living by what the darn guides decree as gospel. Or how CGC chooses to interpret, and implement those guidlines.

Which we then must make a decision with our $$ if we agree or not with the grade given to a comic.

 

But it should not be that way.

A miswrap is a tangible thing , it can be seen , and measured. And to me at least , detracts from a PERFECT comic.

So why cannot the comic community come to terms on how it should affect the final grade? Is it really that bipolar of a subject ?

Or is it.?.. and I just do not want to accept what is a given to everyone else?

I just grow tired of tempering how I might view a comic with how CGC grades a comic versus what the guides tell us.

 

Ze-

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted

In my view there is no place in the 'best of the best' catagory for books that display ANY defects, whether they be handling, structural, production or otherwise.

 

I agree.

If you took 10 people who did not know comics, showed them a room with CGC 9.9 comics hanging on the wall.

Told them these are the finest known CGC examples of the paticular comic.

I wonder if they would ask.."why is this cover off center?, I cant see all the art... is that White part supposed to be there?"

 

And to me THAT is what this comes down to.

Call it a personal preference, or living by what the darn guides decree as gospel. Or how CGC chooses to interpret, and implement those guidlines.

Which we then must make a decision with our $$ if we agree or not with the grade given to a comic.

 

But it should not be that way.

A miswrap is a tangible thing , it can be seen , and measured. And to me at least , detracts from a PERFECT comic.

So why cannot the comic community come to terms on how it should affect the final grade? Is it really that bipolar of a subject ?

Or is it.?.. and I just do not want to accept what is a given to everyone else?

I just grow tired of tempering how I might view a comic with how CGC grades a comic versus what the guides tell us.

 

Ze-

 

What I think confuses the issue is that I don't feel that an overall grade would tell me more than a purely structural grade, a PQ notation and my own 2 eyes.

 

I've made a suggestion to both Litch & Borock on how to address the QP issue.....but as of yet...no reply. confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted
From my understanding...the QP of that TOD 10 wasn't factored into the grade, and the HULK 181 was cut-off at 9.6....not technically downgraded by .2/.3

 

Actually Borock wasn't clear in this thread and just said the TOD 10 is "smoking", but I'd say him saying "If it was not mis-cut, it would have recieved a 9.8-9.9" is quite clear in the thread on the Hulk 181 that I just dug up. Link is below:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=gradeandresto&Number=233982#Post233982

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
From my understanding...the QP of that TOD 10 wasn't factored into the grade, and the HULK 181 was cut-off at 9.6....not technically downgraded by .2/.3

 

Actually Borock wasn't clear in this thread and just said the TOD 10 is "smoking", but I'd say him saying "If it was not mis-cut, it would have recieved a 9.8-9.9" is quite clear in the thread on the Hulk 181 that I just dug up. Link is below:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=gradeandresto&Number=233982#Post233982

 

I know what he said, and understand that the book received a 9.6 rather than a 9.8/9.9 due to the miswrap.

 

The distinction I'm trying to make is that the book was cut-off at 9.6, just as CGC cuts off books at a certain grade due to Page Quality.

 

In other words.....

 

Even if that HULK 181 was a 10.0, it would have been cut-off at 9.6

 

Once a production defect reaches a specific degree, the book is no longer eligible for a numerical grade beyond 9.6

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted
Once a production defect reaches a specific degree, the book is no longer eligible for a numerical grade beyond 9.6

 

Ah, I agree. How do you know they didn't cut off the TOD 10? I think they "cut off" grades for a variety of defects, so to describe that as "not factoring it into the grade" seems misleading. They cut off for creases past a certain length...page quality that is off-white, cream, tan, or brittle...stains...etc...etc.

 

I suspect we're actually in agreement here, so I'm probably confused about where you're leading me after responding to the thread where I disagreed with Blowout's statement that CGC doesn't factor in production defects to the grade... crazy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
Once a production defect reaches a specific degree, the book is no longer eligible for a numerical grade beyond 9.6

 

Ah, I agree. How do you know they didn't cut off the TOD 10? I think they "cut off" grades for a variety of defects, so to describe that as "not factoring it into the grade" seems misleading. They cut off for creases past a certain length...page quality that is off-white, cream, tan, or brittle...stains...etc...etc.

 

I suspect we're actually in agreement here, so I'm probably confused about where you're leading me after responding to the thread where I disagreed with Blowout's statement that CGC doesn't factor in production defects to the grade... crazy.gif

 

This whole thread has made me dizzy. insane.gif

 

Let's start fresh....

 

GUESS THE GRADE:

 

CGCforumASM185.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Tripps

Captain Tripps

Posted
Posted

Dude,

 

I quit more than 11 years ago (Ha Ha). Seriously, I've seen many copies of that book (I've owned 2 9.8's) and it's just perfect. The holder can't do it justice. Check out the edges and corners and spine. An obviously unread, neatly stacked book (my favorite kind)

 

It's a better book than the #1 (better cover, first blade) and I think it's one of the best and underrated Bronze Age Marvels.

 

Do I think it's worth 10K? No, but it's worth a lot more than what 9.8's have gone for, I think.

 

If I still collected TOD's, I'd be putting this one under my pillow (no wonder i'm always tired during the day).

 

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites
awe4one

awe4one

Posted
Posted
If you took 10 people who did not know comics, showed them a room with CGC 9.9 comics hanging on the wall.

Told them these are the finest known CGC examples of the paticular comic.

I wonder if they would ask.."why is this cover off center?, I cant see all the art... is that White part supposed to be there?"

 

I really doubt that would be their response. For all they know, all comics are manufactured this way. Only comic geeks get riled up over these things...

 

Their first reaction would likely involved the questions: "Why is it encased in plastic?" or "Can't you read it"?

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
I am JUST THAT GOOD! acclaim.gif

Actually i have a pile of PERFECT Savage She Hulks with the same miscut and they all came back 9.6. sign-rantpost.gif

 

Is the fact that a book was cut-off due to the QP available in the grader's notes? confused-smiley-013.gif

 

No, your right. You know, every time i auction off a book like that, I have to explain to the bidders that "The book is 9.9 perfect except for the miswrap/miscut/mis whateveryouwannacallit" and i know that this carries no weight. makepoint.gif Got yer point. Your ASM is a MINT book with a slight mis-cut. Sounds much better than 9.6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfilosa

sfilosa

Posted
Posted

SFilosa,

 

I'm the discounting type of guy, as everybody knows (Look up Tales, Strange, buddy).

 

Doug

 

I know and that's what I said.

 

For EVERYONE, don't be afraid to make an offer on ANY BOOK on Doug's Site.

 

I've never paid list pirce. Which is why there are some books that I don't own, that I should (but that's another story).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfilosa

sfilosa

Posted
Posted

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

For EVERYONE, don't be afraid to make an offer on ANY BOOK on Doug's Site.

 

I've never paid list pirce. Which is why there are some books that I don't own, that I should (but that's another story).

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Ra ra ra?

 

 

I basically said that because, as you can see from the sale pending amounts, most sales are at least slightly discounted from list price. On the other hand, there are many dealers that don't seem to discount at all. Not even 5%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing