Tales of Suspense 39 CGC 9.8

[LordRahl]

Do you really think most of the 9.8's out there got the grade on the first try ?

I`ve received plenty of 9.8s on first submission. I`ve never once pressed or resubbed a book.

 

I completely agree. Most 9.8's DID receive a 9.8 on the first try. Sure for a 5-6 figure book, there is lots of financial incentive to resub. But a 2-3 hundred dollar book? And the vast majority of 9.8 books fall in the hundreds of dollars end of the spectrum than the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars end.

 

Having never received a 9.8 grade on any of hundreds of SA submissions, I'll have to accept from your experiences that I was unlucky, or just didn't have nice enough material. I do know that a few of my submissions wound up being regraded as 9.8s, presumably after having been pressed. A couple became the lone 9.8 copies in the CGC census, like my old JIM #115 from the Pacific Coast collection purchased before CGC was formed. While a handful were higher valued books worth thousands as 9.8s, a few others weren't quite as valuable.

 

Regardless, I see signs of probable pressing on so many high grade SA Marvels sporting both 9.8 grades and below that I believe it's increasingly difficult to find them in their native, unmanipulated state. A little bit of gentle cover overhang is natural in SA Marvels, but won't get you the vaunted 9.8 number on your slab unless it's been 'starched' away like an ironed shirt collar.

 

The vast majority of 9.8s out there are not SA keys. Even if you just keep it to SA only material, the 9.8 population is heavily concentrated in the late SA material that is much easier to find in high grade and much cheaper. I'm not sure how many people are resubbing a Cap 103 multiple times hoping for that elusive 9.8, just as an example. But overall 9.8s are mostly modern and copper books and yes most of those did get the 9.8 on the first try.

 

I completely understand that there is a lot of resubbing going on with the expensive material, early SA and keys, but outside of that I'm not buying that people are multiple resubbing $200-300 9.6's to try and get a 9.8.

[LordRahl]

I hope my Showcase #30 example does show that the attainment of the uber grades is often a process. It wasn't a 9.4 on the first submission. It took multiple submissions and, I'm sure, multiple pressings. Question for the true collectors: Is it really the same pedigree I once owned ?

 

It is still the same pedigree book that you once owned. Something has happened to it to change it's appearance. If you accidentally ripped a 2" chunk off the corner during handling, would it still be the same pedigree you owned? Pretty sure the answer there is yes, correct? So why does that change when the grade improves as opposed to downgrades?

[CBT]

I hope my Showcase #30 example does show that the attainment of the uber grades is often a process. It wasn't a 9.4 on the first submission. It took multiple submissions and, I'm sure, multiple pressings. Question for the true collectors: Is it really the same pedigree I once owned ?

 

It is still the same pedigree book that you once owned. Something has happened to it to change it's appearance. If you accidentally ripped a 2" chunk off the corner during handling, would it still be the same pedigree you owned? Pretty sure the answer there is yes, correct? So why does that change when the grade improves as opposed to downgrades?

 

I think he means, if its been "worked" many times, albeit it by professionals, is it still "the same".

 

 

[LordRahl]

I hope my Showcase #30 example does show that the attainment of the uber grades is often a process. It wasn't a 9.4 on the first submission. It took multiple submissions and, I'm sure, multiple pressings. Question for the true collectors: Is it really the same pedigree I once owned ?

 

It is still the same pedigree book that you once owned. Something has happened to it to change it's appearance. If you accidentally ripped a 2" chunk off the corner during handling, would it still be the same pedigree you owned? Pretty sure the answer there is yes, correct? So why does that change when the grade improves as opposed to downgrades?

 

I think he means, if its been "worked" many times, albeit it by professionals, is it still "the same".

 

 

I know what he means and I get where he's coming from. I too prefer an unpressed 9.6 over a pressed 9.6. But a change in condition or appearance, whether up or down, does not change the fact that it is the same book, even though it may not look exactly the same.

[Bomber-Bob]

I hope my Showcase #30 example does show that the attainment of the uber grades is often a process. It wasn't a 9.4 on the first submission. It took multiple submissions and, I'm sure, multiple pressings. Question for the true collectors: Is it really the same pedigree I once owned ?

 

My question is "did the SC30 look like an 8.5 to you at the time, or was it, in your opinion, undergraded ?" GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Yes, it looked undergraded to me, that is why I showed it to Matt. But, at the time, I was mostly going with eye appeal. Pressable defects was not yet common knowledge. Going to Matt was a chance to learn about the new 'magic'. Remember, this was not a formal submission to Matt, just an evaluation. If Matt thought he could help, you then had the option to submit. For this specific book, his exact words were 'it would always be an 8.5'.

Again, I am just pointing out that the attainment of an uber grade is often a process.

[CBT]

I know what he means and I get where he's coming from. I too prefer an unpressed 9.6 over a pressed 9.6. But a change in condition or appearance, whether up or down, does not change the fact that it is the same book, even though it may not look exactly the same.

 

well, i also think he said "same pedigreed book" in his statement, because a pedigree comes with respect to a book being part of a found collection.

 

Personally, I think pressing does "destroy" the pedigree in a certain sense. It remains a high grade book, and came FROM the pedigree, but i do agree with his supposition, that "something" has changed

[VintageComics]

I hope my Showcase #30 example does show that the attainment of the uber grades is often a process. It wasn't a 9.4 on the first submission. It took multiple submissions and, I'm sure, multiple pressings. Question for the true collectors: Is it really the same pedigree I once owned ?

 

My question is "did the SC30 look like an 8.5 to you at the time, or was it, in your opinion, undergraded ?" GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Yes, it looked undergraded to me, that is why I showed it to Matt. But, at the time, I was mostly going with eye appeal. Pressable defects was not yet common knowledge. Going to Matt was a chance to learn about the new 'magic'. Remember, this was not a formal submission to Matt, just an evaluation. If Matt thought he could help, you then had the option to submit. For this specific book, his exact words were 'it would always be an 8.5'.

Again, I am just pointing out that the attainment of an uber grade is often a process.

 

Sometimes it's a 'process', sometimes some people just grade better than others and sometimes it's just luck. Grading standards change over time, as do the opinions of people like Matt.

 

@namisgr (Bob #2 ) - I think the most prominent defect was spine wear.

 

I find it hard to believe that anyone thinks this book looks like an 8.5

 

 

[Ghost Town]

Do you really think most of the 9.8's out there got the grade on the first try ?

I`ve received plenty of 9.8s on first submission. I`ve never once pressed or resubbed a book.

I know many of the Curator and Pacific Coast books received 9.8s on the first try like the Curator X-Men #1 Tim mentioned earlier.

 

And I've had a decent amount of non-pedigrees get the nod too. No doubt a lot of the 9.8s have received some TLC over the years. But I really believe a lot of them are virgin copies too.

 

[lou_fine]

 

@namisgr (Bob #2 ) - I think the most prominent defect was spine wear.

 

I find it hard to believe that anyone thinks this book looks like an 8.5

 

 

Roy;

 

Based upon the serial number, do you know when this supposedly 9.4 copy was graded?

 

Based upon the scan alone, I am also seeing some definite spine wear. Any bets that with the much tighter grading which CGC is currently in the midst of conducting in their war with the other grading company, this book would not grade back out as a 9.4 copy if submitted now. And for sure if it did not have the Bethlehem pedigree attached to it.

[clarkkentdds]

Is CGC grading tighter lately? I was under the impression they were grading more leniently (also compared to the other grading co)...

[jimjum12]

I hope my Showcase #30 example does show that the attainment of the uber grades is often a process. It wasn't a 9.4 on the first submission. It took multiple submissions and, I'm sure, multiple pressings. Question for the true collectors: Is it really the same pedigree I once owned ?

 

My question is "did the SC30 look like an 8.5 to you at the time, or was it, in your opinion, undergraded ?" GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Yes, it looked undergraded to me, that is why I showed it to Matt. But, at the time, I was mostly going with eye appeal. Pressable defects was not yet common knowledge. Going to Matt was a chance to learn about the new 'magic'. Remember, this was not a formal submission to Matt, just an evaluation. If Matt thought he could help, you then had the option to submit. For this specific book, his exact words were 'it would always be an 8.5'.

Again, I am just pointing out that the attainment of an uber grade is often a process.

 

Thank you..... my reason for asking was that I have seen periods where a CGC grade was close to a full grade less than what the book should have received..... the 093********** to 097************** time frame being one of them. If it was graded then, it may well have had a "bump" already built in.... GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[VintageComics]

Based upon the serial number, do you know when this supposedly 9.4 copy was graded?

 

It's easy enough to check. Just pop the serial number into the "Verify CGC Certification" form. It was graded 09/2015

 

Based upon the scan alone, I am also seeing some definite spine wear.

 

Of course. It's a 9.4, not a 9.6, 9.8 or a 9.9. There is supposed to be some wear on the book to account for the grade.

 

Any bets that with the much tighter grading which CGC is currently in the midst of conducting in their war with the other grading company, this book would not grade back out as a 9.4 copy if submitted now. And for sure if it did not have the Bethlehem pedigree attached to it.

 

Now you're just speculating, which is really pointless.

[Timeless icons]

I know there's been a lot of speculation on the Showcase 30 Bethlehem so I just took some new scans of both the front and back cover. While I do agree with the assigned grade, I can say without a reason of a doubt.. this book will NEVER grade higher than a 9.4 white pager and that's perfectly fine with me. However, I would make the assumption that it was pressed somewhere along the line because this thing is super flat and has zero indentations. It has a nice registration and the corners are better in person than in the scans(the yellow corner, top right.. blends in with the white pages to a degree). I can also say that the scans do it zero justice. What it does have, is a crease that breaks color under the claw of the serpent and it also has a super small amount of wear closer to the top of the spine where the black line is that divides the front and back cover. Aside from that, the 2 small blemishes near the "A" in Aquaman is on the inside holder, not the book.

 

The back cover is really clean and it also has a cool date stamp which I am perfectly fine with since it doesn't cover any art on the front cover.

 

Structurally, it looks great as well. Staples are clean and well placed. If you want to throw it up on a scanner and blow up a large scan, I'm sure you may find something that isn't super perfect but are 9.4 books really supposed to be perfect? This fits right in with the description of a 9.4's condition. Minor defects are allowed to a certain extent. I'm confident that most of us collectors know that looking at a scan and looking at a book in hand is a world of difference. Simply put.. I'm incredibly happy to add this copy to my collection.

 

Thank you for once again for working something out Roy. You're a gentleman and a scholar.

 

 

 

 

 

[Kevin76]

Book looks good from my house

[Timeless icons]

Book looks good from my house

 

Thanks Kev

[VintageComics]

That book pops in hand. Mike, glad you're happy.

 

 

 

[jimjum12]

Bethlehems have gloss that just can't be captured in a scan.... GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[mackenzie999]

So back to the ToS39...there was speculation about the gains made from going 9.6 to 9.8...how much was the guy risking if it had come back as 9.4?

 

And are they really more lenient now? My copy is a 4.0 and I am under the impression there is a bit of a value jump between 4 & 4.5

[Timeless icons]

Thanks Roy and Jimjum

 

The 12 month gpa for a 4.0 is 3836.00 while the 12 month gpa for a 4.5 is 4357.00. Taking page quality, centering and overall eye appeal into consideration, in addition to where the books were sold (Ebay or an auction site) plays a part in the difference of those 2 grades as it does with any other, to one degree or another.

 

I'd consider the possibility of the page quality changing as well if you plan to resub it. Going from off white to cream but getting the book bumped up to a 4.5 might not leave that much of a difference in value in the end. On the other hand, it could work in your favor if the PQ doesn't change in a negative way and you get a grade bump. Roll of the dice..

[mackenzie999]

Good to know, thanks. Mine actually presents very well for the grade, in the slab. There's about a one inch tear on the cover that brings the grade down, but it lies very flat and is subtle in the slab. That being said I'm pretty happy with it as a 4.0 and don't think I'll roll the dice on it, but thanks for the info.