PGM Bloodstone #1 2 2

[captainzombie]

Can someone please share what they think this might grade at? I am guessing between 9.6-9.8. The back of the book scared me at first when I saw it thinking that the text was smeared and and had this weird yellowing, but when I looked at other ones online they looked the same. Thanks

[scburdet]

I'd be more worried about the bottom spine corner. 9.2/9.4

[captainzombie]

On 2/19/2023 at 7:08 PM, scburdet said:

I'd be more worried about the bottom spine corner. 9.2/9.4

Are you referring to the lower hand corner where there is that binary tear?

[scburdet]

Looks like a blunted corner in the photo, however, the CGC guide has small bindery tears meriting 9.2-9.6. My observations is that CGC's definition of small is really small. The same could be said of many of the ways they weigh productions issues. It's not that they don't count as defects, they just count less. They also seem to be more forgiving of production problems from earlier eras of history. This is a pretty new by those standards, even though it's +20 years old. The guide also says over a certain length, they just start treating bindery tears like run-of-the-mill tears. My guess is that a 9.6 bindery tear would be barely perceptible, so I'll stick with my guess of a 9.4 max.

[captainzombie]

On 2/20/2023 at 8:46 AM, scburdet said:

Looks like a blunted corner in the photo, however, the CGC guide has small bindery tears meriting 9.2-9.6. My observations is that CGC's definition of small is really small. The same could be said of many of the ways they weigh productions issues. It's not that they don't count as defects, they just count less. They also seem to be more forgiving of production problems from earlier eras of history. This is a pretty new by those standards, even though it's +20 years old. The guide also says over a certain length, they just start treating bindery tears like run-of-the-mill tears. My guess is that a 9.6 bindery tear would be barely perceptible, so I'll stick with my guess of a 9.4 max.

I think it’s the angle of the picture and how I took it. This book has no blunted corners, all of the corners a very sharp. That binary tear is very very small. I’ll try to take another picture of the book later when I’m home today. If this had a blunted corner I would not of even bothered picking the book up for the prices that these raw books are going for plus the condition this was in.

[Nschenks]

Yeah that bindery tear looks borderline to me--but hard to tell without a closer view. Also, the nature of the color patterns on the front (and white on the back) make it hard to see any potential CB spine ticks without closer pics. Without any more info I'd say +/- 9.4. 

[grendelbo]

9.4

Thanks for posting.