X-Men 1 CGC 9.6 listed on ComicLink

[Sqeggs]

Generally speaking, those who consider 'old label goodness' to be a myth are those who neither purchased nor submitted slabs before 2004.

 

Well, as I remember, Gator has mentioned a few times that he thinks it's a myth and he buys and sells a lot of books. I've been submitting since CGC opened its doors (although not in the volume that many dealers have) and I've seen variance in grading from the start.

 

Seems inevitable to me not just because their (never publicly disclosed) standards may have varied across time, but because different books have been graded by different people and because no grader can be perfectly consistent or can avoid making the occasional mistake of overlooking some minor flaw.

 

I think we've all owned old label books that we wouldn't think of resubmitting because they seem overgraded and their grades would likely go down if we resubmitted them.

[VintageComics]

That 9.6 is amazing! If the back cover looks as nice that's gotta be a 9.8, or... there must be a defect on the interior pages. Simply beautiful.

 

I'm amazed how transparent the cover is. The inside cover type really shows thru.

 

The micro chamber paper "reflects" the interior cover inks through the whites.

 

If that's true then they should put the micro chamber paper under the splash page.

 

That would defeat one purpose of the microchamber paper, to minimize the transfer staining between the inner cover and splash page.

 

Any Whiteish cover I submit I guess I will now have to request they put the microchamber paper under the splash page. I think the "reflectivity" detracts from these covers.

I`m not sure they`ll do it, but as Barton mentioned earlier, it doesn`t look nearly as translucent in person as it does in a scan, which is a result of the scanner effectively shining a bright light at the cover.

 

On a technical level, what I think happens is when you scan a book with a bright white light, the bright white light that makes it's way through the cover hits the white microchamber paper underneath and 'bounces back' causing the inside of the cover to appear more clearly than if you didn't have a light on it.

[Bomber-Bob]

I owned an over graded HG Key that I got back from CGC after cracking and pressing it.

 

It was one of my most important keys and one of my favorite superheroes. Even though I had my total dream grade, it was graded incorrectly.....blatantly imho. It just didn't sit well with me. I saw it as a fugly book do to the gift grade on the label. Being easily a $25K+ book at the time I thought I'd be thrilled considering my initial investment, but it was not the case. I felt a sense of false advertising as I held my new HG Key and stared at it. I knew than, I would resent this book, my supposed dream HG Key book:(

 

So I traded it same day I got it back for a slab where the carpet matched the drapes and the new HG key book & I have lived happily ever after since.

 

Moral is, gift grades aren't necessarily all that and a bag of chips.

If you care about the book and or it is a key - buy the book not the label or you possibly could get some feelings of remorse. Last I knew I got back into this hobby to enjoy and be happy with what I collect.

(From a non flippers perspective at least)

 

A great post. I have had the same reaction upon receiving an overgraded book and I completely understand your feelings about it. If I have a keeper in my collection, it is not getting worked on. The risk is not worth the reward of a higher grade.

[jimjum12]

I owned an over graded HG Key that I got back from CGC after cracking and pressing it.

 

It was one of my most important keys and one of my favorite superheroes. Even though I had my total dream grade, it was graded incorrectly.....blatantly imho. It just didn't sit well with me. I saw it as a fugly book do to the gift grade on the label. Being easily a $25K+ book at the time I thought I'd be thrilled considering my initial investment, but it was not the case. I felt a sense of false advertising as I held my new HG Key and stared at it. I knew than, I would resent this book, my supposed dream HG Key book:(

 

So I traded it same day I got it back for a slab where the carpet matched the drapes and the new HG key book & I have lived happily ever after since.

 

Moral is, gift grades aren't necessarily all that and a bag of chips.

If you care about the book and or it is a key - buy the book not the label or you possibly could get some feelings of remorse. Last I knew I got back into this hobby to enjoy and be happy with what I collect.

(From a non flippers perspective at least)

 

A great post. I have had the same reaction upon receiving an overgraded book and I completely understand your feelings about it. If I have a keeper in my collection, it is not getting worked on. The risk is not worth the reward of a higher grade.

 

 

.... and from a part time flippers perspective, I hate having a slab in inventory that I have to make excuses for..... GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

 

..... I've noticed over the years that OO books that were stored in homemade saran wrap backs seem to have a higher incidence of cover transparency. I believe it's the Mass books that fall in this category as well..... although the gloss and suppleness of them more than make up for it.....

[Bomber-Bob]

 

..... I've noticed over the years that OO books that were stored in homemade saran wrap backs seem to have a higher incidence of cover transparency. I believe it's the Mass books that fall in this category as well..... although the gloss and suppleness of them more than make up for it.....

 

Years ago I was getting Bronze Mass books (almost) directly from the OO. They were in small groups packed in plastic baggies, freezer like bags. I was told this was the way there were stored.

I don't remember any saran wraps. Let me say the gloss and suppleness were something to behold, albeit with numerous dings from handling.

[jimjum12]

 

..... I've noticed over the years that OO books that were stored in homemade saran wrap backs seem to have a higher incidence of cover transparency. I believe it's the Mass books that fall in this category as well..... although the gloss and suppleness of them more than make up for it.....

 

Years ago I was getting Bronze Mass books (almost) directly from the OO. They were in small groups packed in plastic baggies, freezer like bags. I was told this was the way there were stored.

I don't remember any saran wraps. Let me say the gloss and suppleness were something to behold, albeit with numerous dings from handling.

 

I remember talking to Marnin right before he made the deal for them....he was liquidating a lot of his collection to raise funds for them..... One thing I''ve noticed about the homemade bags (and ziplocks, etc....) it only seemed to affect very high grades which, presumably, were left alone in the bags for decades....

[Bomber-Bob]

 

..... I've noticed over the years that OO books that were stored in homemade saran wrap backs seem to have a higher incidence of cover transparency. I believe it's the Mass books that fall in this category as well..... although the gloss and suppleness of them more than make up for it.....

 

Years ago I was getting Bronze Mass books (almost) directly from the OO. They were in small groups packed in plastic baggies, freezer like bags. I was told this was the way there were stored.

I don't remember any saran wraps. Let me say the gloss and suppleness were something to behold, albeit with numerous dings from handling.

 

I remember talking to Marnin right before he made the deal for them....he was liquidating a lot of his collection to raise funds for them..... One thing I''ve noticed about the homemade bags (and ziplocks, etc....) it only seemed to affect very high grades which, presumably, were left alone in the bags for decades....

 

Yes, Marnin bought all the SA books but declined on the Bronze, lucky for me and others. Marnin was offering much of the collection for an average of triple top guide, too rich for me at the time. I like Marnin and he had/has great books to offer but you really have to want the book to pay his prices. In hindsight, I should have mortgaged my house and bought all his books !

[VintageComics]

In my opinion, storage climate has a lot to do with oil transfer that causes that trasulscence.

 

In a warm climate oil is more likely to migrate than in a cool one because of the way viscocity changes.

[jimjum12]

 

..... I've noticed over the years that OO books that were stored in homemade saran wrap backs seem to have a higher incidence of cover transparency. I believe it's the Mass books that fall in this category as well..... although the gloss and suppleness of them more than make up for it.....

 

Years ago I was getting Bronze Mass books (almost) directly from the OO. They were in small groups packed in plastic baggies, freezer like bags. I was told this was the way there were stored.

I don't remember any saran wraps. Let me say the gloss and suppleness were something to behold, albeit with numerous dings from handling.

 

I remember talking to Marnin right before he made the deal for them....he was liquidating a lot of his collection to raise funds for them..... One thing I''ve noticed about the homemade bags (and ziplocks, etc....) it only seemed to affect very high grades which, presumably, were left alone in the bags for decades....

 

Yes, Marnin bought all the SA books but declined on the Bronze, lucky for me and others. Marnin was offering much of the collection for an average of triple top guide, too rich for me at the time. I like Marnin and he had/has great books to offer but you really have to want the book to pay his prices. In hindsight, I should have mortgaged my house and bought all his books !

 

... for the life of me, I can't recall why I was talking to him then.... as his books were outside my possibilities as well.... I know it was CBG days.... maybe I had inquired about a book that was already sold. I always liked him.... he'd talk comics with you for an hour if you called.... we were all pretty isolated back then, pre-internet and all. I still remember the first time I had been able to actually buy a book from him that wasn't already gone before I called..... it was the Sci-Fi / Horror portion of the Bethlehem batch I was able to snag Astonishing 3 and 5 that he called 6.0..... they both later ended up CGC 7.0 GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[Bomber-Bob]

In my opinion, storage climate has a lot to do with oil transfer that causes that trasulscence.

 

In a warm climate oil is more likely to migrate than in a cool one because of the way viscocity changes.

 

Sounds like a nice hot steam bath of a press will enhance that oil migration. Of course you will say otherwise .

[namisgr]

Generally speaking, those who consider 'old label goodness' to be a myth are those who neither purchased nor submitted slabs before 2004.

 

Well, as I remember, Gator has mentioned a few times that he thinks it's a myth and he buys and sells a lot of books. I've been submitting since CGC opened its doors (although not in the volume that many dealers have) and I've seen variance in grading from the start.

 

Variance in grading over time isn't relevant to the question of whether CGC grading was, overall, more strict during the old label period than a particular new label period, or the new label period as a whole. As for Gators' opinion? It's one to value, but it's worth noting that he also thinks that page quality grades over their entire range are influenced by the feel/suppleness of the paper. Call me skeptical.

 

To get a good sense of old label grading, a great resource is Barton Landsman's registry. It's filled with hundreds of scans of old label high grade books. Look them over extensively, and then revisit whether as a whole old label books were graded no differently than new label books.

 

Back on topic, if I were looking to acquire a 9.6 X-Men #1 and had the choice, I'd choose Barton's without question.

[VintageComics]

In my opinion, storage climate has a lot to do with oil transfer that causes that trasulscence.

 

In a warm climate oil is more likely to migrate than in a cool one because of the way viscocity changes.

 

Sounds like a nice hot steam bath of a press will enhance that oil migration. Of course you will say otherwise .

 

I only say what I believe.

 

I think it takes time and temperature for those oils to separate from the inks. Time a in years. A few minutes in a press won't do it IMO.

 

 

 

[Sqeggs]

Variance in grading over time isn't relevant to the question of whether CGC grading was, overall, more strict during the old label period than a particular new label period, or the new label period as a whole. As for Gators' opinion? It's one to value, but it's worth noting that he also thinks that page quality grades over their entire range are influenced by the feel/suppleness of the paper. Call me skeptical.

 

Sure it is. It speaks to the likelihood that grading was highly consistent across books during any period.

 

Unless you are willing to undertake a systematic analysis, it's just a case of dueling anecdotes.

[jimjum12]

Generally speaking, those who consider 'old label goodness' to be a myth are those who neither purchased nor submitted slabs before 2004.

 

Well, as I remember, Gator has mentioned a few times that he thinks it's a myth and he buys and sells a lot of books. I've been submitting since CGC opened its doors (although not in the volume that many dealers have) and I've seen variance in grading from the start.

 

Variance in grading over time isn't relevant to the question of whether CGC grading was, overall, more strict during the old label period than a particular new label period, or the new label period as a whole. As for Gators' opinion? It's one to value, but it's worth noting that he also thinks that page quality grades over their entire range are influenced by the feel/suppleness of the paper. Call me skeptical.

 

To get a good sense of old label grading, a great resource is Barton Landsman's registry. It's filled with hundreds of scans of old label high grade books. Look them over extensively, and then revisit whether as a whole old label books were graded no differently than new label books.

 

Back on topic, if I were looking to acquire a 9.6 X-Men #1 and had the choice, I'd choose Barton's without question.

 

 

.... I could agree with this on 9.0 and above..... but below that I think they may have tightened up since then..... I've seen some horrible 6.0 to 7.5 old labels..... GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[namisgr]

Variance in grading over time isn't relevant to the question of whether CGC grading was, overall, more strict during the old label period than a particular new label period, or the new label period as a whole. As for Gators' opinion? It's one to value, but it's worth noting that he also thinks that page quality grades over their entire range are influenced by the feel/suppleness of the paper. Call me skeptical.

 

Sure it is. It speaks to the likelihood that grading was highly consistent across books during any period.

 

It's never been. Still doesn't impact the view held by many that old label comics as a whole were graded more strictly than new label comics. There's no way to settle the question definitively to everyone's satisfaction, so it's all a matter of opinion anyway.

 

For starters, though, one could check out the scans of Barton's remaining collection, or ask his opinion based on the thousands of additional old and new label comics he's either submitted or owned post-encapsulation.

[Sqeggs]

Variance in grading over time isn't relevant to the question of whether CGC grading was, overall, more strict during the old label period than a particular new label period, or the new label period as a whole. As for Gators' opinion? It's one to value, but it's worth noting that he also thinks that page quality grades over their entire range are influenced by the feel/suppleness of the paper. Call me skeptical.

 

Sure it is. It speaks to the likelihood that grading was highly consistent across books during any period.

 

It's never been. Still doesn't impact the view held by many that old label comics as a whole were graded more strictly than new label comics. There's no way to settle the question definitively to everyone's satisfaction, so it's all a matter of opinion anyway.

 

For starters, though, one could check out the scans of Barton's remaining collection, or ask his opinion based on the thousands of additional old and new label comics he's either submitted or owned post-encapsulation.

 

Well, it's a very long-running debate.

 

I'll just say that I lived through it and to my mind it wasn't a Golden Age when men were men and all books were properly graded.

[Bomber-Bob]

I look at CGC's variance in grading based on who was the head grader. Hats off to Haspel, he was a tough grader. Everything had to be finalized through him. He leaves and things get soft until he comes back, although on a part time basis. Borock didn't like grading and probably didn't do it much, deferring to Haspel. As far as I can tell, Borock leans a little to the soft side, as evidenced by his new company. BTW, it's seems like the new company is the dumping ground for submissions that didn't grade out with CGC. The new company reminds me of CGC circa 2011.

[jimjum12]

I look at CGC's variance in grading based on who was the head grader. Hats off to Haspel, he was a tough grader. Everything had to be finalized through him. He leaves and things get soft until he comes back, although on a part time basis. Borock didn't like grading and probably didn't do it much, deferring to Haspel. As far as I can tell, Borock leans a little to the soft side, as evidenced by his new company. BTW, it's seems like the new company is the dumping ground for submissions that didn't grade out with CGC. The new company reminds me of CGC circa 2011.

 

..... let me first state that this is in no way intended as confrontational towards you, Bob........ however.......... from what I've seen, you're primarily a buyer of slabs so naturally, you'll prefer "tight" grading. Since grading is subjective, our observations and assertions can only be anecdotal, so "tight" as a term can be misleading. That being said, I recall an old label 8.0 that I felt was nicer. It was popped and resubbed WITHOUT a press and received a 9.0.... as it should have to begin with. In a case like this, I would almost be tempted to say that CGC ripped off the original submitter in a way.... as that difference (in dollar FMV) was significant. Let's face it, even the most inexperienced of us know the difference between a 8.0 and a 9.0. To me, that isn't "tight" grading and is as equally unacceptable as a gift grade.... for example if that same book had received a 9.2..... which it also wasn't. I think it's easy for a TPG to fall into the trap of undergrading everything so that "their" 8.0 will sell for more than anyone elses...... when in reality, the 8.0 sells for more only because it's actually a 9.0. One of CGC's earliest marketing strategies was to highlight exactly that, "our's goes for WAY more"..... without explaining why, of course. Personally, I don't want a gift grade on my subs either..... and my last submission, during a supposedly "tight" phase, seemed pretty fair and consistent to me. CGC has been good for the hobby and I would hate to spend more than a grand on a book that isn't slabbed (...with good pics and scans, natch...) GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[VintageComics]

Variance in grading over time isn't relevant to the question of whether CGC grading was, overall, more strict during the old label period than a particular new label period, or the new label period as a whole. As for Gators' opinion? It's one to value, but it's worth noting that he also thinks that page quality grades over their entire range are influenced by the feel/suppleness of the paper. Call me skeptical.

 

Sure it is. It speaks to the likelihood that grading was highly consistent across books during any period.

 

It's never been. Still doesn't impact the view held by many that old label comics as a whole were graded more strictly than new label comics. There's no way to settle the question definitively to everyone's satisfaction, so it's all a matter of opinion anyway.

 

For starters, though, one could check out the scans of Barton's remaining collection, or ask his opinion based on the thousands of additional old and new label comics he's either submitted or owned post-encapsulation.

 

Well, it's a very long-running debate.

 

I'll just say that I lived through it and to my mind it wasn't a Golden Age when men were men and all books were properly graded.

 

I like the dueling anecdotes explanation. I fully appreciate opinions by Barton, Bob, Bob and others but there are also long time collectors (like sqeggs, Teddie Mercedes) who state that the old label were not necesearily tighter.

 

It really is to me relative to the period you are reviewing.

 

And how do we reconcile the 'old labels are tigher' theory with periods like the well known instance where dealers were outraged at how tight CGC was out of the gate, forcing them to loosen up a bit?

 

I really do personally believe CGC has had various loose and tight periods through the seasons, regardless of label.

 

For what it's worth, they are pretty tight recently just as they were last year around this time on high grade.

 

 

[Bomber-Bob]

I look at CGC's variance in grading based on who was the head grader. Hats off to Haspel, he was a tough grader. Everything had to be finalized through him. He leaves and things get soft until he comes back, although on a part time basis. Borock didn't like grading and probably didn't do it much, deferring to Haspel. As far as I can tell, Borock leans a little to the soft side, as evidenced by his new company. BTW, it's seems like the new company is the dumping ground for submissions that didn't grade out with CGC. The new company reminds me of CGC circa 2011.

 

..... let me first state that this is in no way intended as confrontational towards you, Bob........ however.......... from what I've seen, you're primarily a buyer of slabs so naturally, you'll prefer "tight" grading. Since grading is subjective, our observations and assertions can only be anecdotal, so "tight" as a term can be misleading. That being said, I recall an old label 8.0 that I felt was nicer. It was popped and resubbed without a press and received a 9.0.... as it should have to begin with. In a case like this, I would almost be tempted to say that CGC ripped off the submitter in a way.... as that difference (in dollar FMV) was significant. To me, that isn't "tight" grading and is as equally unacceptable as a gift grade.... for example if that same book had received a 9.2..... which it wasn't. I think it's easy for a TPG to fall into the trap of undergrading everything so that "their" 8.0 will sell for more than anyone elses...... when in reality, the 8.0 sells for more only because it's actually a 9.0. One of CGC's earliest marketing strategies was to highlight exactly that, "our's goes for WAY more"..... without explaining why, of course. Personally, I don't want a gift grade on my subs..... and my last submission, during a supposedly "tight" phase, seemed pretty fair and consistent to me. CGC has been good for the hobby and I would hate to spend more than a grand on a book that isn't slabbed (...with good pics and scans, natch...) GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Nothing confrontational about your comments. I would agree with everything you said. I especially like the 'CGC ripped off the submitter' comment. I have often thought this but dare not say it. Haspel may have been too tight, especially on certain flaws, however, I do think he was consistent. I'm actually a big holder of lots of raw and as time goes on I have begun to prefer them. Just too much manipulation of late inside those slabs for my taste.