Strange Tales 97 CPR Results are, well, Strange! 2 2

[WOLVERINE335]

Sent in a beat up Strange Tales 97 graded by CGC at 3.5.  It had some BAD wrinkles and creases and really looked like a good candidate for pressing (although it's obviously not a very high dollar book regardless).

I just got it back, and without a doubt, it looks A LOT better!  CGC was able to remove a lot of creases and wrinkles and the book, especially the back, presents a 100x better.

...And yet... it came back with the EXACT same grade.  On the plus side, the book looks better, and it now has the Spider-Man label (because THIS is the first appearance of Aunt May and Uncle Ben... despite CGC continuing to claim it's AF15)... but mostly, this was generally a giant waste of time and money.

I just can't understand how a book can be improved as much as this appears to be without it affecting the grade?

The first two photos are what I sent in; the second two photos are what I got back.  The 5th photo is a panel showing Aunt May and Uncle Ben in a comic that pre-dates AF15!

[dbcn]

Following.

Curious to see how this pans out, as from what I can tell, CGC's pressing has only been able to downgrade and/or damage books I've sent in recently, but that back cover is an incredible improvement, really confused as to why the grade remained the same. 

[WOLVERINE335]

Exactly!  I know the front cover is considered more important by most than the back cover.  But this was a really GREAT improvement to the condition and eye appeal of the back cover.  I was shocked at how nice CGC made it look.  And then I was shocked AGAIN when I let myself look at the grade and saw zero improvement!  So odd.  This book (before and after pressing) side-by-side can't possibly be the same grade, right?

[zzutak]

On 2/13/2024 at 1:24 PM, WOLVERINE335 said:

I just can't understand how a book can be improved as much as this appears to be without it affecting the grade?

The original "critical" flaw was not the back cover creasing but the front cover Marvel chipping and tear (which cannot be fixed with either a cleaning or a pressing).  Remember: individual grades in the 2.0 to 4.0 range are each relatively broad.  Here's an example of an AF #15 with a similar level of chipping (and I'll note that CGC tends to be a bit more lenient on the mega-keys). 

[Point Five]

Maybe the book was originally a 3.0/3.5 tweener and you were "lucky" to get the 3.5. (That seems like a lot of heavy creasing for a 3.5, no?) Now it's a 3.5/4.0 tweener and you were "not so lucky" to get the 3.5. 

Adding to zzutak's comments, the creasing on the front is largely color-breaking, and didn't go anywhere from a color loss perspective.

With that said, I don't quite understand how Marvel chipping affects CGC's grades. Is it not a production defect, thus overlooked? Or is it specifically the tears that would downgrade the book?

 

[WOLVERINE335]

For what it's worth, the original notes were:

marvel chipping full right of front cover
large crease full right of front cover breaks color
large stain right top of back cover
large tear with crease right center of front cover
large, heavy, multiple crease bottom of back cover

 

And the new notes are:

marvel chipping full right of front cover
tear with crease right center of front cover
light staining to cover
moderate creasing to cover

[WOLVERINE335]

But if zzutak is right, maybe the marvel chipping puts a 4.0 ceiling on any book that has it bad enough?

 

And yet, as Point Five notes, and as I've heard over the years, Marvel Chipping is usually considered a widespread production defect of Marvel comics from this time period, and thus should be largely overlooked.

 

I don't know.  But I'd be PISSED if I had an AF15 that looked that good and it came back at 3.0!

[Point Five]

The notes you posted are helpful. As a quick aside, the grading notes are rarely exhaustive... they're almost like random thoughts from one of the graders as they go, sometimes short and sometimes pretty thorough.

But it's hard not to think the Marvel chipping and the resulting tear were factors in the grade. In your book's case, both were noted *both* times.

 

[Cerebus3000]

From the Official CGC Guide to Grading Comics:

"Marvel chipping historically had less of an impact on grade than traditional missing pieces, but this has changed over time. Because of it's impact on visual appeal, it is now treated the same as regular missing pieces.  Its severity can range from one very small piece out (9.6) to chipping that runs the entire length of the front cover's right edge (4.0)."

[zzutak]

On 2/13/2024 at 3:19 PM, WOLVERINE335 said:

And yet, as Point Five notes, and as I've heard over the years, Marvel Chipping is usually considered a widespread production defect of Marvel comics from this time period, and thus should be largely overlooked.

This is not correct -- Marvel chipping was/is NOT a production defect (and it is not treated as such by CGC or any reputable grader/seller).  The equipment used often produced a weakness in the paper along the right edge of the front cover, but it absolutely, positively, did not result in chips.  Repeated handling is what causes this weakness to morph into chips.  Trust me on this -- I had a nearly complete 1959-66 run of all the Atlas fantasy and Marvel hero titles.  I purchased each of these comics off the rack.  Not one book had chips out at the time of purchase; but many of the books that were handled the most did develop chips over the years. 

[Point Five]

On 2/13/2024 at 7:29 PM, zzutak said:

This is not correct -- Marvel chipping was/is NOT a production defect (and it is not treated as such by CGC or any reputable grader/seller).  The equipment used often produced a weakness in the paper along the right edge of the front cover, but it absolutely, positively, did not result in chips.  Repeated handling is what causes this weakness to morph into chips.  Trust me on this -- I had a nearly complete 1959-66 run of all the Atlas fantasy and Marvel hero titles.  I purchased each of these comics off the rack.  Not one book had chips out at the time of purchase; but many of the books that were handled the most did develop chips over the years. 

Wow! That's really interesting, never heard that before.

 

[zzutak]

This is what the early Marvel comics looked like when they came off the press.    The binder holes were added afterwards.    You can find many low-grade copies of these issues with moderate to severe Marvel chipping.

[Cerebus3000]

Some more context from the CGC Guide:

"Marvel chipping is one of the most notorious printing defects in comic book history...due to a dull trimming blade at the printers, the right edge of many comics developed multiple tears...ultimately turned into missing pieces by being pulled or torn off through handling".  So I guess Marvel chipping is considered a printing defect, but as zzutak says it still required handling to produce the actual chipping.

[Vince G]

I sent in a Chamber 23 to remove a ton of creasing.  Nothing could be done about the long color breaking creases and I knew that going in.  CCS took out all the defects that could be pressed out but the book's grade remained the same.  It's not uncommon pending the type of defects already present on the book.  My book does look much, much better, though 

[buttock]

On 2/13/2024 at 2:24 PM, WOLVERINE335 said:

Sent in a beat up Strange Tales 97 graded by CGC at 3.5.  It had some BAD wrinkles and creases and really looked like a good candidate for pressing (although it's obviously not a very high dollar book regardless).

I just got it back, and without a doubt, it looks A LOT better!  CGC was able to remove a lot of creases and wrinkles and the book, especially the back, presents a 100x better.

...And yet... it came back with the EXACT same grade.  On the plus side, the book looks better, and it now has the Spider-Man label (because THIS is the first appearance of Aunt May and Uncle Ben... despite CGC continuing to claim it's AF15)... but mostly, this was generally a giant waste of time and money.

I just can't understand how a book can be improved as much as this appears to be without it affecting the grade?

The first two photos are what I sent in; the second two photos are what I got back.  The 5th photo is a panel showing Aunt May and Uncle Ben in a comic that pre-dates AF15!

Those are deep creases and although they look better, they're still visible.  Those are the main determinants of the grade both before and after.  I'm sure a lot of other wear improved, but when you hold that book outside the slab all that creasing is still there, only flat.  When you choose a book to press, you have to assess whether removing the pressable defects will change the grade.  In this case, it won't.