Allowable defect on a 9.8 or production related? 2 2

[lostboys]

When I purchased this 9.8 I figured it was debris inside the slab but now that I have it in hand I can see that it's actually on the spine. 

So would this be considered a production flaw or is this type of damage actually allowable on a 9.8? 

There are also a couple of very, very light spine bends that don't break color.

 

[MAY1979]

CGC seems to be a bit more lenient on spine than on rest of book in terms of a color flake. If that was anywhere else on the book likely a 9.6 which IMHO is simply not congruent ... That said if the book is 9.9 sans that defect then I guess a 9.8 is acceptable?

Classify as "buy the book not the slab label"

 

Edited May 5, 2022 by MAR1979

[theCapraAegagrus]

Educated guess would be that it's considered a MFG defect, as I would not give that a 9.8 otherwise.

[grendelbo]

Unless CGC deemed it a manufacturing flaw, it seems a little much for a 9.8, especially if the book also displays a couple minor imperfections.

IMO it doesn't fit CGC's grading scale.

"9.8 A nearly perfect collectible with negligible handling or manufacturing defects."

Makes me wonder if something happened to the copy between grading and encapsulation.

[lostboys]

On 5/5/2022 at 11:51 AM, grendelbo said:

Unless CGC deemed it a manufacturing flaw, it seems a little much for a 9.8, especially if the book also displays a couple minor imperfections.

IMO it doesn't fit CGC's grading scale.

"9.8 A nearly perfect collectible with negligible handling or manufacturing defects."

Makes me wonder if something happened to the copy between grading and encapsulation.

I contacted the seller to ask if the defect was already present when they sent it to CGC. Im 99% sure he was the original owner. I will update when he replies.

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 5/5/2022 at 11:51 AM, grendelbo said:

Unless CGC deemed it a manufacturing flaw, it seems a little much for a 9.8, especially if the book also displays a couple minor imperfections.

IMO it doesn't fit CGC's grading scale.

"9.8 A nearly perfect collectible with negligible handling or manufacturing defects."

Makes me wonder if something happened to the copy between grading and encapsulation.

It may not be included on their Grading Scale, but I would say that it's "common knowledge" that CGC allows MFG defects that are considered 'common' to be eligible for 9.8 at best.

I don't necessarily agree with that procedure, because would dealers grade it a 9.8 even if the defect is common due to a printing error? Highly doubt it, but that's how CGC has chosen to approach those common MFG defects.

[grendelbo]

On 5/5/2022 at 11:51 AM, theCapraAegagrus said:

It may not be included on their Grading Scale, but I would say that it's "common knowledge" that CGC allows MFG defects that are considered 'common' to be eligible for 9.8 at best.

For sure. The gripper holes in ASM 361 come immediately to mind.

[lostboys]

On 5/5/2022 at 1:51 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

It may not be included on their Grading Scale, but I would say that it's "common knowledge" that CGC allows MFG defects that are considered 'common' to be eligible for 9.8 at best.

I don't necessarily agree with that procedure, because would dealers grade it a 9.8 even if the defect is common due to a printing error? Highly doubt it, but that's how CGC has chosen to approach those common MFG defects.

The seller says its color chipping and CGC is lenient on that for 9.8s. 

 

These visible defects drive me nutzo! Normally, Id just sell/upgrade it... problem here is there are only three 9.8s out there right now.

 

Cmon guys...get those Toxin 4s graded pleeeeeeeaaaaase!

I know one you guys are sitting on a stack of em.

[Mystafo]

Covers like these are basically damaged the first time they are folded...many times the thickly applied ink on the more cardstock like covers cracks and chips before it lands on the stands/shelves.

[lostboys]

On 5/5/2022 at 1:51 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

It may not be included on their Grading Scale, but I would say that it's "common knowledge" that CGC allows MFG defects that are considered 'common' to be eligible for 9.8 at best.

I don't necessarily agree with that procedure, because would dealers grade it a 9.8 even if the defect is common due to a printing error? Highly doubt it, but that's how CGC has chosen to approach those common MFG defects.

I pulled my raw copy out to look and it has the same defect in the same spot but not nearly as bad. 

My raw copy actually looks nicer than my slabbed 9.8 so I'm gonna send it in and see what grade CGC gives it

 I'll leave one pic of both the graded and the raw here just for comparison but I'm gonna post the entire book on the "spare a grade?" board.

 

 

[Upgrayedd2]

I recently watched a video - Bry's Comics - and he provides the best explanation as to why some comics, with clearly visible defects, get a 9.8. There are so many factors including when the comics was made (Bronze, modern, etc). In addition, as mentioned above, some modern comics (as in now) are made with such poor quality paper and ink, it's virtually impossible to not blemish them.  Then throw in subjectiveness and you have a wonderful mixed stew.

[Axe Elf]

On 5/8/2022 at 3:56 AM, Upgrayedd2 said:

I recently watched a video - Bry's Comics - and he provides the best explanation as to why some comics, with clearly visible defects, get a 9.8. There are so many factors including when the comics was made (Bronze, modern, etc). In addition, as mentioned above, some modern comics (as in now) are made with such poor quality paper and ink, it's virtually impossible to not blemish them.  Then throw in subjectiveness and you have a wonderful mixed stew.

Here at GAE™, we do not grade on a curve.  We don't grade a book as a 10.0 just because it's the "best 100-year old book you will find."  If the best 100-year old book you will find is a 7.5, then it's a 7.5.  The book isn't in better condition than it appears to be just because it is older than other books in the same condition.

The same goes for poor quality moderns; if the book has blemishes and defects, then it will be graded in light of those conditions--not in light of the perception that every copy in the run has the same spine split or abrasion or whatever.

[The Lions Den]

On 5/8/2022 at 5:08 PM, Axe Elf said:

Here at GAE™, we do not grade on a curve.  We don't grade a book as a 10.0 just because it's the "best 100-year old book you will find."  If the best 100-year old book you will find is a 7.5, then it's a 7.5.  The book isn't in better condition than it appears to be just because it is older than other books in the same condition.

The same goes for poor quality moderns; if the book has blemishes and defects, then it will be graded in light of those conditions--not in light of the perception that every copy in the run has the same spine split or abrasion or whatever.

[LowGradeBronze]

Is history repeating itself? In the Golden and Silver Ages there were MFG defects (mis-wraps, miscuts, Marvel chipping,) that were largely overcome as we hit the 1970s. Also the marked improvement in early 1970s paper & cover stock. Since the 90s we're back to spines where colour breaks appear as soon as the cover is folded. All considered MFG defects. 

[Kevin76]

I wouldn't count on a book having any kind of defects thinking you're getting a 9.8. The book shown in 9.8 was a gift.  I wouldn't send in any book with any kind of defect if I needed it to be a 9.8.  Get an LED magnifying lens  if you need a 9.8