Terrible Undergrading - Am I right or wrong? 1 1

[TomO1357]

I recently received back a batch of 10 silver age books (after waiting A YEAR, or close enough, for them to come back).  Now, I know there's always a grade to disagree with and I've had undergraded and overgraded books, it's hit or miss, and so on.  I'm also not one to complain about things, I've had faith in the general grading process overall.  I've mostly predicted grades right on returning books.  But I never had 10 books together that I felt were ALL undergraded to one degree or another.  The grades seem to match neither the notes nor CGC's own general description of each grade on the scale IMO.  But of course, this is my opinion, and maybe you'll disagree, I don't know.  I do know that I feel severely disappointed that I spent around $350 and waited an entire year only to end up with grades that I don't feel represent the books.  Right now I'm thinking I'll never send in another economy book and will switch to CBCS to give them a try, which I wouldn't have guessed I would say before.  I feel like CGC should be accountable for their work, yet everyone just shrugs and moves on when you get a bad grader...But am I overreacting?  Please see some of the pictures below and give me your opinions.

NOTE: I'm well aware pictures can hide details but there are no large hidden flaws I could find and few small ones that don't show up at least slightly in the photos.  These books were from one original collection, a remarkable collection which had numerous NM silver age and even higher grade golden age, from an older avid collector who passed away.  The grader notes specify "light creasing to cover" for a lot, yet before sending these in I examined them closely in the light and they had remarkably flat covers, and I can't find much hidden beneath the slabs now.  I'm also not saying they're 9.8's.  One has a hard-line printer's crease (which I didn't think normally they take off much for, since its a manufacturing defect?), another has a small triangular-shaped edge-tear/flaw at the bottom-middle cover.  One graded 6.5 has a very thin corner crease and almost no other flaws, which certainly doesn't match CGC's own generic description of "An above-average collectible with a major defect and some smaller defects, or a significant accumulation of small defects." Well anyway, enough complaining, I guess.  Let me know what you think

 

[TomO1357]

Whoops, I cut out the grade on one of these, but it got a 7.5.  Has a small triangle-like edge flaw bottom middle, not much else.

[TomO1357]

Sorry, I cut off the tops of two above in the pictures, Avengers 32 and 40 were both 8.0.  The crease on #40 appears to be a printer's defect, may not be obvious at that angle.  There's a drop-like stain or mark on the back of #32, don't know if that should bring it all the way down to 8.0 though, given a general lack of other flaws, idk, what do you think?

[Jaylam]

Ok, the Tales to Astonish #88 I don't get. It has a pretty good "dog ear" crease at the right upper corner of the front cover but not much else I can see, but I've seen books like that get 7.5 all day.

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 11/23/2022 at 6:59 PM, Jaylam said:

Ok, the Tales to Astonish #88 I don't get. It has a pretty good "dog ear" crease at the right upper corner of the front cover but not much else I can see, but I've seen books like that get 7.5 all day.

Cover tanning 

 

And a crease that size puts it at 7.0 max to begin with IMO

Edited November 24, 2022 by THE_BEYONDER

[Jaylam]

The Avengers #32 8.0 with that "blot stain" on the back cover is pretty consistent with what I've seen before. From my experience, any kind of stain like that will pretty much limit a book to an 8.0 no matter how nice the rest of the book is. 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 11/23/2022 at 7:10 PM, DUMMO said:

What are the grading notes on these?

They’re free.  Look them up 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 11/23/2022 at 7:14 PM, DUMMO said:

Too stoned.

Ditto 

[TomO1357]

On 11/23/2022 at 7:10 PM, DUMMO said:

What are the grading notes on these?

They're mostly:

light creasing to cover
light spine stress lines to cover

...although the creasing and spine stress was generally very light on these IMO.  I thought maybe some of the detractions were for cover tanning, though they only noted that on ToA #88.  Notes are often incomplete in general, if not entirely blank, so maybe light cover tanning was also taken off for on other issues.  There were no issues with the interiors, for the record.  Idk, I just felt like these presented better than the grades given, whereas usually I'm mostly in line with what's given.

[KCOComics]

Hard to say without the books in hand, but i don't think the grading was egregious based on the pictures.   

Grading has been tight the last few years. I'm sure you can find example of worse looking 9.0s. But overall the grades seem reasonable.  

[Jaylam]

On 11/23/2022 at 7:14 PM, DUMMO said:

Too stoned.

[The Lions Den]

On 11/23/2022 at 6:40 PM, TomO1357 said:

I've mostly predicted grades right on returning books.  But I never had 10 books together that I felt were ALL undergraded to one degree or another.  The grades seem to match neither the notes nor CGC's own general description of each grade on the scale IMO. 

Well my friend, for starters I don't know how you could expect a book that's missing 6 pages to not get a .5. (World's Finest #45). And the Avengers #10 certainly sounds like it has enough problems to be a 2.5. Also, the Whiz #72 sounds like it has enough problems to warrant a 6.5. 

As for the other 7 books, they look like pretty nice copies in the holder, but they all seem to have some form of cover creasing, spine stress or both. The TTA #88 also has some tanning mentioned in the notes, the Avengers #32 allegedly has a moderate fade, the TTA #99 has light tears, and the Avengers #29 has moderate fingerprints and moderate spine stress. 

These are actually good notes; better than I expected for the Economy tier. So, while I'm very sorry you're disappointed, I do see enough evidence here to warrant many of the grades you received...  

[TomO1357]

On 11/23/2022 at 8:03 PM, The Lions Den said:

Well my friend, for starters I don't know how you could expect a book that's missing 6 pages to not get a .5. (World's Finest #45). And the Avengers #10 certainly sounds like it has enough problems to be a 2.5. Also, the Whiz #72 sounds like it has enough problems to warrant a 6.5. 

As for the other 7 books, they look like pretty nice copies in the holder, but they all seem to have some form of cover creasing, spine stress or both. The TTA #88 also has some tanning mentioned in the notes, the Avengers #32 allegedly has a moderate fade, the TTA #99 has light tears, and the Avengers #29 has moderate fingerprints and moderate spine stress. 

These are actually good notes; better than I expected for the Economy tier. So, while I'm very sorry you're disappointed, I do see enough evidence here to warrant many of the grades you received...  

You're commenting on books I didn't picture and didn't even mention.  I shouldn't have said "ALL" in retrospect, since the 0.5 on that issue is obvious, I actually forgot about it when I posted, as I was thinking about the others, so nevermind about that one.  The Avengers #10 is comparable to 3.5's I found on the internet, though 2.5 isn't out of the question for it.  If it was only that issue, I wouldn't bother posting.  The Whiz Comics issue actually looks very nice but I don't have a picture to upload at the moment.  It does have tanning to the cover but is very flat and has no significant creasing that can be seen in the light.  I was asking people to go by the photos, not the notes, as I feel the notes for these aren't all warranted.  Just putting something in a notes section doesn't make it true.  Maybe they take off more for light tanning on books than they used to.  Well, it is what it is in any case...I'll continue to submit modern books, as they've been quite fast lately, but I'm not sending in anything older in to CGC.

[Point Five]

Agree with the consensus... the grades seem in the ballpark given the sprinkling of flaws... the tear at the bottom FC (TTA 99), the spot of stain on the back (Avengers 32), and so forth. But waiting a full year for these grades, I can see how that's legit disappointing.

I will say though, these books are really nice examples of their grades! You mention these are original-owner, and it shows... super vibrant inks and gloss, and great page quality. If your intention is to sell them, I'd expect at least a gentle nudge in value, versus other books in the same grades that are a bit more lackluster.

 

[TomO1357]

On 11/23/2022 at 8:53 PM, Point Five said:

Agree with the consensus... the grades seem in the ballpark given the sprinkling of flaws... the tear at the bottom FC (TTA 99), the spot of stain on the back (Avengers 32), and so forth. But waiting a full year for these grades, I can see how that's legit disappointing.

I will say though, these books are really nice examples of their grades! You mention these are original-owner, and it shows... super vibrant inks and gloss, and great page quality. If your intention is to sell them, I'd expect at least a gentle nudge in value, versus other books in the same grades that are a bit more lackluster.

 

Thanks for your opinion.  Maybe I was just expecting too much from them.  They are still nice grades for silver age...I only got a small portion of the collection.  The original owner had almost an entire run of Whiz Comics, many early Sensation Comics, Wonder Woman, Avengers 1-100+, X-men 1-100+, early Shadow and Doc Savage issues with very numbers on the census, and other rare golden and silver age issues, such as Suspense Comics #3 with that sacrifice/bondage cover.

[KCOComics]

On 11/23/2022 at 9:36 PM, TomO1357 said:

Thanks for your opinion.  Maybe I was just expecting too much from them.  They are still nice grades for silver age...I only got a small portion of the collection.  The original owner had almost an entire run of Whiz Comics, many early Sensation Comics, Wonder Woman, Avengers 1-100+, X-men 1-100+, early Shadow and Doc Savage issues with very numbers on the census, and other rare golden and silver age issues, such as Suspense Comics #3 with that sacrifice/bondage cover.

Wow! Sounds like an absolutely incredible collection!!! Suspense 3 is such an iconic and special book that I'm sure I'll never have an opportunity to own. 

And I agree, the books you showed present beautifully for the grade! 

[rjpb]

Hard to say without seeing the books in hand, but the 8.5s look like they should be 9.0s.  Overall the grading looks a bit tougher than I've seen for some books, but not out of line with others. Most of my submissions have been either spot on with my estimation or +/- .5 either way, which one has to expect. It's rare to get a consensus from even knowledgable graders. A few times the difference has been more dramatic, including a 6.0 I thought should have been a 7.5 and a 6.5 I had considered a 5.0, but when you slab, you are handing the grading over to CGC for better or worse.

[The Lions Den]

On 11/23/2022 at 8:27 PM, TomO1357 said:

You're commenting on books I didn't picture and didn't even mention.  I shouldn't have said "ALL" in retrospect, since the 0.5 on that issue is obvious, I actually forgot about it when I posted, as I was thinking about the others, so nevermind about that one.  The Avengers #10 is comparable to 3.5's I found on the internet, though 2.5 isn't out of the question for it.  If it was only that issue, I wouldn't bother posting.  The Whiz Comics issue actually looks very nice but I don't have a picture to upload at the moment.  It does have tanning to the cover but is very flat and has no significant creasing that can be seen in the light.  I was asking people to go by the photos, not the notes, as I feel the notes for these aren't all warranted.  Just putting something in a notes section doesn't make it true.  Maybe they take off more for light tanning on books than they used to.  Well, it is what it is in any case...I'll continue to submit modern books, as they've been quite fast lately, but I'm not sending in anything older in to CGC.

I apologize for any indiscretion on my part. I tend to be very thorough in my assessments---maybe more thorough than I need to be.  

And I do understand your concerns here, but the sad fact is that sometimes the Economy tier just doesn't get a whole lotta love...

[TomO1357]

On 11/23/2022 at 11:39 PM, The Lions Den said:

I apologize for any indiscretion on my part. I tend to be very thorough in my assessments---maybe more thorough than I need to be.  

And I do understand your concerns here, but the sad fact is that sometimes the Economy tier just doesn't get a whole lotta love...

No need, and thanks for your opinion...As I said to someone else, perhaps I just expected too much.  The colors and flat covers really stood out for me when I first submitted these, and I didn't notice much creasing, so I had high hopes.  I try not to put much hope into grades, as I know its unpredictable to a degree and anyway it's the same comic regardless, but sometimes you can't help but invest some emotion.  If some issues are under but one or two over, it's no big deal.  But when each one comes back less than you'd hoped, it's like someone punching you in the stomach a bit harder with each reveal lol.  If they hadn't taken so long to come back, I probably would've felt better about it too...Oh well.

[Dave2739]

On 11/23/2022 at 7:50 PM, Jaylam said:

You rang?