PGM Tales of Suspense 96

[Phill the Governor]

And not to derail the thread, I'd give the book a 9.0 all day long.

[romanheart]

And not to derail the thread, I'd give the book a 9.0 all day long.

 

That's what I said, but he got a 9.4. All the better for him.

[vaillant]

Yes, there is a very light and narrow dust shadow on lower left side of back cover edge although it looks worse on scan than on reality. There is none on bc spine.

 

CGC seems to be inconsistent with dust shadows (and with many other things), I have seen CGC 9.6 copies with larger dust shadows, especially with Golden Age books

Then that is fine, if they are lenient it can easily be a VFNM or better (depending on how they treat).

My FF #36 posted above was graded as a 8.0 and honestly it doesn’t look much worse than your ToS… :shrug:

[pickycollector]

My FF #36 posted above was graded as a 8.0 and honestly it doesn’t look much worse than your ToS… :shrug:

I see several stress lines on the spine of your FF 36 while my TOS 96 has none, that only should account for a grade difference

 

Moreover, I did not see the bc of your book so hard to compare how severe (or not) is the sun shadow on your copy.

 

Look at this book below for example. You can see a narrow sun shadow at lower left edge of fc and a hint of light tanning along spine, most visible at upper half. Worse than mine and still a 9.4.

 

Not saying that I agree (or not) with the grade, just showing an example.

 

http://www.comiclink.com/itemdetail.asp?back=%2Fitems%2Easp%3Fid%3D4017%26FROM%3D%26TO%3D%26pg%3D3&id=1021882

 

Another example, probably worse:

http://www.comiclink.com/itemdetail.asp?back=%2Fitems%2Easp%3Fid%3D4017%26FROM%3D%26TO%3D%26pg%3D2&id=978611