Captain Marvel Jr. #29 from 1945 CGC 9.9 2 2

[comicginger1789]

I have no issue with this. If a book was encapsulated properly back in 2000 as a 9.9, it should in theory be the same book in there and thus, same grade.

Youtube is full of newer folks to the hobby and while there are some with great content, these two are not on that list. You can have an opinion about the book but they clearly seem unknowledgeable about CGC, its history, how CGC grades and this book itself. Plus, in my eyes, 9.9 or 10.0 means it is likely the best copy in existence. And chances are, that book is the best copy out there. Perfect in pretty much every way.

With moderns, there are TONS of perfect copies. Thus when going for 9.9 or 10.0, those grades are reserved for the copies that truly show this...including perfect binding and centering and all that jazz. Maybe someone disagrees with this but if that is the case, that should be what is brought up and argued.

[Krydel4]

On 9/13/2022 at 6:15 PM, szav said:

Yeah 9.9s may not have been graded by the same standard back in the day.  Granted this recently sold for $12,000 CGC 9.9 may have suffered some damage since it was slabbed.  Who bids on this and doesn't take a closer look though? (no graders notes available.  Graded in 2001).

etc

 

It's 2022. Buy the Grade, not the Book. But if you're a submitter attach your acetate first.

[Rip]

It's sad you have click bait videos appealing to the lowest common denominator instead of actually educating people about grading.

[lou_fine]

On 9/13/2022 at 3:09 PM, lou_fine said:

Label Text

Double Cover. 1st cover 9.8. 2nd cover 9.9.

 

Grader Notes

Front Cover Shadow
Right Bottom Front Cover Crease
Top Back Cover Small Crunch

 

On 9/13/2022 at 3:17 PM, D84 said:

So it's a 9.2.

Absolutely no idea as you really need to have the actual book in hand in order to grade it properly.  

Realistically though, you really can't compare grades from different time periods, especially if they are quite distant, because the grading teams change and the undisclosed grading standards also tends to change over time.  For example, certain defects that might be at the top of CGC's hit parade 10 or 15 years ago or whenever, might not necessarily be at the top anymore, as other types of defects might have moved squeezed and pressed their way to the top of their charts for whatever reason.    

Edited September 14, 2022 by lou_fine

[lou_fine]

On 9/13/2022 at 6:15 PM, szav said:

Yeah 9.9s may not have been graded by the same standard back in the day.  Granted this recently sold for $12,000 CGC 9.9 may have suffered some damage since it was slabbed.  Who bids on this and doesn't take a closer look though? (no graders notes available.  Graded in 2001).

Well, isn't it really a case of to each their own, as some collectors "buy the book" while others tend to "buy the label"?  

From my own personal point of view, it's all good as long as they know exactly what they are buying and are happy with their purchases in the end. 

Edited September 14, 2022 by lou_fine

[The Lions Den]

On 9/14/2022 at 12:29 AM, lou_fine said:

 

Absolutely no idea as you really need to have the actual book in hand in order to grade it properly.  

Realistically though, you really can't compare grades from different time periods, especially if they are quite distant, because the grading teams change and the undisclosed grading standards also tends to change over time.  For example, certain defects that might be at the top of CGC's hit parade 10 or 15 years ago or whenever, might not necessarily be at the top anymore, as other types of defects might have moved to the top of their charts for whatever reason.  

A couple of random observations, my friend:

As I'm sure you know, it was a much smaller group of graders back then, and many high-grade Pedigree books were still uncertified at that point. I've personally seen a bit of variation in some of these early certified books, not only in the grading but in the page quality standards as well---one can surmise they were still learning their craft.  

And it's true that different defects bother certain graders more than others, but to attain a grade of 9.9 the book should be virtually perfect except for a nearly imperceptible flaw. So regardless of who graded it, a 9.9 book should be one of the best copies in existence...  

[BlowUpTheMoon]

On 9/13/2022 at 6:09 PM, lou_fine said:

Label Text

Double Cover. 1st cover 9.8. 2nd cover 9.9.

 

Grader Notes

Front Cover Shadow
Right Bottom Front Cover Crease
Top Back Cover Small Crunch

With those last 2 defects listed in their Graders Notes though, I very much highly doubt this book would grade out as a CGC 9.9 copy if regraded today with CGC's current condition-centric focus targeting additional revenue generating defects like creases and fixabale bumps whenever possible.    

I am presuming those defects are on the outer/9.8 cover. 

[goldsilverap]

On 9/13/2022 at 9:52 AM, ak47po said:

CGC has given a 77-year old comic book a 9.9 grade - how is this possible?

 

I'm glade I don't waste my time with so called comic nerds/experts on youtube.

[LDarkseid1]

On 9/14/2022 at 9:38 AM, BlowUpTheMoon said:

I am presuming those defects are on the outer/9.8 cover. 

Oh yeah without a doubt. That bad boy ain't getting a 9.9 if not for that interior untouched cover.

[sfcityduck]

On 9/14/2022 at 6:20 AM, The Lions Den said:

A couple of random observations, my friend:

As I'm sure you know, it was a much smaller group of graders back then, and many high-grade Pedigree books were still uncertified at that point. I've personally seen a bit of variation in some of these early certified books, not only in the grading but in the page quality standards as well---one can surmise they were still learning their craft.  

And it's true that different defects bother certain graders more than others, but to attain a grade of 9.9 the book should be virtually perfect except for a nearly imperceptible flaw. So regardless of who graded it, a 9.9 book should be one of the best copies in existence...  

I agree. But two more observations.

First, CGC has much larger pool of graders now, many newly hired, and they undoubtedly are still learning their craft.

Second, a rhetorical question: How can anyone.reasonably second guess the grading on an encapsulated book when the grade in question is based is of the inside cover of a double cover book?  

I don't think its really possible. For the yahoos on the video, they did so based pretty much solely on (1) the age of the book and (2) the notion that the only way a book could attain such a state of preservation would be if it was kept locked in a bank vault (which as many here know may be far from ideal for storage even if better for security). Apparently they had never heard of Edgar's cedar lined closet or its cousin the cedar box the 9.0 white Action 1 was stored in or whatever storage held the Allentown's etc.  

[The Lions Den]

On 9/14/2022 at 3:33 PM, sfcityduck said:

I agree. But two more observations.

First, CGC has much larger pool of graders now, many newly hired, and they undoubtedly are still learning their craft.

Second, a rhetorical question: How can anyone.reasonably second guess the grading on an encapsulated book when the grade in question is based is of the inside cover of a double cover book?  

I don't think its really possible. For the yahoos on the video, they did so based pretty much solely on (1) the age of the book and (2) the notion that the only way a book could attain such a state of preservation would be if it was kept locked in a bank vault (which as many here know may be far from ideal for storage even if better for security). Apparently they had never heard of Edgar's cedar lined closet or its cousin the cedar box the 9.0 white Action 1 was stored in or whatever storage held the Allentown's etc.  

Yes, I suppose we'll probably never know what that inside cover really looks like...and therein lies the conundrum...  

[lou_fine]

On 9/14/2022 at 11:59 AM, LDarkseid1 said:

On 9/14/2022 at 9:38 AM, BlowUpTheMoon said:

I am presuming those defects are on the outer/9.8 cover. 

Oh yeah without a doubt. That bad boy ain't getting a 9.9 if not for that interior untouched cover.

Even much more so with a double cover, that's one of the reasons why you can't actually grade a book unless you have it in hand.  

Then again, I am not so sure about the CGC grader's terminology when it comes to description of defects:  

Grader Notes

Front Cover Shadow
Right Bottom Front Cover Crease
Top Back Cover Small Crunch

Although I can certainly see a crease affecting only the surface cover, the word "crunch" kind of leaves me with the impression of a defect that's a bit more penetrating than only skin deep.    

[LDarkseid1]

On 9/14/2022 at 9:21 PM, lou_fine said:

Even much more so with a double cover, that's one of the reasons why you can't actually grade a book unless you have it in hand.  

Then again, I am not so sure about the CGC grader's terminology when it comes to description of defects:  

Grader Notes

Front Cover Shadow
Right Bottom Front Cover Crease
Top Back Cover Small Crunch

Although I can certainly see a crease affecting only the surface cover, the word "crunch" kind of leaves me with the impression of a defect that's a bit more penetrating than only skin deep.    

Yeah have to assume it doesn’t penetrate. Otherwise definitely ain’t getting that 9.9.

[nearmint]

On 9/14/2022 at 12:33 PM, sfcityduck said:

First, CGC has much larger pool of graders now, many newly hired, and they undoubtedly are still learning their craft.

I doubt the newbies are grading 9.9 Golden Age books.  

[sfcityduck]

On 9/15/2022 at 10:48 AM, nearmint said:

I doubt the newbies are grading 9.9 Golden Age books.  

You'd hope not. But I can promise you I've seen some strangely high grades on GA books in the past year or so. 

 

[nearmint]

On 9/15/2022 at 10:57 AM, sfcityduck said:

You'd hope not. But I can promise you I've seen some strangely high grades on GA books in the past year or so. 

 

I see what you did there.  

[PDGray]

I think it's absolutely fascinating to see books that are that old in THAT condition!!  Who cares 9.8 or 9.9 - it's a fantastic piece of pop-culture history.

 

PDG

[LDarkseid1]

On 9/15/2022 at 11:14 AM, PDGray said:

I think it's absolutely fascinating to see books that are that old in THAT condition!!  Who cares 9.8 or 9.9 - it's a fantastic piece of pop-culture history.

 

PDG

If I had to choose, I'll take the 9.9 

[PDGray]

On 9/15/2022 at 2:04 PM, LDarkseid1 said:

If I had to choose, I'll take the 9.9 

 

True, but it's unlikely that any book from that era, in those grades, will ever make themselves available to me.  I just enjoy seeing the books!

 

PDG

[LDarkseid1]

On 9/15/2022 at 12:21 PM, PDGray said:

 

True, but it's unlikely that any book from that era, in those grades, will ever make themselves available to me.  I just enjoy seeing the books!

 

PDG

Surely, likely not available to most people. The everyday collectors can only enjoy seeing them.