PGM Marvel Two-In-One 52

[HighStakesComics]

As always, thanks for the input, gang

[NuffSaid57]

Though the scan is a little small all I am seeing is a couple of light spine stresses. 9.2

[Mike NL]

I also see some writing in the G of Thing in the logo (3112? the book is from June 1979). And what is that black mark on the BC in the center near the spine? I checked with another book I have with the same back ad, ASM #193 published in the same month, and this mark is not there.

[steveinthecity]

I'm wavering at 9.0/9.2. Reasons being spine creases and the "cross" shaped mark on BC near the basketball net. The cover is somewhat miscut, but is that what's creating the look of slight spine roll? You can clearly see the inside pages along the top right edge, but pages are gradually obscured as you follow the cover edge to the bottom.

 

I also see some writing in the G of Thing in the logo (3112? the book is from June 1979). And what is that black mark on the BC in the center near the spine? I checked with another book I have with the same back ad, ASM #193 published in the same month, and this mark is not there.

The newsstand or "on sale" date was March '79. The cover date is June. The writing is just a hand written "datestamp".

[Mike NL]

The newsstand or "on sale" date was March '79. The cover date is June. The writing is just a hand written "datestamp".

 

Thanks for this information :thumbsup:

[fastballspecial]

9.0-9.2

 

[Still Only 35c]

I'm at 9.2 as well, with the only caveat being the pencil date stamp.

 

Does anyone know how CGC treats this type of marking?

[manetteska]

To add to one point here: I have several copies of this comic and every single one of them has that weird cross mark on the back. Let's call it a publishing "artifact"; does not detract from grade.

 

:thumbsup:

[The-Collector]

I'm at 9.2 as well, with the only caveat being the pencil date stamp.

 

Does anyone know how CGC treats this type of marking?

 

No deduction below 9.8.

[HighStakesComics]

I love the opinions and wish I agreed, guys. I have this listed as a 7.5. I deducted heavily for the dark yellow stains along the top edge of the back cover.

[NuffSaid57]

It may be the small scans. I really don't see anything showing up in the scans that looks more than a little off-white on the BC. Now that you point it out I think I may see some light foxing along the top edge, but it is just showing up well in the scans at all.

[Topnotchman]

I was wondering if that is foxing on the back cover across the top, would be in the 8.0 range.