PGM Marvel Spotlight on (Spider-Woman) 2 2

[Eponymous]

While I'm at it with S-W, here's her first appearance before they figured out big hair was a better look. Nice color choice on Nick's shooter.

A bit more distressed than the SW #1.

[scburdet]

5-5.5

[comicginger1789]

I agree with 5.5

[grendelbo]

5.0

It may press to a 5.5 but I doubt higher.

Thanks for posting.

[Eponymous]

On 7/14/2022 at 4:30 PM, scburdet said:

5-5.5

Thanks for this. I'm trying to get better at grading and am curious about just which defects draw this to ~5.5. I see the creases and stress lines on the fold. But no tears and pretty good gloss on a clean cover. I'd have put it a little higher.

[scburdet]

On 7/14/2022 at 8:09 PM, Eponymous said:

which defects draw this to ~5.5

On my list:

1) Color breaking creases bottom right (2, which are long); 2) hard crease top left back cover; 3) bottom right back cover, there's something. Looks like a tear, but I'll take your word that there aren't any, but it's something; 4) 1/2 dozen give or take color-breaking stress lines alone the spine, a couple are above average in length; 5) corners are rounded and have some wear; 6) top edge of the front cover has some non-color-breaking lines, this seems like the area where pressing would offer the greatest improvement; 7) the white on the back cover is a little dirty; 8) photos maybe make it look less so, but the cover is just a tad dull.

IMO the longer stress lines on the spine and the 2 creases at the bottom are the different between 5.0/5.5 and maybe a 7.0. Long story short, I have an Astonishing Tales 25 that has similar spine wear (I sent if for the canceled Pérez signing since it had his first Marvel work & I had another CGC copy) and it came back as a 7.0 even with the rest of the book looking pretty sharp (i.e. no color breaking creases). The black on this book really highlight the color breaking defects whereas the AT25 has a yellow background that can hide things a bit.

[Mojohand]

5.0-5.5

[Eponymous]

On 7/14/2022 at 8:47 PM, scburdet said:

On my list:

1) Color breaking creases bottom right (2, which are long); 2) hard crease top left back cover; 3) bottom right back cover, there's something. Looks like a tear, but I'll take your word that there aren't any, but it's something; 4) 1/2 dozen give or take color-breaking stress lines alone the spine, a couple are above average in length; 5) corners are rounded and have some wear; 6) top edge of the front cover has some non-color-breaking lines, this seems like the area where pressing would offer the greatest improvement; 7) the white on the back cover is a little dirty; 8) photos maybe make it look less so, but the cover is just a tad dull.

IMO the longer stress lines on the spine and the 2 creases at the bottom are the different between 5.0/5.5 and maybe a 7.0. Long story short, I have an Astonishing Tales 25 that has similar spine wear (I sent if for the canceled Pérez signing since it had his first Marvel work & I had another CGC copy) and it came back as a 7.0 even with the rest of the book looking pretty sharp (i.e. no color breaking creases). The black on this book really highlight the color breaking defects whereas the AT25 has a yellow background that can hide things a bit.

Thanks for the detail.

You’re right that that looks like a tear on the back, but it isn’t. Some kind of pressure resulting in a dark colored artifact?

I’ve been looking around at various on line guides to grading and it seems to me that books like this one qualify for something in the 6 range, though again I’m inexperienced with this, so the notes are helpful. 

[scburdet]

On 7/14/2022 at 10:30 PM, Eponymous said:

Thanks for the detail.

You’re right that that looks like a tear on the back, but it isn’t. Some kind of pressure resulting in a dark colored artifact?

I’ve been looking around at various on line guides to grading and it seems to me that books like this one qualify for something in the 6 range, though again I’m inexperienced with this, so the notes are helpful. 

I believe everyone who participates here is going off of the CGC grade scale, which requires some experience sending books and seeing how they come back. If you do a side-by-side comparison of CGC's published scale and Overstreet's for example, you will see a lot more detail on the latter. I suspect the general consensus is that CGC might be a little stricter with grading. I've been collecting longer than grading services have existed, so back there was less consistency b/c there was no "enforcement mechanism" to interpret the scale(s). Meaning, someone would look at the Overstreet scale and make an assignment and you could agree or disagree, but there was no independent authority to arbitrate who was better at assigning grades. CGC is imperfect for sure, but I they're at least trying to provide consistent standards for collectibles. 

[grendelbo]

On 7/14/2022 at 9:44 PM, scburdet said:

I suspect the general consensus is that CGC might be a little stricter with grading.

Than Overstreet?

Not IMO. 

I've never submitted anything to a grading company (with no immediate plans to either) and I've owned only 15 slabs with more than half the books cracked back to their natural raw state.

I like to grade books because that's where a lot of my interest in the hobby lies nowadays. This is my third go around with comic book collecting and the market is artificially too high nowadays for me to add much to my long boxes other than cheap niche interests. I'm content with enjoying what I have and expanding my knowledge.

I'm continuing to learn how to grade and my standards will often align with what CGC's appears to be (remember, trade secret). Especially in this forum where posters are asking for a potential CGC grade. Personally I grade a little harsher and I have my own set of pet peeve defects and defects that don't bother me all that much.

I began learning to grade through 35+ years in the hobby and a good handle on Overstreet grading standards (and other's that aren't a secret like CBCS, Chuck's and CPG).

The CGC boards are an invaluable tool and so too are the slabs themselves, especially in hand. My LCS has a pretty good range of graded books in all grades and from all ages. Heritage is also a great resource. I've looked at thousands of books on their website.

It's possible to reverse engineer CGC's standards to a degree. Like many other contributors to this forum, if I'm not on the money when a book returns from Sarasota, I'm rarely more than a grade off.

CGC is trying to provide consistent standards to the hobby but when your imposing those standards on someone's perspective and opinion then there's bound to be divergence.

[Mmanick]

4.5/5.0 I have a similar looking book slabbed that came back a 5.0

[scburdet]

On 7/15/2022 at 1:04 AM, grendelbo said:

I've owned only 15 slabs with more than half the books cracked back to their natural raw state

You mean that you don't want to invest $150-300 each on slabbed books that were published 2 months ago and there's no evidence that anyone will find that book collectable 20 years from now?!?

I know a lot of people like to bandy about the impending doom of the comic industry. I am a skeptic although I am hoping for at least a mini-bubble burst to bring down the price for the 6-12 books (mostly late Silver Age) I'd like to have but can't imagine shelling out for right now. A segment of the comic buyers out there are acting like day traders and we know short term thinking has never had any negative consequences in any market.

I may have not expressed myself clearly on the grading Overstreet vs. CGC. I'm guessing we're both old enough to have heard the Overstreet vs. CVM grading/pricing debates. I believe collectors will generally give the same book a different grade depending on whether it's in their collection or they're buying it/inspecting a recent purchase. People can look at Overstreet's scale (detailed) and subjectively assigned a grade that favors their preferred outcome (confirmation bias) and look at their returned CGC comic and think the grading was too strict for the same reason. Since, as far as I know, there has never been an equivalent authority to CGC for verifying Overstreet grades, there's room for controversy. I think we are in agreement that the purpose of CGC is to impose some sort of consistent standard to the collectables market, regardless of how well it matches standards other organizations might have. The one thing I do find appalling is when an industry professional (i.e. someone selling comics as their primary source of income) has grading standards that are outside any industry standards and then uses the excuse that they're not a "grading professional" to excuse overlooking obvious defects to advertise books at inflated grades.

I still like Spider-Woman to re-center the discussion 🕷️😊

[KirbyTown]

On 7/15/2022 at 12:04 AM, grendelbo said:

Than Overstreet?

Not IMO. 

I'll put in my cents:

CGC is the loosest, most inconsistent, and most unpredictable grading system available. This is absolutely by design and there is zero accountability for it. It appears to be some kind of arbitrary points deduction system rather than a true comic evaluation system. CGC will always err upwards because it's in the company's best interest to do so. You should always slab at CGC to maximize value.

xxxx is without a doubt stricter and more consistent than CGC. There is at least some accountability present since it's their policy to publish comprehensive notes on every book that isn't a 9.8 (and they've done so from the beginning.) Studying their system can provide a solid foundation, but it's not easily transferrable/translatable.

Overstreet's 2nd Edition is so strict as to be non-functional. I don't think it's even relevant at this point.

Lone Star's grading system is the one I consider closest to perfection. Many sellers poo-poo it because the scale essentially cuts out the CGC fantasy grades, forcing the less-high high grades to really justify themselves. Lone Star provides what 2e should have: extreme consistency and basic letter divisions that are sturdy and easily discernible. These traits make the system easy to learn too.

[KirbyTown]

On 7/15/2022 at 8:05 AM, scburdet said:

the purpose of CGC is to impose some sort of consistent standard

I don't agree with this at all, I think their intent is self-serving nonsense. But yes, this thread was intended for something else and please forgive my contributions to the tangent 🥳

[grendelbo]

On 7/15/2022 at 7:05 AM, scburdet said:

I still like Spider-Woman to re-center the discussion 

 

On 7/15/2022 at 7:44 AM, KirbyTown said:

But yes, this thread was intended for something else and please forgive my contributions to the tangent

Welcome to the boards!

[Eponymous]

Thanks, everybody, for the interesting comments.

My own sense of the grading that I see here is that there's a steep drop-off from 8 to 5. That is, what I'd have said were relatively minor things cause a quick fall in grade.

[Mars76]

5.5

[Galen130]

A press will help a bit…6.0 tops.