Please grade my Daredevil #17

[Johnny G]

Ok...

 

Pages are off white, there is a stamp on the lower front page, same as the back. " Beta Sigma Phi Football Acount " I have a couple of books with this stamp... pedigree???

 

Thanks...

 

 

[uclapeterg]

5.5/6.0.

[inconceivable]

5.5/6.0.

 

I agree. I see a bit of indentation from additional writing on the back cover. Is there a stain lower edge back cover?

 

Dan

[Aces]

5.5

[KingOfRulers]

4.5

[arexcrooke]

4.5

Folks, this is a fine 6.0 book

[KingOfRulers]

Well then I have a box full of "fine 6.0" books that you might be interested in.

[divad]

4.5

Folks, this is a fine 6.0 book

 

Arex, although significant defects are absent, the book doesn't warrant a FN grade - there is too much age-related wear to the spine edges and corners. So much so, that I hesitate to put it in the FN range. I'll give it high-end VG range, which would be VG+ or VG/FN . . . Take into consideration the frat-boy stamp, the writing, the indents, and the significant dirt on the back cover . . . make that a 4.5

[arexcrooke]

[arexcrooke]

Diva, i see that stuff that you mention, but even with the accumulation of those defects, i dont see it being any worse than a f- 5.5. The dirt on the back cover and the lack of quality non-pixilated scans does make me waver a little though.

right back atcha

[arexcrooke]

Well then I have a box full of "fine 6.0" books that you might be interested in.

ill give you full 2.0 guide for them

[divad]

Diva, i see that stuff that you mention, but even with the accumulation of those defects, i dont see it being any worse than a f- 5.5. The dirt on the back cover and the lack of quality non-pixilated scans does make me waver a little though.

right back atcha

 

Arex, you may be right - it all depends how it feels in hand, mid-grades can be deceiving . . .

[uclapeterg]

Diva, i see that stuff that you mention, but even with the accumulation of those defects, i dont see it being any worse than a f- 5.5. The dirt on the back cover and the lack of quality non-pixilated scans does make me waver a little though.

right back atcha

 

Arex, you may be right - it all depends how it feels in hand, mid-grades can be deceiving . . .

 

Oh sure, you're nice to HIM.

[arexcrooke]

Diva, i see that stuff that you mention, but even with the accumulation of those defects, i dont see it being any worse than a f- 5.5. The dirt on the back cover and the lack of quality non-pixilated scans does make me waver a little though.

right back atcha

 

Arex, you may be right - it all depends how it feels in hand, mid-grades can be deceiving . . .

 

Oh sure, you're nice to HIM.

[divad]

Diva, i see that stuff that you mention, but even with the accumulation of those defects, i dont see it being any worse than a f- 5.5. The dirt on the back cover and the lack of quality non-pixilated scans does make me waver a little though.

right back atcha

 

Arex, you may be right - it all depends how it feels in hand, mid-grades can be deceiving . . .

 

Oh sure, you're nice to HIM.

 

 

 

 

 

[Johnny G]

Thanks all... I was thinking a 5 myself

 

Thanks again