• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

MF73 CGC 9.4 Mile High
3 3

Started by Gotham Kid,

150 posts in this topic

Sqeggs

Sqeggs

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:
11 minutes ago, Sqeggs said:

I don't think so, either.  The numerical grade might change, but I don't think there's any way this one would come back as a PLOD.

Maybe you are right. To save any controversies, chances are both the grade and the Universal designation would stay the same. Still, I would not buy this book for the sole reason of an upgrade. 

I wouldn't either.  I don't know about this particular book, but I've seen a lot of books that are still in old label slabs because they appear to be overgraded. As I think you mentioned earlier, with this book, the risk of going down to a 9.2 would outweigh the chance of going up to a 9.6, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
r100comics

r100comics

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, jason327 said:

Yeah I own it.  No big secret.  And yeah, I even like to have a drink and talk once in a while.  At least I'm honest.  Which is more than I can say for SOME of you.

 

Like the guys who mislead about grading.  And guys who say they can look at a scan and see the flaws in a 9.4; what a load.  That's just flat-out lies.  (call CGC if you really want to know about a specific comic - they have 3 graders for each comic and they keep all the notes)  Comic fans are the most biased people on the planet.  No secret.  At least I admit it.  Unlike SOME on here.  For anyone who's new here....you can get good info, and there are honest posters.  BUT....you have to sift through a lot of BS.  A lot.

 

I have no reason to be biased anymore about the Flash & Thrill ashcans.  I sold them.  But I 100% stand by my thoughts that they should be worth a lot more than Whiz #1.  They probably will in the future.  Make jokes all you want....but look what you own, and look what I own now.  And I did it on a low starting budget.  Bought a Whiz 1 for $19K, sold it for $176K....and took $75K of that to buy MF 73 Mile High.  Who's Strawberry Shortcake now?

It was the unnecessary pumping of a book you were selling and some of the ridiculous statements you made that caused the reaction you got.

This is some spectacular wheeler-dealing though and deserves a lot of respect. :applause:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
r100comics

r100comics

Posted
Posted

It's all par for the course and I wouldn't take it personally.

When you're selling a major, six figure book you have to accept it will come under some serious scrutiny.

It will find it's level in the marketplace regardless of any comments made here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lou_fine

lou_fine

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, jason327 said:

Saying Church's notoriously famous date written on the cover (a good thing) should detract from the grade....blatant lies.

I am quite sure this part here was meant as just a joke only, because all of the collectors that I am aware of actually would prefer to have a Church book with the signature dates on them because that helps with the proof of pedigree verification.  (thumbsu

Edited by lou_fine
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bomber-Bob

Bomber-Bob

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, jason327 said:

You haven't seen many Church copies that are in old slabs that appear to be overgraded.  Instead of wild speculation (not saying you)....let's call CGC.

Let's call CGC to ask them what ??? You have a great book here, I don't think anybody was dissing your book. Just a discussion of the label notes. Why are you angry ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bomber-Bob

Bomber-Bob

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, jason327 said:

If anyone still disagrees with me, feel free to say so.  Really.  Let me have it LOL.  It's all good.

Regarding calling CGC about the grading, I don't think it works like that anymore. I remember what you are talking about, you could call and discuss your book. They would even tell you what each grader gave your book.  That's when I found out the opinion of the 'finalizer' is what counted. I remember calling and being told a grade scenario of 9.6, 9.6 final grade 9.0 . Now, you have to purchase the notes online. You pay and they E-Mail you the notes. The cost depends on how the book (what tier) was submitted. In your case I'm sure it would be 15.00 . Also, they no longer tell you the individual grades from each grader. The good ol' days are gone ! It's kinda why I said this book should not be resubbed. CGC can change their mind on anything, anytime. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lou_fine

lou_fine

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

That's when I found out the opinion of the 'finalizer' is what counted. I remember calling and being told a grade scenario of 9.6, 9.6 final grade 9.0 .

Now, this sounds like a book that should definitely be sent back in for a resub.

Actually, with this type of scenario that you pointed out, what's the point of even having the first 2 graders since their input means absolute diddly squat in the final analysis.  meh

Edited by lou_fine
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bomber-Bob

Bomber-Bob

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

Now, this sounds like a book that should definitely be sent back in for a resub.

Actually, with this type of scenario that you pointed out, what's the point of even having the first 2 graders since their input means absolute diddly squat in the final analysis.  meh

I know, I think it's just a more than one set of eyes scenario. On this particular book, I was told the finalizer saw something on the apex of the spine that the other two missed.  I actually still own it but have never resubbed.  Crapshoot if it would get a 9.6 or not = would they spot the flaw.  I don't like to play the 'let's fool CGC' game anyway. BTW, I could never, with my own eyes see the flaw, even cracked it open. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lou_fine

lou_fine

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:
18 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

Now, this sounds like a book that should definitely be sent back in for a resub.

Actually, with this type of scenario that you pointed out, what's the point of even having the first 2 graders since their input means absolute diddly squat in the final analysis.  meh

I know, I think it's just a more than one set of eyes scenario. On this particular book, I was told the finalizer saw something on the apex of the spine that the other two missed.  I actually still own it but have never resubbed.  Crapshoot if it would get a 9.6 or not = would they spot the flaw.  I don't like to play the 'let's fool CGC' game anyway. BTW, I could never, with my own eyes see the flaw, even cracked it open. 

:idea:  Well, since it looks like you live in the Chicago area, maybe you should consider bringing it in for something fast and simple like on-site grading if they have it there at the con. 

You can always take it back out of the slab once your curiosity has been satisfied.  (thumbsu

Edited by lou_fine
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bomber-Bob

Bomber-Bob

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

:idea:  Well, since it looks like you live in the Chicago area, maybe you should consider bringing it in for something fast and simple like on-site grading if they have it there at the con. 

You can always take it back out of the slab once your curiosity has been satisfied.  (thumbsu

Ha, great minds think alike. I have considered it for onsite grading for that very reason. They are rushed and may miss it. Maybe I'll get a 9.8 this time !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

Nothing new at all as I believe they've always had the finalizer in place ever since the start of CGC, or that's what I have always thought.  (shrug)

I too believe that is correct

Edited by G.A.tor
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RareHighGrade

RareHighGrade

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, jason327 said:

I was responding to a guy in this thread who said the date written on the cover should have detracted from the grade.  I called that a blatant lie.  Me and you are in 100% agreement that the notorious Church date is a PLUS, not a minus.

I assume that you're referring to the previous post from Bedrock quoted below.  If so, you clearly don't understand Bedrock's sense of humor:

"There is writing on the cover in the top left too. And a page looks like it is loose and hanging out of the bottom. And it is misprinted with the issue number having stuff printed over the top. And miscut too...see how everything is slanted down on the right. And obviously it was pressed, just look at the pages sticking out of the side. And the scuff marks in the logo. And don't get me started on the dust shadow up and down the spine. And this is just the front cover. But from what is going on here on the front it is obvious that there must be heavy creasing and probably chunks missing from the back cover. Based on this scan I wouldn't be surprised if the back cover is replaced from another book altogether...looks like a Fawcett back cover to me. CGC, and especially that Matt Nelson fella, screws up AGAIN! doh!"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
woowoo

woowoo

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, RareHighGrade said:

I assume that you're referring to the previous post from Bedrock quoted below.  If so, you clearly don't understand Bedrock's sense of humor:

"There is writing on the cover in the top left too. And a page looks like it is loose and hanging out of the bottom. And it is misprinted with the issue number having stuff printed over the top. And miscut too...see how everything is slanted down on the right. And obviously it was pressed, just look at the pages sticking out of the side. And the scuff marks in the logo. And don't get me started on the dust shadow up and down the spine. And this is just the front cover. But from what is going on here on the front it is obvious that there must be heavy creasing and probably chunks missing from the back cover. Based on this scan I wouldn't be surprised if the back cover is replaced from another book altogether...looks like a Fawcett back cover to me. CGC, and especially that Matt Nelson fella, screws up AGAIN! doh!"

 

:whatthe: Richard was not serious. :ohnoez:    Most all of use love this book and I would bet Richard is one of them (thumbsuI am not to sure abought RHG ? He might not like Church books hm

Edited by woowoo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimjum12

jimjum12

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, woowoo said:

:whatthe: Richard was not serious. :ohnoez:    Most all of use love this book and I would beat Richard is one of them (thumbsuI am not to sure abought RHG ? He might not like Church books hm

RHG likes Pizza..........................GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)(thumbsu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
3 3
Go to topic listing