corner bindery tears

[the blob]

when does a bindery tear grow too much not to be ok in NM? i assume that most of the corner tears pass as bindery tears? i had never considered them any different than any other damage, but i guess OPG and CGC do.

 

i'm only curious because I have a lot of 60s/70s magazines that are super sharp and that sort of defect being the only problem. I had always figured they were VF+ to VF/NM, but really, I clearly don't have a clue. I'd be extremely happy to learn that this sort of unavoidable "defect" is still ok in 9.4 and higher.

 

I'm really tempted to put together a set of 50 of my nicest SSOCs and Warrens and do a 9.4 pre-screen. If that sort of thing is ok, that will make life easier.

 

Of course, whether some generic 70s creepy or SSOC is worth $25+ in slabbing fees, even if it comes back a 9.4, is another calculation.

 

any thoughts? i know it's worth it for the earlier issues and keys, and 9.6s are chased from throughout the decade, but what about "mere" 9.4s?

[bounty_coder]

Hey Blob, this is what I recommend. Get all of your pre 1975 books. Pick out all the issues that you have which are perfect, except they have these bindery tears that you mentioned. From there I will buy them all from you at cover price

 

JUST KIDDING! This is what is interesting. Grading guidlines for Magazines are VERY BRIEFLY talked about in the OSGG's 2nd Edition. And it mentions that bindery corners are common in magazines. Have you looked at Ultra Hi-Res CGC scans of magazines? I've seen MANY 9.4's and 9.6's with bindery corners some looked to be 1/8" in length.

 

I think this. If you have 2 Bindery corners, and less than 2 spine ticks, with the remaining corners pretty square and no other defects that you will get back a NM 9.4. Which actually makes sense to me. Most of these things came with the darn things! (meaning bindery corners) This is not a defect that we caused as collectors.

 

I've seen a CGC NM+ 9.6 Dracula lives with 2 gnarly bindery corners. and a spine Tick.

 

Then again I've seen CGC issues without any bindery and really no noticable defects at NM 9.2 So really there must be something with those books that you just cannot see from scans very well. Such as a kink/crease in the cover, or indentations somewhere. Something along those lines.

 

I also think that if you have a Mag which has no bindery corners, and is straight otherwise. That you can have up to 4-5 spine ticks (1/16") that lightly break color and still possibly get a NM 9.4 Trust me I've seen it, but whether you will actually get that grade with that type of book I guess is a different story.

 

As I've been going through my books I've been scoping copies that I think would do well, and possibly contend for Highest grades in the Census. I'll have to send in a test batch before I go all out and do much slabbing if I come down to that pike.

 

I've considered thinning out parts of my collection due to duplicity and space. I'm approaching over 1,000 magazines currently. So I'll have to see!

 

None the less, I hope that helps a little bit. It's funny because many are JUST starting to get an idea of how CGC grades comics (yet even at that its very few since there are so many variables that they take into account that most individuals look over) and here we are on a new frontier for Magazines where very few have a set of guidlines when grading these making in the wild wild west of sorts.

 

-bounty

[the blob]

thanks, i lost my old OGG long ago and didn't know there were different rules for magazines.

 

i didn't really buy these off the rack as a kid/early teen in the 70s/80s (other than heavy metal and epic, which are a different analysis), so i don't know what they initially looked like