Avengers 1 CGC 9.6 Heritage November 2015 Auction!

[tth2]

looks like very few on here agree with assigned grade.

Unless a HG book is known to be owned by a Boardie, very few people on here ever agree with the assigned grade.

 

It's totally predictable that people will immediately come on and make lots of snarky comments about a HG book, most of which will relate to the book being overgraded.

[chrisco37]

What about for those of us who think it's at best a 9.0?

 

They can send me a list of their raw 9.0's for sale.

[october]

looks like very few on here agree with assigned grade.

Unless a HG book is known to be owned by a Boardie, very few people on here ever agree with the assigned grade.

 

It's totally predictable that people will immediately come on and make lots of snarky comments about a HG book, most of which will relate to the book being overgraded.

 

A similar phenomenon happens in the grading forum and the selling forum. Loads of very tight graders when the book belongs to someone else, but those tight grades seem to disappear when it comes time to sell their own stuff. Not in every case, but it happens a lot.

[chrisco37]

looks like very few on here agree with assigned grade.

Unless a HG book is known to be owned by a Boardie, very few people on here ever agree with the assigned grade.

 

It's totally predictable that people will immediately come on and make lots of snarky comments about a HG book, most of which will relate to the book being overgraded.

 

A similar phenomenon happens in the grading forum and the selling forum. Loads of very tight graders when the book belongs to someone else, but those tight grades seem to disappear when it comes time to sell their own stuff. Not in every case, but it happens a lot.

 

 

Some people were calling this book a 9.0 at best. There was another thread a week or so ago with a (I think) Doc Strange #1 that may have rec'd a favorable grade. Some people were calling it a 5-6.0. The book was much nicer than that.

[passion4comics]

If I were subbing it, it would come back a 9.2 (my luck, but I agree it has a shot at 9.4 and would not be surprised if it was a 9.4). It does make me wonder who subbed it.

 

I've also been hosed on scans that looked great and in hand the book didn't look that good.

 

 

 

[jimjum12]

Avengers 1 is a book that doesn't scan well. The blacks and reds seem to highlight contrasts more than they really are in hand. I once had an 8.0 that looked much nicer than the scan (in hand). A book like this would really need to be viewed in person, during the preview stage. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[VintageComics]

looks like very few on here agree with assigned grade.

Unless a HG book is known to be owned by a Boardie, very few people on here ever agree with the assigned grade.

 

It's totally predictable that people will immediately come on and make lots of snarky comments about a HG book, most of which will relate to the book being overgraded.

 

A similar phenomenon happens in the grading forum and the selling forum. Loads of very tight graders when the book belongs to someone else, but those tight grades seem to disappear when it comes time to sell their own stuff. Not in every case, but it happens a lot.

 

 

Some people were calling this book a 9.0 at best. There was another thread a week or so ago with a (I think) Doc Strange #1 that may have rec'd a favorable grade. Some people were calling it a 5-6.0. The book was much nicer than that.

 

Regardless of what people want to believe, there is no such thing as free will and humans are entirely subjective to their surroundings.

 

People have a tendency to be less objective and overly harsh when criticizing someone else (or their belongings) but much less so with their own (including me!). It's human nature.

 

And yes, the grading forum is an excellent example of that. I routinely scratch my head at some of the very strict grades given out there.

 

The reality is that everyone is going to be much harsher in opinion than the person who took 30-60 seconds to grade the 6 figure book, because now we have digital compression, scan contrast, ego, scan size and yes of course TIME to double check (ie. over analyze) everything.

 

I disagree with anyone who says this book would come back a 9.2. And if it did, it would be the wrong grade and get resubbed faster than you can say resub.

 

The book is not a 9.2 and it's not a 9.8. That's my opinion. Where it falls in between there is going to depend on the day you see the book and what you've seen just before you see that particular book.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Avengers 1 is a book that doesn't scan well. The blacks and reds seem to highlight contrasts more than they really are in hand. I once had an 8.0 that looked much nicer than the scan (in hand). A book like this would really need to be viewed in person, during the preview stage. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

I'm always reminded of a particular grading contest where a book was graded 7.5/8.0 by the majority of people and yet it was a CGC 9.4.

 

And it was all because the scanner made the book look like it had multiple stresses along the spine but in hand the book didn't have them. There was an absolute outrage about the book.

 

The fact is that the scanner was unable to properly duplicate what the book looked like in hand when it transferred the live analog picture into binary code.

 

A terrific argument for analog visual reproduction if ever saw one!

[VintageComics]

One last thing that I feel is important to note is that you can't reproduce feel or gloss of a book in hand using a 2D scan. A scan doesn't convey state of preservation. It only conveys 2D defects, but the books are actually 3D objects.

 

The graders are comic people and if they're handling a book that feels brand new even though it's 70 years old, it's going to get a higher grade than another book that doesn't have the same feel with the same physical defects.

 

Books, even in the same grade can feel different from each other.

 

That's probably one of the reasons a book gets what some people call a 'Pedigree' bump. The book feels, smells or looks different in hand than a comparable grade from a book that has similar physical defects but doesn't have the same physical feel.

 

A perfect example of this is a conversation I had with Steve Ritter a few years ago. He commented on how the San Francisco books had a 'stiff' feel to them, even if it was compared to a comparable Church book. Both books come from spectacular, well preserved Pedigrees but they had a different feel between them.

 

The sensory evaluation is a big part of grading a book.

[Chip Cataldo]

Great post, Roy.

[pickycollector]

People have a tendency to be less objective and overly harsh when criticizing someone else (or their belongings) but much less so with their own (including me!). It's human nature.

 

I disagree with anyone who says this book would come back a 9.2. And if it did, it would be the wrong grade and get resubbed faster than you can say resub.

 

Is that your book?

 

 

 

[VintageComics]

Is that your book?

 

I wish. I have no idea who owns the book. I'm just trying to be fair to the book when a 6 figure book gets picked apart.

 

For what it's worth, it is possible that the book could look better or worse in hand than the scan. (thumbs u

 

 

[roulette44]

I agree - insightful, factual post Roy.

 

I'd give the book a 6.5.

 

.....I love it how everyone has bad luck when subbing. "If I would have subbed, it would have been 9.2.....". It's like polling a random sampling of people and hearing that 82% of them believed they were smarter (or better looking) than average!

 

Really tough to grade a book from a scan. Avengers 1 are tricky (I've owned every grade from 9.4 down). This particular book has blemishes that i don't think are graded as defects.

 

Coin flip 9.4/9.6 is my assessment too.

 

I do agree that the number in the top left carries a lot of weight, but we also seen realized prices deviate from the market (in both directions).

 

 

[makeminemego]

Looks more like a 9.4 to me, but is a really nice book that maybe doesn't scan as well as others.

 

If CGC is softening up reflexively in response to CBCS, I think it's a mistake.

 

In the long run, the company that's the most consistent will be the one I use the most, but that's just personal preference. My fairly recent experience (about 20 midgrade books to each party), made me think that CGC was @.5 tighter in the 4.0-7.0 range, which I thought was a good thing.

 

 

 

 

[lou_fine]

If CGC is softening up reflexively in response to CBCS, I think it's a mistake.

 

In the long run, the company that's the most consistent will be the one I use the most, but that's just personal preference. My fairly recent experience (about 20 midgrade books to each party), made me think that CGC was @.5 tighter in the 4.0-7.0 range, which I thought was a good thing.

 

 

Well, if consistency in grading is what you are looking for, then CGC is probably not the company to go for since most board members seem to feel that they are historically notorious for inconsistency as they tend to go from tight grading periods to loose grading periods on a regular basis.

 

They are probably tighter than the other company based upon your recent experience as it sounds like they are going through a tight grading period right now after just coming out from a much looser grading period not too long ago.

[namisgr]

I disagree with anyone who says this book would come back a 9.2. And if it did, it would be the wrong grade and get resubbed faster than you can say resub.

 

The book has a half inch vertical color break near the spine. A cynic would suggest that the reason CGC chose to ignore this obvious blemish on an otherwise NM+ comic is that it is one sometimes caused by pressing.

 

Regardless of how it got there, to ignore the defect as if it weren't there is disingenuous.

 

[tth2]

Well, if consistency in grading is what you are looking for, then CGC is probably not the company to go for since most board members seem to feel that they are historically notorious for inconsistency as they tend to go from tight grading periods to loose grading periods on a regular basis.

I think CGC have been very consistent for the last 12 years--consistently loose, that is.

 

When people complain that they are in a "tight" phase, that just means they seem tight compared to their generally loose standards. All "tight" means is that they're getting somewhere close to their grading standards back in the old label era, when a 9.6 or a 9.8 was actually impressive.

[chrisco37]

Well, if consistency in grading is what you are looking for, then CGC is probably not the company to go for since most board members seem to feel that they are historically notorious for inconsistency as they tend to go from tight grading periods to loose grading periods on a regular basis.

I think CGC have been very consistent for the last 12 years--consistently loose, that is.

 

When people complain that they are in a "tight" phase, that just means they seem tight compared to their generally loose standards. All "tight" means is that they're getting somewhere close to their grading standards back in the old label era, when a 9.6 or a 9.8 was actually impressive.

 

I guess. And you are right, a 9.6 (and especially 9.8) used to be special. And they should be. I think, initially, they were pretty tight on 9.4, and esp 9.2/9.0.

 

The Avengers #1 here, to me, looks like a solid 9.4. If it got a 9.2, I would say it was a very, very strong 9.2 and I'd resub it as Roy suggested (damn, I agree with Roy a lot! Probably an astrology thing).

 

To me, 9.6 is pretty loose on this one. I'd think 9.2 was pretty harsh. 9.4 (from scan) seems pretty fair.

[paperheart]

I disagree with anyone who says this book would come back a 9.2. And if it did, it would be the wrong grade and get resubbed faster than you can say resub.

 

The book has a half inch vertical color break near the spine. A cynic would suggest that the reason CGC chose to ignore this obvious blemish on an otherwise NM+ comic is that it is one sometimes caused by pressing.

 

Regardless of how it got there, to ignore the defect as if it weren't there is disingenuous.

 

if that crease in Loki's head had been done by Thor's hammer, he would be dead. if i'd subbed this and gotten a 9.4 i would have prayed my almighty thanks to odin.

[VintageComics]

The book has a half inch vertical color break near the spine. A cynic would suggest that the reason CGC chose to ignore this obvious blemish on an otherwise NM+ comic is that it is one sometimes caused by pressing.

Lately everything to you seems like it's 'from pressing'.

 

That's a defect that's more common due to printing issues - comics stacked after the printing process but before the inks dry.

 

Regardless of how it got there, to ignore the defect as if it weren't there is disingenuous.

 

It's well known that if CGC believes the defect is a production defect it doesn't reduce the grade as much as a non production defect. I'm not saying whether it's right or wrong, but It's not disingenuous, it's their standards.