Thor #126 - what do you think? 3 3

[Dan Connoy]

I bought this off eBay thinking it was around a 7-8 The first two pictures are the listing and the next 4 are "upon further inspection".

The last photo has me most concerned (small tear)

Please let me know what you think. Still a 7.0?

Thanks!

[Dan Connoy]

On 3/18/2021 at 6:47 PM, Randall Ries said:

I guess I need it spelled out for me. They are two different books.

OK, now that we have the obligatory condescending post out of the way - no, they are the same book.

I guarantee that. I took a photo of it facing straight forward and none of the defects are visible. They both have the same wrap and cut.

You can see the small tear in the original listing if you look closely.

[Randall Ries]

52 minutes ago, Dan Connoy said:

OK, now that we have the obligatory condescending post out of the way - no, they are the same book.

I guarantee that. I took a photo of it facing straight forward and none of the defects are visible. They both have the same wrap and cut.

You can see the small tear in the original listing if you look closely.

Sorry if I came off that way. If I said that, I must have meant it. I can't tell now. Is there a link to the first post?

[Roger66]

Interior shots of both covers is key to gauging the grade.  Any interior tanning even light will be considered a deficit.  Looking at the photos alone that you present my best guess is a 6.5 to 7.0.  my 2 cents 

[pmWolf]

I think it can still make a 7.0. 

[Funnybooks]

6.5

[Deadpoolica]

6.5

[Galen130]

7 hours ago, Funnybooks said:

6.5

 

1 hour ago, Deadpoolica said:

6.5

 

[Zegeroth]

5.5 with that tear and paper aging.  It’s not a hairline tear and in the color.  Looks bad imo.

[theCapraAegagrus]

7.0 may be a small reach.

6.0-6.5 IMO.

[comicginger1789]

1 hour ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

7.0 may be a small reach.

6.0-6.5 IMO.

+1 on this grade from me