What defects does CGC really mark down for?

[drotto]

When you hear people are disappointed with a grade received, it makes me wonder where the disconnect occurs. I know I will look at a book I think is great and somebody else will see problems that I missed. So when we send into CGC and do not get back what we expected, what are the big defects that CGC nicks us for that collectors tend to miss?

[VintageComics]

All of them. Depends on the size, severity and how it affects the eye appeal and readability of the book.

[thecopperagekids]

All of them. Depends on the size, severity and how it affects the eye appeal and readability of the book.

 

What he said.

 

 

[LordRahl]

Stains. They hammer stains. But are lenient on foxing even though most of the time foxing looks like stains... go figure

[joeypost]

Tanning. One many people miss.

Heavy foxing

Color breaking creases

Tears

Holes punched through a book

Popped staples.

Food/water stains

Dust and sun shadows

Fading

Poor pressing

Rusty staples

Pieces missing

Cut out ads and value stamps

Writing on the cover, if it is heavy enough

 

 

 

[Pip1988]

Seems scratches take a hammering. Was the only graders note on one of mine (which I went and missed) and it took a hit. Vs. a spine crease seems as though it is more of a hit, I guess it affecting more of the cover.

[AJD]

Tanning. One many people miss.

Heavy foxing

Color breaking creases

Tears

Holes punched through a book

Popped staples.

Food/water stains

Dust and sun shadows

Fading

Poor pressing

Rusty staples

Pieces missing

Cut out ads and value stamps

Writing on the cover, if it is heavy enough

 

 

 

Not so sure about that. Link.

[seanfingh]

I'm not sure what that is supposed to demonstrate. It's a 6.0. Foxing will take a dead bang 9.8 bronze book down to 9.0-9.2. And it gets missed a lot.

[VintageComics]

Even Overstreet allows a small amount of foxing in NM range.

 

A lot of foxing on an otherwise flawless book can take it down into Fine range. Again, it all depends on how much.

[Stronguy]

I'm not sure what that is supposed to demonstrate. It's a 6.0. Foxing will take a dead bang 9.8 bronze book down to 9.0-9.2. And it gets missed a lot.

 

+1

 

It's a 6.0 and without the foxing (and dirt) looks to structurally a 7.5.

[Weird Paper]

There's a book in the sales thread that's a qualified 9.2 because it has a hole punched in the cover and some pages. A 9.2? If that hole (HOLE!) was a stain on the back cover 1/2 its size, the freakin' book would be a 7.5. Can somebody please justify that? As a collector, would you rather have the identical book with holes punched in it as a 9.2, or a tiny stain as a 7.5?

I get that it's qualified, but come on!

[VintageComics]

There's a book in the sales thread that's a qualified 9.2 because it has a hole punched in the cover and some pages. A 9.2? If that hole (HOLE!) was a stain on the back cover 1/2 its size, the freakin' book would be a 7.5. Can somebody please justify that? As a collector, would you rather have the identical book with holes punched in it as a 9.2, or a tiny stain as a 7.5?

I get that it's qualified, but come on!

 

Their assigning a 'qualified grade' as though the hole is not there.

 

If the book was put into a blue label and graded as thought the hole affected the grade, it would probably be incomplete as the hole affects the story (it goes through 12 pages).

[rodan57]

Tanning. One many people miss.

Heavy foxing

Color breaking creases

Tears

Holes punched through a book

Popped staples.

Food/water stains

Dust and sun shadows

Fading

Poor pressing

Rusty staples

Pieces missing

Cut out ads and value stamps

Writing on the cover, if it is heavy enough

 

 

 

I sometimes wonder about this one. I crack out all my keepers and have been disappointed too often with unexpected interior cover edge tanning on a book that looks for all other intended purposes the grade on the label.

[AJD]

I'm not sure what that is supposed to demonstrate. It's a 6.0. Foxing will take a dead bang 9.8 bronze book down to 9.0-9.2. And it gets missed a lot.

 

+1

 

It's a 6.0 and without the foxing (and dirt) looks to structurally a 7.5.

 

And if it had that much staining from something other than foxing? VG at best.

 

But, hey, go right ahead and fill your collections with 6.0s like that one if you want.

[divad]

CGC is not the end all, be all Their grades are mostly important to the resellers and slab collectors.

 

And quite often, they just get it wrong. Life happens.

[jimjum12]

Tanning. One many people miss.

Heavy foxing

Color breaking creases

Tears

Holes punched through a book

Popped staples.

Food/water stains

Dust and sun shadows

Fading

Poor pressing

Rusty staples

Pieces missing

Cut out ads and value stamps

Writing on the cover, if it is heavy enough

 

 

 

I sometimes wonder about this one. I crack out all my keepers and have been disappointed too often with unexpected interior cover edge tanning on a book that looks for all other intended purposes the grade on the label.

 

...this has been my experience as well, Dennis...... GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[rjpb]

CGC is not the end all, be all Their grades are mostly important to the resellers and slab collectors.

 

And quite often, they just get it wrong. Life happens.

 

What he said.

[rjpb]

Stains. They hammer stains. But are lenient on foxing even though most of the time foxing looks like stains... go figure

 

In my admittedly limited observations it seem they hammer 6.0 and up for stains but are sometimes quite lenient on the lower grades.

[ftlepore]

Stains. They hammer stains. But are lenient on foxing even though most of the time foxing looks like stains... go figure

 

In my admittedly limited observations it seem they hammer 6.0 and up for stains but are sometimes quite lenient on the lower grades.

 

I'm not sure I follow this logic. Wouldn't it be the stains that caused the book to be sub 6.0?

[jimjum12]

Stains. They hammer stains. But are lenient on foxing even though most of the time foxing looks like stains... go figure

 

In my admittedly limited observations it seem they hammer 6.0 and up for stains but are sometimes quite lenient on the lower grades.

 

I'm not sure I follow this logic. Wouldn't it be the stains that caused the book to be sub 6.0?

 

..... books that are sub 6.0 will be that way due to cumulative defects. For us to speculate as to what weight CGC assigns for a specific defect will be just that, speculation. At grades below 6.0, defects, like stains, should be expected. From what I've seen, CGC doesn't totally disregard Overstreet standards, they've just built on and tweaked them, based on what they've come to believe are acceptable Market conditions. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jjesus)