Heritage's Next Event Auction has started posting books ! 31 31

[Gotham Kid]

wow !

[tth2]

On 4/22/2022 at 1:27 PM, lou_fine said:

On 4/21/2022 at 2:17 PM, lou_fine said:

that "gorgeous" Promise Collection copy of Gangsters Can't Win 2 with the exact same equivalent 8.5 grade must have all been production related defects to be ignored upon grading.    

Boy, do I ever wish you are right that books are graded much looser nowadays as compared to before because that would mean all of those CGC 9.2's to 9.6's that I got on my first run would grade higher now.

Expand  

 

On 4/21/2022 at 9:33 PM, tth2 said:

Make up your mind!  In the space of two consecutive sentences, you have completely contradicted yourself!

I guess you missed my point that I was simply trying to be sarcastic here or it just flew over your head when you was reading it.    

I fully understood you were being sarcastic in your sentence re GCW 2, i.e., you know they were not production-related defects and therefore you thought it was very loosely graded and did not deserve the 8.5 that it received. 

So in your first sentence you were saying that CGC were too loose.  Then in your second sentence you complained that CGC are too tight.  

[tth2]

On 4/22/2022 at 2:13 PM, lou_fine said:

Can you feel the soft gentle swishing of the CGC grading whip as it comes down to caress your book with that clearly visible rat chew, edge tears, spine wear, indented staples, color breaking creases, and what have you?    

 

Grading Scenario #2:  

 

 

Click link below to view:  

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/ejeW00YcZIc/hqdefault.jpg   

Can you feel the hard blood letting, scar inducing cracking of the CGC grading whip as it comes down to bludgeon your book with that near invisible tiny NCB spine tick that can only be seen if you hold the book up to the light or that unflattened still fresh looking book with still just a hint of the natural bow that comes when a book has been stored properly, especially when all of these additional revenue generating defects could have easily been taken care of if only you had been willing to open your wallet a bit wider so that we could have lighten it a lot more for you ?    

Yes, but "rat chew, edge tears, spine wear, indented staples, color breaking creases" are the main and majority of defects that most books get downgraded for.  If you've got a non-HG book, the NCBs are irrelevant because the book's already been knocked down so much because of the main defects that NCBs probably barely affect the grade if at all.

So saying that CGC has gotten looser on the defects that constitute 99% of book defects and tighter on NCBs that constitute 1% (at most) of book defects, and then concluding from this that CGC has therefore become overall tighter on grading, makes no sense. 

[batman_fan]

This is something I can say with 100% certainty relative to CGCs grading over the years.

Anything I am selling was graded really tough and is a definite upgrade candidate on a straight resubmit.

Anything I am buying was graded when CGC was looser on their grading and should be discounted.

[buttock]

On 4/22/2022 at 8:50 AM, batman_fan said:

This is something I can say with 100% certainty relative to CGCs grading over the years.

Anything I am selling was graded really tough and is a definite upgrade candidate on a straight resubmit.

Anything I am buying was graded when CGC was looser on their grading and should be discounted.

Got anything for sale? 

[batman_fan]

On 4/22/2022 at 8:58 AM, buttock said:

Got anything for sale? 

Just this bad boy

[ThothAmon]

On 4/22/2022 at 11:38 AM, batman_fan said:

Just this bad boy

If only newsstand…

[buttock]

On 4/22/2022 at 9:38 AM, batman_fan said:

Just this bad boy

Easy 9.9 on a resub. 

[Point Five]

I'd be tempted to crack that book out and read it. I mean, do they find a big enough oven or not? Look at that pie, it's f'ing huge.

 

[jimbo_7071]

This book recently sold on HA.com. It looks like it picked up quite a bit of ink from the back of whatever book was on top of it in the pile for many years. Can anyone identify what back cover ad that would have been? Ever since I noticed, I've been trying to figure it out, but I don't know enough back covers to be able to recognize it. It doesn't appear on the back of Mary Marvel 12 or 14. I thought I would check other issues from June of '47, but I couldn't find back cover scans for many of them.

[comicnoir]

On 4/22/2022 at 7:30 PM, jimbo_7071 said:

This book recently sold on HA.com. It looks like it picked up quite a bit of ink from the back of whatever book was on top of it in the pile for many years. Can anyone identify what back cover ad that would have been? Ever since I noticed, I've been trying to figure it out, but I don't know enough back covers to be able to recognize it. It doesn't appear on the back of Mary Marvel 12 or 14. I thought I would check other issues from June of '47, but I couldn't find back cover scans for many of them.

Foot itch?

[jimbo_7071]

On 4/22/2022 at 8:35 PM, comicnoir said:

Foot itch?

I don't think so. If you zoom in on it, the central part of the ad shows pictures of houses.

[tth2]

On 4/22/2022 at 11:44 PM, ThothAmon said:

On 4/22/2022 at 11:38 PM, batman_fan said:

Just this bad boy

Expand  

If only newsstand…

Almost choked on the milk coming out of my nose! 

[Crowzilla]

On 4/22/2022 at 10:44 AM, szav said:

Classic ‘Robin watching Batman do all the work’ cover.

I think the "wow" was that he wasn't tied up on the cover.  Cool that it's a Detective cover, but aren't there some other earlier Batman ones known? I know the first Joker cover in Detective is out there, but that is a few months later.

[Gotham Kid]

On 4/23/2022 at 4:01 AM, Crowzilla said:

I think the "wow" was that he wasn't tied up on the cover.  Cool that it's a Detective cover, but aren't there some other earlier Batman ones known? I know the first Joker cover in Detective is out there, but that is a few months later.

Metro has OA to Tec 28 and 30

The HA piece is Tec59

Edited April 23, 2022 by Gotham Kid

[Gotham Kid]

On 4/23/2022 at 4:01 AM, Crowzilla said:

I think the "wow" was that he wasn't tied up on the cover.

[jpepx78]

On 4/22/2022 at 6:58 PM, jimbo_7071 said:

I don't think so. If you zoom in on it, the central part of the ad shows pictures of houses.

That ink imprint is from the inking from the inside front cover ad showing through on the white cover.

The left side of Mary’s face is the fingers of the kid holding a house.

 

[lou_fine]

On 4/22/2022 at 8:12 PM, Gotham Kid said:

On 4/22/2022 at 8:01 PM, Crowzilla said:

I think the "wow" was that he wasn't tied up on the cover.  Cool that it's a Detective cover, but aren't there some other earlier Batman ones known? I know the first Joker cover in Detective is out there, but that is a few months later.

Metro has OA to Tec 28 and 30

The cover artwork for 'Tec 28 is front and center when you enter the Metro offices as it deserves to be, but both that one and 'Tec 30 are non-Bat covers. 

Then again, I absolutely love that cover for 'Tec 28 and would take it over many of the later Batman covers and if I am not mistaken, Fishler mentioned to me that he had paid something like only $800 for the cover way back in the day.    

[jimbo_7071]

On 4/23/2022 at 12:41 AM, jpepx78 said:

That ink imprint is from the inking from the inside front cover ad showing through on the white cover.

The left side of Mary’s face is the fingers of the kid holding a house.

 

Interesting! I had no idea that ink could come through the cover like that. I've never seen that before. I've see a little bit of red ink peek through—faintly—but I've never seen black ink come right through the cover inks. (I have seen ink transferred from other covers many times, which is why I thought that's what it was.)

Edited April 23, 2022 by jimbo_7071

[lou_fine]

On 4/22/2022 at 6:28 AM, tth2 said:

So in your first sentence you were saying that CGC were too loose.  Then in your second sentence you complained that CGC are too tight. 

Didn't want to come right out and say it since I thought the side by side photos were pretty self evident, but something akin to what @batman_fan was alluding to in his post.  

Everything that you and I as regular collectors submit would seemingly end up being graded tightly relative to the book's visual defects.

Everything that Heritage submits would seemingly get the benefit of the doubt and seemingly end up being graded loosely relative to the book's visual defects.

Then again, the Gangsters Can't Win 2 seems to be the poster child for overgrading when it comes to the Promise Collection, and maybe boardies like me are overstating it a bit since nobody's perfect including the CGC graders.  Shouldn't really matter in the end anyways, since I imagine most bidders would use their own eyes and bid according to the book relative to the subjective CGC grade.    

Perfect case in point being this copy of Ace Comics which I thought presented quite nicely relative to its assigned CGC grade:

From the Graders Notes, it would appeared that the cover tanning   along with the cover creases and the nicks out of the front cover really killed the grade on this copy here.  I guess if it was just a rat chew on the corner from cover to cover throughout the entire book, it would have ended up grading higher.  

Unfortunately for me, even though I was bidding well into double digit condition guide value for this book, somebody else was obviously thinking the same way and I just couldn't see myself bidding more than the 20X condition guide that it might have taken for me to win this beauty of a book.  Don't you just absolutely hate it when you are bidding on a book that you think presents nicely relative to its assigned CGC grade, and other bidders are doing the same thing instead of focusing on just the CGC label like they should in this particular case here?     

Edited April 23, 2022 by lou_fine