MF52 CGC 9.2 Larson

[porcupine48]

Dammm...how can there be erased without restore....N.O.D. we need you...,

 

Because the erased name wasn't on the book at time of manufacture.

 

In other words, the name was added and then erased later.

 

Unfortunate, but not restoration.

So removed tape isn't restore?

Not trying to snark at all sir....just ,such a crime to erase the name....and tape isn't added at manufacture..

[Red84]

Dammm...how can there be erased without restore....N.O.D. we need you...,

 

Because the erased name wasn't on the book at time of manufacture.

 

In other words, the name was added and then erased later.

 

Unfortunate, but not restoration.

So removed tape isn't restore?

Not trying to snark at all sir....just ,such a crime to erase the name....and tape isn't added at manufacture..

 

i'm pretty sure that removing tape is just considered damage. If you got a tape pull and took the tape off it would be damage, not restoration.

 

Also, tape is not considered restoration; so the removal of it should not be considered restoration either.

[batman_fan]

Dammm...how can there be erased without restore....N.O.D. we need you...,

 

Because the erased name wasn't on the book at time of manufacture.

 

In other words, the name was added and then erased later.

 

Unfortunate, but not restoration.

So removed tape isn't restore?

Not trying to snark at all sir....just ,such a crime to erase the name....and tape isn't added at manufacture..

 

Don't try to understand the grading standards you will go nuts

[porcupine48]

Thanks board brothers.

Really bugs me that it was erased...and is not disclosed.

[woowoo]

To me the book lost a lot of value for that sig being erased.

[lou_fine]

I wonder why the owner had this book reslabbed as it was already a 9.2

Unless he had it pressed?

 

 

http://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/more-fun-comics-52-larson-pedigree-dc-1940-cgc-nm-92-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7017-92022.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515#

Heritage did quite a few free reholders for a number of their authorized dealers and higher volume collectors so that the new holders would get out and be seen. It is very probable that this was a simple free reholder.

 

 

 

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks Richard.

 

Yes, since it's got the exact same CGC serial identification number, I assumed that it must have just been a reholder.

[batman_fan]

To me the book lost a lot of value for that sig being erased.

 

The way I classify some of what I consider "goofy" grading is this

 

Tape = restoration, archival = professional, non-archival = amateur. Based on my observation, CGC calls it restored for archival tape, unrestored for non-archival

Eraser, if it cannot be seen (which is rarely the case), unrestored. If you can see the reminants of what was erased it is amateur restoration in the truest sense of the phrase.

[MrBedrock]

Thanks board brothers.

Really bugs me that it was erased...and is not disclosed.

It is disclosed...you can see the erasure through the holder. It is pretty obvious.

[porcupine48]

Noted.Should be noted.

PS never snark for you Richard.

[Dark Knight]

and I can't say this enough. Totally dislike the new label.

 

Can barely make out the Pedigree.

 

I wonder how often pedigrees will be overlooked because of their having moved where the designation appears?

 

Not on a book of this magnitude, of course, but on other books I think it might easily happen. (I always try to answer my own questions! )

 

Edited to add: It looks like this is one of the books where "Larson" was erased. Too bad, imo.

 

If you look at the "U" in "Fun", it looks like you can faintly see "Lamont"

 

Just saw it. All I can do is What a shame that whomever owned these pedigreed books before would erase provenance on the book. Should always be left alone. Can you imagine if the same person who erased Lamont did the same thing if he also owned the Marvel 1 Pay Copy

[The_SandMan]

not a fan of the new labels either. looks cheap with those big grades. beauty of a book however. comiclink continues to impress josh has done a hell of a job there

 

 

agree! Label looks dumb and obtrusive, but there ain't no way in hell CGC will eat crow and backtrack on this. Its a done deal IMO

[jimbo_707]

How is it that a tiny stain will knock a book all the way down to 7.5 or below because the book is contaminated with foreign material, yet a book with glue on the spine can still be a 9.2?

[mysterio]

How is it that a tiny stain will knock a book all the way down to 7.5 or below because the book is contaminated with foreign material, yet a book with glue on the spine can still be a 9.2?

 

I'm more concerned with rusted staples in a 9.2.

[MrBedrock]

and I can't say this enough. Totally dislike the new label.

 

Can barely make out the Pedigree.

 

I wonder how often pedigrees will be overlooked because of their having moved where the designation appears?

 

Not on a book of this magnitude, of course, but on other books I think it might easily happen. (I always try to answer my own questions! )

 

Edited to add: It looks like this is one of the books where "Larson" was erased. Too bad, imo.

 

If you look at the "U" in "Fun", it looks like you can faintly see "Lamont"

 

Just saw it. All I can do is What a shame that whomever owned these pedigreed books before would erase provenance on the book. Should always be left alone. Can you imagine if the same person who erased Lamont did the same thing if he also owned the Marvel 1 Pay Copy

See this Larson Mystic 2...

...see how "Larson" is erased. I got this book in trade from Ron Pussell at the 1980 San Diego Con. Later that year I erased the name. Obviously a mistake now, but who knew. We did that kind of stuff back then. Embarrassing? Maybe. But I'm darn happy to still have the book.

[Sqeggs]

and I can't say this enough. Totally dislike the new label.

 

Can barely make out the Pedigree.

 

I wonder how often pedigrees will be overlooked because of their having moved where the designation appears?

 

Not on a book of this magnitude, of course, but on other books I think it might easily happen. (I always try to answer my own questions! )

 

Edited to add: It looks like this is one of the books where "Larson" was erased. Too bad, imo.

 

If you look at the "U" in "Fun", it looks like you can faintly see "Lamont"

 

Just saw it. All I can do is What a shame that whomever owned these pedigreed books before would erase provenance on the book. Should always be left alone. Can you imagine if the same person who erased Lamont did the same thing if he also owned the Marvel 1 Pay Copy

See this Larson Mystic 2...

...see how "Larson" is erased. I got this book in trade from Ron Pussell at the 1980 San Diego Con. Later that year I erased the name. Obviously a mistake now, but who knew. We did that kind of stuff back then. Embarrassing? Maybe. But I'm darn happy to still have the book.

 

35 years is long enough. Give one of the other children a chance now.

[woowoo]

and I can't say this enough. Totally dislike the new label.

 

Can barely make out the Pedigree.

 

I wonder how often pedigrees will be overlooked because of their having moved where the designation appears?

 

Not on a book of this magnitude, of course, but on other books I think it might easily happen. (I always try to answer my own questions! )

 

Edited to add: It looks like this is one of the books where "Larson" was erased. Too bad, imo.

 

If you look at the "U" in "Fun", it looks like you can faintly see "Lamont"

 

Just saw it. All I can do is What a shame that whomever owned these pedigreed books before would erase provenance on the book. Should always be left alone. Can you imagine if the same person who erased Lamont did the same thing if he also owned the Marvel 1 Pay Copy

See this Larson Mystic 2...

...see how "Larson" is erased. I got this book in trade from Ron Pussell at the 1980 San Diego Con. Later that year I erased the name. Obviously a mistake now, but who knew. We did that kind of stuff back then. Embarrassing? Maybe. But I'm darn happy to still have the book.

 

Richard how could u you lost half the value now that book is junk.

[MrBedrock]

 

Richard how could u you lost half the value now that book is junk.

I know, right? I figure I'll keep it around 'cause nobody else could possibly want it.

[woowoo]

Hey i thought the same thing. How am i going to get a deal on a junk book if you keep thinking like me See what you did now i need a

 

 

If you send me that number 1 ch copy i cant say no when its in my hand.

[mrmyst]

[woowoo]

 

you dont know the ch copy?