How Much Would You Pay for a Conserved Grade on a SA Key? 1 1

[Math Teacher]

I've been reading this forum for almost 10 months, and I have read numerous opinions about how restoration affects the price of a book. I have seen people say that a PLOD book would/should only get a value of 25% to 33% of a Blue label. I have also heard that this percentage rises the more valuable the book is and the assigned grade given on the PLOD.

Now that CGC has developed a new label for conserved (Conserved Label Blue/Gray), how do you value a conserved book? It seems to me that a conserved book would be worth more than a restored grade (at least in my opinion). I have seen some conserved books that look VERY nice. It seems to me that I might perhaps value a conserved book at 50% to 60% of a Blue label? Am I way off base here? How would you value a conserved book?

Here are some quick examples:

Daredevil #1 6.0 (C) sold for $1605 in April of 2018. Most recent sale of Daredevil #1 6.0 (Blue label) was $2450 in August of 2019. Ratio of conserved price to Blue label price is approximately 66%.

Amazing Fantasy #15 6.5 (C) sold for $36000 in August of 2018. Most recent sale of Amazing Fantasy #15 6.5 (Blue label) was $65000 in March of 2018. Ratio of conserved price to Blue label price is approximately 55%

X-Men #1 6.0 (C) sold for $6900 in February of 2019. Most recent sale of X-Men #1 6.0 (Blue label) was $11500 in June of 2019. Ratio of conserved price to Blue label price is approximately 60%.

These examples fall close to my predicted range of 50% to 60%. If I was willing to take more time, I could have found more examples, but I just wanted some quick and dirty data to work with.

Just for the record, I own two restored books (SC #6 - 3.0 - C1 and TtA #35 - 4.0 - C1), and I don't currently own any conserved books. I certainly understand the stigma of a PLOD; however, I really can't say that I am getting less enjoyment from my restored books than I would had they not been restored. In all honesty, my key books are all in CGC cases and are stored on the top shelf of a closet in our guest bedroom. My really valuable books are in a safe deposit box at my local bank.

So, how do you feel about a conserved label versus a blue label? Would you be willing to pay 60% of the Blue label price to buy a conserved book in the same grade? If not, what percentage would you be willing to pay?

I'd really like to hear everyone's opinion. Someday, I may get offered a SA key book in a Conserved holder. The information I can get from such a learned community of collectors would help me to decide if the purchase price made sense.

Thanks, everybody!

 

Joe Ankenbauer

[newshane]

It really depends on how the conservation is defined. 

I think a book with replaced staples of a vintage nature at 60% off blue label prices would be a killer deal in grey. 

I don't think there is a thing wrong with replacing the staples if it ends up saving the paper in the long run. 

They define certain types of tear seals as conserved...so I guess it really just depends. 

Saving a book from damage is more noble than trying to restore it Frankenstein-style. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

The Conservation label isn't new.

The design may be, but they've used Conserved labels for at least 5 years.

[The Lions Den]

Thanks for the information, Joe. 

I can see paying 50 - 60% of the blue label price for a nice looking Conserved book, especially if it has white pages.  

 

[Krismusic]

I would pay 50-60% of the blue label price for a Conserved book. grey is more neutral any ways and slides in the with rest of the books better than purple mind you I have a few purple books. 

[sledgehammer]

On 8/30/2019 at 6:57 AM, The Lions Den said:

Thanks for the information, Joe. 

I can see paying 50 - 60% of the blue label price for a nice looking Conserved book, especially if it has white pages.  

 

I've been seeing several examples in the last year where the number was right around 75%.

I also wanted to pick your brain specifically, instead of calling the CGC office.

I saw a married cover in a "conserved" slab. 

Do you know of any reason that they would call re attaching a cover "marrying"?

I have to believe that it is what we normally consider the term to mean, and that it was a mistake in the label.

[Math Teacher]

My understanding of "marrying," in your example, would be if you used a cover from a different book than your own.

For example, you have a copy of AF #15 (book A) with a decent cover, but has several pages missing. But you also have a coverless copy of AF #15 (book B) which doesn't have missing pages. To me, "marrying" would be using the cover from book A along with the insides of book B, so as to obtain a book with a decent cover with no missing pages.

[Yale Stewart]

I think like all things it hinges on the conservation the book has undergone. I've seen an ASM #1 where the only note was that the cover had been cleaned. To me, that's an "IDGAF" note that should be prob 80-90% of a blue label. I've seen other stuff that really makes me wonder exactly how they define conserved vs. restored because the notes feel SIGNIFICANTLY more involved, and would have me consider a price 50-60% of blue label. It's really tricky.

[Math Teacher]

On 2/8/2022 at 5:11 PM, 18-22 said:

I believe that is what he is saying. The book should not get a  Conserved label if this was the case. I think he's saying that this book has its original cover that was reattached 

If that is the case, I would send the book to be graded using the "detached cover" notation. It may lower the grade by 1/2, but getting a blue label rather than a conserved label might make it worth it.

[Yale Stewart]

@18-22 right, but I still don't care. I will never in my life understand the hang-up some folks have on cleaning, dry or chemical.

[William-James88]

On 2/8/2022 at 6:05 PM, Math Teacher said:

My understanding of "marrying," in your example, would be if you used a cover from a different book than your own.

For example, you have a copy of AF #15 (book A) with a decent cover, but has several pages missing. But you also have a coverless copy of AF #15 (book B) which doesn't have missing pages. To me, "marrying" would be using the cover from book A along with the insides of book B, so as to obtain a book with a decent cover with no missing pages.

Marrying is a green label anyways, so that's a different discussion.

But yeah, 50% on a grey label key makes sense. But on non keys or non expensive SA, it could be much lower. I don't think an FF 10 in grey label would get 50%, I reckon it would be much lower than that.

On 2/8/2022 at 6:15 PM, Yale Stewart said:

@18-22 right, but I still don't care. I will never in my life understand the hang-up some folks have on cleaning, dry or chemical.

Here's hoping whoever is selling chemically cleaned books has 2 of you in a bidding war over them, for the sake of the seller ;)

[The Lions Den]

On 2/8/2022 at 5:32 PM, sledgehammer said:

I saw a married cover in a "conserved" slab. 

Do you know of any reason that they would call re attaching a cover "marrying"?

I have to believe that it is what we normally consider the term to mean, and that it was a mistake in the label.

When they put "married cover" in capital letters on the label, that would indicate to me that even though other work was done, the book also has a married cover. And the grading notes do confirm it... 

[The Lions Den]

On 2/8/2022 at 7:02 PM, 18-22 said:

Do you think it should be labeled as Conserved?

That's not my call...

[Yale Stewart]

On 2/8/2022 at 5:30 PM, 18-22 said:

You have much to learn grasshopper. There's no way in hell 80-90% of Blue labels were chemically/aqueously cleaned 

I'm not saying that they were. I'm saying that in my opinion such a minor thing should only knock a book down to 80-90% of Universal.

[Kevin76]

I'd pay 0, Only label I buy is Blue or Black. 

[William-James88]

On 2/8/2022 at 9:28 PM, Kevin76 said:

I'd pay 0, Only label I buy is Blue or Black. 

You talking about Whiskey? What's Back Label CGC?

[sledgehammer]

On 2/8/2022 at 5:43 PM, The Lions Den said:

On 2/8/2022 at 4:32 PM, sledgehammer said:

I saw a married cover in a "conserved" slab. 

Do you know of any reason that they would call re attaching a cover "marrying"?

I have to believe that it is what we normally consider the term to mean, and that it was a mistake in the label.

When they put "married cover" in capital letters on the label, that would indicate to me that even though other work was done, the book also has a married cover. And the grading notes do confirm it... 

I guess I'll have to call them. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever that a book with what they call restoration would ever get a conserved label.

I have an absolutely gorgeous to look at 7.5 ASM 3 with a married cover in a green label.

When I bought it, I was sure that it was a mistake, and should have gone in to a purple label.

Now I see one in a conserved label.

Who the flying  knows?

On 2/8/2022 at 5:05 PM, Math Teacher said:

My understanding of "marrying," in your example, would be if you used a cover from a different book than your own.

For example, you have a copy of AF #15 (book A) with a decent cover, but has several pages missing. But you also have a coverless copy of AF #15 (book B) which doesn't have missing pages. To me, "marrying" would be using the cover from book A along with the insides of book B, so as to obtain a book with a decent cover with no missing pages.

Well yea, that's pretty much what everyone believes is exactly what "marrying a cover" means. Point is, other than this being a mistake, is their some other reason. Which is why I specifically asked the guy that used to work for them.

Just an FYI (to no one in particular), in January, a conserved 6.5 x-men #1 sold for $28,800 because it had its staples replaced (GPA notes it as "purple" but it is conserved), and a blue label 6.5 copy sold for just over $37K ( a big drop from recent highs)

Edited February 9, 2022 by sledgehammer

[The Lions Den]

On 2/9/2022 at 7:39 AM, sledgehammer said:

I have an absolutely gorgeous to look at 7.5 ASM 3 with a married cover in a green label.

When I bought it, I was sure that it was a mistake, and should have gone in to a purple label.

This actually sounds correct as well---married covers normally get a green Qualified label, not a purple label. And if the restoration on a given book is done professionally and meets all the other CGC criteria, the book will usually get a Conserved label. There's a pretty lengthy explanation available here on the CGC site. 

I also believe the reason the book in question received a Conserved label (even with a married cover) is because of the other work that was done. I hope this helps. 

But if you still want to call them, please do. I always enjoy hearing what they have to say...

[sledgehammer]

On 2/9/2022 at 8:48 AM, The Lions Den said:

On 2/9/2022 at 6:39 AM, sledgehammer said:

I have an absolutely gorgeous to look at 7.5 ASM 3 with a married cover in a green label.

When I bought it, I was sure that it was a mistake, and should have gone in to a purple label.

This actually sounds correct as well---married covers normally get a green Qualified label, not a purple label. And if the restoration on a given book is done professionally and meets all the other CGC criteria, the book will usually get a Conserved label. There's a pretty lengthy explanation available here on the CGC site. 

I also believe the reason the book in question received a Conserved label (even with a married cover) is because of the other work that was done. I hope this helps. 

But if you still want to call them, please do. I always enjoy hearing what they have to say...

Thanks.

Are you saying that the other "conservation" work, was enough to overwhelm something that is restoration warranting a purple label?

All very confusing, and I don't have much motive to contact them, because my ASM 3 was graded in '19. Marrying covers is not listed on the site as a "conservation" type act.

They must distinguish between how the cover was married, for whatever reason, because I found this 2.5 AF 15, graded in 2017, noted as "conserved".

 

CGC Cert #

1294639001

Conservation includes: staples replaced. COVER & 1ST WRAP MARRIED.

I will get around to asking them. They certainly can't be saying that a "conservation" act, can overwhelm a type of "restoration" that would warrant a purple label.

[The Lions Den]

On 2/9/2022 at 1:31 PM, sledgehammer said:

Thanks.

Are you saying that the other "conservation" work, was enough to overwhelm something that is restoration warranting a purple label?

All very confusing, and I don't have much motive to contact them, because my ASM 3 was graded in '19. Marrying covers is not listed on the site as a "conservation" type act.

They must distinguish between how the cover was married, for whatever reason, because I found this 2.5 AF 15, graded in 2017, noted as "conserved".

 

CGC Cert #

1294639001

Conservation includes: staples replaced. COVER & 1ST WRAP MARRIED.

I will get around to asking them. They certainly can't be saying that a "conservation" act, can overwhelm a type of "restoration" that would warrant a purple label.

There are times when certain label designations can't accurately reflect everything that's going on with the book. In these cases, CGC usually tries to give the book the best possible outcome.

So yes, until they come up with a different type of label, I'm pretty sure that's what they're saying...