MAD Magazine #44, January 1959 2 2

[Galen130]

I got a good one for ya'll.  Even though I don't come around here anymore because CGC's grading and mine differ a lot these past few years, I know some of you still try.

Pretty soon, I'm going to list my MAD Magazine collection for sale on these boards.  I'm still looking through them, scanning them, and assigning grade estimates (my way).  Unfortunately, I'm still not good with off-color interior wraps, so I need your eyes, and your thoughts.

Here are the major defects: spine is rough, but still hanging on with a few splits throughout; some light oxidation of the two staples; mild spine roll; some discoloration and/or ink-loss in spots (mainly the front); cream to tan pages with more 'tanning' around the edges with potentially light foxing; very mild moisture wrinkling/waviness in spots (no staining)

A lot of my older MAD's come from my dad when he was growing up in Iowa, up until we moved in 1977.  He was still buying them until about 1980 or so.  A lot of the mags have similar page-coloring, with mild moisture damage on some of them.  Those of you that don't know, Iowa gets humid and my old man didn't have these bagged/boarded.  They were stored in a box, which I rescued years ago while they were still living in Arizona.  They are bagged/boarded now, but the moisture took it's toll.  Don't get me wrong...the mags look pretty damn good, except for the usual wear & tear, and discolored wraps.  None of them are white, unfortunately.

[grendelbo]

I'd call this one a 4.0/4.5.

Thanks for stopping by.

[Galen130]

On 12/7/2023 at 10:35 AM, grendelbo said:

I'd call this one a 4.0/4.5.

Thanks for stopping by.

 

[scburdet]

Yeah, 4.0/4.5. If given TLC, I could see a magazine getting a bump from a CGC grader as their standards seem to be more lenient in magazines. For selling, I wouldn't price that in as probable.

[FoggyNelson]

VG Ann I agree CGC is lenient these days