They're Still Out There! 22 22

[batman_fan]

I think I am going to have to take off my iWatch so all these outbid notifications don't drive me crazy 

[The Lions Den]

3 hours ago, 50YrsCollctngCmcs said:

I'll buy 7.0 Disneys like that all day long! That's drop dead gorgeous and yet another reason I don't play this grading game!

I'll admit this book looks nicer than a 7.0, but just because you can't see the flaws through the holder doesn't mean they aren't there. It's the same reason you take books out of the bag before you grade them...

[The Lions Den]

6 hours ago, lou_fine said:

Ummm.....................wouldn't that simply be nothing more than the polar opposite of what many call here as being "gift grades" by CGC?  

I guess you must not be paying too much attention as I believe we just saw one posted here earlier:  

I can appreciate where you're coming from; some books appear to be nicer than their assigned grade. But I'm sure there's a reason this book received a 7.0 instead of a higher grade. And I do hope you understand that "punishment grading" by any CGC grader would be grounds for immediate dismissal. There are some things CGC won't tolerate...

[tth2]

5 hours ago, LordRahl said:

So you're making a determination that this was "punishment grading" from a picture of the front cover of a book, in a slab? That might explain why you always seem to think CGC is wrong and you are right in respect to grade. Because of course grading from a picture of a book of only the front cover in a slab is more accurate than grading with the book raw and in hand 

 

Not to mention that it's a photo, not a scan, and taken from a distance at an angle.

[comicdonna]

5 minutes ago, The Lions Den said:

6 hours ago, lou_fine said:

Ummm.....................wouldn't that simply be nothing more than the polar opposite of what many call here as being "gift grades" by CGC?  

I guess you must not be paying too much attention as I believe we just saw one posted here earlier:  

I can appreciate where you're coming from; some books appear to be nicer than their assigned grade. But I'm sure there's a reason this book received a 7.0 instead of a higher grade.

Yep,  It's one thing for someone to post a front cover scan of a book that has a large chunk out of the cover and is graded a 9.0  You can see the grade and a defect.  But, to post a 7.0 with a flawless front cover scan and no  back cover scan, it doesn't mean the book is under graded.  A back cover scan, and possibly a scan of the spine may be needed to show it is under graded.

@thirdgreenham's last grading contest had a book that looked 9.0 from the front and back cover scan.  It graded a 2.0 or less.  The spine was completely split, and Andy didn't even notice when he sent it in.    

[tth2]

50 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

I think I am going to have to take off my iWatch so all these outbid notifications don't drive me crazy 

Put in higher bids. 

[thehumantorch]

Just now, comicdonna said:

Yep,  It's one thing for someone to post a front cover scan of a book that has a large chunk out of the cover and is graded a 9.0  You can see the grade and a defect.  But, to post a 7.0 with a flawless front cover scan and no  back cover scan, it doesn't mean the book is under graded.  A back cover scan, and possibly a scan of the spine may be needed to show it is under graded.

@thirdgreenham's last grading contest had a book that looked 9.0 from the front and back cover scan.  It graded a 2.0 or less.  The spine was completely split, and Andy didn't even notice when he sent it in.    

I've heard that if you remove the book from the CGC case you'll find not only a back cover but also interior pages.....not all defects are on the front cover

[tth2]

27 minutes ago, The Lions Den said:

I'll admit this book looks nicer than a 7.0, but just because you can't see the flaws through the holder doesn't mean they aren't there. It's the same reason you take books out of the bag before you grade them...

 There's a reason the expression "mylar mint" exists in this hobby.

If you can't accurately gauge the grade of a raw book that you're holding in hand because it's sitting in a mylar (with the back cover obscured by a backboard), why is it that we're suddenly supposed to be able to accurately gauge the grade of a book from a photo of the front cover through a slab from a distance at an angle?

[batman_fan]

2 minutes ago, tth2 said:

Put in higher bids. 

everyone knows there is only one book worth any serious bidding in this auction 

 

[tth2]

19 minutes ago, The Lions Den said:

And I do hope you understand that "punishment grading" by any CGC grader would be grounds for immediate dismissal. There are some things CGC won't tolerate...

Although they might make an exception for Dean's next submission. 

[batman_fan]

1 minute ago, tth2 said:

 There's a reason the expression "mylar mint" exists in this hobby.

If you can't accurately gauge the grade of a raw book that you're holding in hand because it's sitting in a mylar (with the back cover obscured by a backboard), why is it that we're suddenly supposed to be able to accurately gauge the grade of a book from a photo of the front cover through a slab from a distance at an angle?

I think the answer is perfectly obvious based on this analysis

[tth2]

2 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

everyone knows there is only one book worth any serious bidding in this auction 

 

Wow!!!!  That book is amazing!!!!

[tth2]

11 minutes ago, tth2 said:

1 hour ago, batman_fan said:

I think I am going to have to take off my iWatch so all these outbid notifications don't drive me crazy 

Put in higher bids. 

But not on those sweet 1950s Peanuts. 

[batman_fan]

Just now, tth2 said:

But not on those sweet 1950s Peanuts. 

too late.  thats an itch I haven't scratched in months and its not for lack of trying !

[Mmehdy]

1 hour ago, jimbo_7071 said:

I agree that the panic over being left out will affect this auction—but it won't last into auctions where the books are resold. Some books may be locked away in permanent collections, but others will be re-sold at a loss. It always happens with over-hyped auctions.

There is no panic, only reality here. 5000+ OO GA books with 95% top grade speaks for itself. There is no hype either, its one the last OO GA comic book collections on this size to ever appear. I do not believe that any SF copy or Chuck copy original purchaser has ever lost on those buys. Yes this is 2021. You can buy an sell anything for any price at any time, however using common sense and purchasing from a collector's standpoint with an ability to hold these books for 3+ years I do no see a number of re-sold at a loss with that program in mind. Are widget buyers more likely to lose, yes if they have no holding power. If you are a collector, a TCBC who is buying the book itself in the best possible condition, then I disagree with you  that  a loss  always happens with over hyped auctions. This is not over hype, but the real deal.

Edited May 28, 2021 by Mmehdy

[thehumantorch]

55 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

everyone knows there is only one book worth any serious bidding in this auction 

 

That's a book to walk the hills with.

[lou_fine]

8 hours ago, 50YrsCollctngCmcs said:

I'll buy 7.0 Disneys like that all day long! That's drop dead gorgeous and yet another reason I don't play this grading game!

I don't believe you are allow to say such positive things about a book that's been slabbed as only a CGC 7.0 graded copy, because that would be considered as absolutely blasphemous to the eyes and ears of somebody like his Lordship and his gang of loyal followers. 

Especially since we are supposed to be paying attention to the CGC label only and not try to relate it back to how the actual underlying book appears. 

Remember the mantra here:  Buy the label, not the book!!!     

Edited May 28, 2021 by lou_fine

[lou_fine]

7 hours ago, buttock said:

8 hours ago, lou_fine said:

 as I had  already clearly stated in my original response to this scan from @sfcityduck  that you cannot accurately grade a book without actually having the book in hand:  

Although this is definitely true for books that might appear to be possibly undergraded, it is a lot easier to tell if a book is possibly overgraded from a scan, especially in the case of clear and obvious visual defects which other books in equivalent grades would generally not have. 

 

Literally in consecutive sentences.  

Literally cannot comprehend or understand that "possibly undergraded" has the exact opposite meaning of "possibly overgraded".    

[lou_fine]

6 hours ago, szav said:

8 hours ago, lou_fine said:

I believe it's going to be a toss up between the PL 17 and the AA 61

Rooting for PL17 but wouldn’t tsleep on the Tec 140, the Riddler is more iconic and well known than Grundy or Phantom Lady.  Lone highest graded (for those who care) of a book that seems not to show up often in high grade.  Seems like a 100-150k book easy.

I would probably tend to agree with you here except that I personally never really cared for the comic book version of the Riddler myself (liked him in the Gotham TV series though) and out of the 3 covers that we are talking about, the one for 'Tec 140 is by far the least appealing out of the three.  

Not sure if the census matters here, but 'Tec 140 appears to be a lot more common with a total of 193 copies slabbed to date which is more than both PL 17 (105 total slabbed copies) and AA 61 (only 67 total slabbed copies) combined.  

[VintageComics]

On 5/26/2021 at 2:21 PM, walclark said:

It wasn’t that long ago that CGC hammered this comic book for a dust shadow.  Heritage graded it as a VF+ and Metropolis called it a VF/NM.   Graded in January and the grader’s notes don’t note any hidden defects.  So in early 2021, they did count a sun shadow as a significant defect.

 

I think the graders were also concerned about the black spots and they had as much to do with the grade as the shadow.