QP-how it should or should not affect the Bronze CGC Grade

[Rip]

I agree. There are many other factors that should account for a grade. On cards I hate out of focus cards that sometimes get a 10. On comics I hate paper creases.

I don't mind a little white if its straight but when you get into the really high grades I find myself getting very picky considering the silly amount of money you have to put out.

 

I also like the books cropped tighly at the top. I like to see as much of the image area as possible. Image area has become a bigger and bigger factor in my purchasing. Another factor I look for is glossy white backs.

[joe_collector]

Joe Collector, and others, what percentage of CGCed books would you say have terrible PQ and what percentage of those are in high grade, say 9.4 and above?

 

About 90% of greggy's books.

 

I personally don't thiink the overall number of low-QP books is that high, but they are always for sale, like some hot potato that keeps getting passed around.

 

After all, when collectors get that "keeper" it usually goes away, leaving the freakshow QP books to be sold, upgraded and resold. Rinse and repeat.

[sterlingcomics]

I personally don't thiink the overall number of low-QP books is that high, but they are always for sale, like some hot potato that keeps getting passed around.

 

Agreed. I'm taking a wild guess, but I'd say at least 30% of books CGC 9.4 or better has varying degrees of QP issues ranging from slight to extreme.

[tth2]

I personally don't thiink the overall number of low-QP books is that high, but they are always for sale, like some hot potato that keeps getting passed around.

Actually, I think a pretty high percentage of BA books have some kind of noticeable QP defect. Most common is being slightly crooked or slightly miswrapped (the dreaded white spine, even if straight), or both. Finding a HG BA book with really great QP seems to be much harder than with a HG SA book with great QP.

 

Does anyone know when the QP quality generally started going down? Surprisingly, The King of QP does not seem to know.

[Scheradon]

No one buys a cgc 9.8 Bronze without seeing it. Anyway the QP is taking into consideration by the market it the buy price. Thats way there is so much variance in the final price on high grade CGC issues. If a HOuse of Secrets 92 in 9.8 turned up I don't think anybody is going to care about the QP or think it is a defect.

 

Also dealers make a big issue about QP when buying not when they are selling.

 

So not true. I just bought three 9.8s from Bronzebruce13 completely blind.

 

I wouldn't recommend that as a buying strategy overall for people, but that was one of CGCs supposed purposes; to be able to buy sight unseen and be confident in the type of book you should be getting.

[joe_collector]

Does anyone know when the QP quality generally started going down? Surprisingly, The King of QP does not seem to know.

 

The only real-world examples I can give are from warehouse finds I've seen, and in those, maybe 20-30% have noticeable QP issues, and probably half or more are prime examples. Of course, there are specific books that have noted problems through the run, just as there are books where virtually all copies are nice, but overall, it's not as bad as some may think.

 

It's just that when you have two CGC 9.6's, one with perfect QP and the other that looks like a reject from the freakshow, which one are you gonna sell?

[THE_BEYONDER]

Although the CGC grade is the same, the old label book is structurally superior.At the same price....which do you choose?

Select a thumbnail from the left to zoom. Image hosting and Zoom Gallery by VillagePhotos.com

[tth2]

Although the CGC grade is the same, the old label book is structurally superior.

 

At the same price....which do you choose?

This might be a stupid question, but which one is supposed to have the better QP? Both are straight. The new label copy is pushed far enough to the right that the exclamation mark for "Earth's Mightiest Heroes!" is partially cut-off, but the old label copy is pushed far enough to the left that the Marvel trademark in the upper left box and the Perez/Austin signature are wrapped around to the back cover.

 

I guess cutting off text is a bigger miswrapping defect than having stuff wrapped around to the back, and the old label copy looks sharper, so it seems the clear winner is the old label copy.

[Scheradon]

I don't know, I can't see the bottom edge of either book.

[tth2]

I don't know, I can't see the bottom edge of either book.

Good point, forgot to mention that!

[THE_BEYONDER]

Although the CGC grade is the same, the old label book is structurally superior.

 

At the same price....which do you choose?

This might be a stupid question, but which one is supposed to have the better QP? Both are straight. The new label copy is pushed far enough to the right that the exclamation mark for "Earth's Mightiest Heroes!" is partially cut-off, but the old label copy is pushed far enough to the left that the Marvel trademark in the upper left box and the Perez/Austin signature are wrapped around to the back cover.

 

I guess cutting off text is a bigger miswrapping defect than having stuff wrapped around to the back, and the old label copy looks sharper, so it seems the clear winner is the old label copy.

 

The new label book has only the slightest miswrap, whereas the old label book wraps around to the back cover at least an 1/8 of an inch. The QP of the new label book is clearly closer to perfection.

 

I think you're confusing QP with Eye Appeal.

[THE_BEYONDER]

BTW- If you think you're continued 'jabs' at me have gone unnoticed...you're wrong.

[tth2]

BTW- If you think you're continued 'jabs' at me have gone unnoticed...you're wrong.

Besides the "King of QP" comment, because I was genuinely surprised you didn't know, what else have I said lately that could be construed as a jab? I assure you whatever they were, they were unintentional. My questions/comments in this thread were genuine.

 

By the way, I'M the one who extended an olive branch to you in a PM. YOU never responded except to say you would get back to me.

[tth2]

The new label book has only the slightest miswrap, whereas the old label book wraps around to the back cover at least an 1/8 of an inch. The QP of the new label book is clearly closer to perfection.

 

I think you're confusing QP with Eye Appeal.

So you're saying QP is purely quantitative, and not qualitative? A miswrap that is 1/16 of an inch but which cuts off lettering is a less serious QP defect than a miswrap of 1/8 of an inch but which doesn't otherwise mar the cover in any way? If your answer is yes, then okay, I guess I prefer Eye Appeal to QP.

[Rip]

I like the older label book. I like the framing of the image area and the words a little better. I don't think this one was the greatest example to use considering image framing/area can sometimes trump QP.

 

A famous example is HOS 88. To get the cover looking centered best you need a silver of wrap around on the back of the spine.

[Timulty]

Personal opinion here. If the QP is not tight a book should not get a grade higher than 9.4. Please feel free to discuss.

[drbanner]

Personal opinion here. If the QP is not tight a book should not get a grade higher than 9.4. Please feel free to discuss.

 

QP should not be factored into CGC's grade, but should be (and is) factored into the price CGC books garner. An independent rating system for centering, print register, etc.,. would be a good addition to the current scheme. Comments?

[Sal]

Personal opinion here. If the QP is not tight a book should not get a grade higher than 9.4. Please feel free to discuss.

 

QP should not be factored into CGC's grade, but should be (and is) factored into the price CGC books garner. An independent rating system for centering, print register, etc.,. would be a good addition to the current scheme. Comments?

 

i think what you're suggesting is a codification of individual buying preferences.

 

isn't it?

[drbanner]

Personal opinion here. If the QP is not tight a book should not get a grade higher than 9.4. Please feel free to discuss.

 

QP should not be factored into CGC's grade, but should be (and is) factored into the price CGC books garner. An independent rating system for centering, print register, etc.,. would be a good addition to the current scheme. Comments?

 

i think what you're suggesting is a codification of individual buying preferences.

 

isn't it?

 

Yep, just like is currently done with the "physical" CGC grade - a 9.0 might have a corner crease, or it might have a chip out of the back of the cover, pick your poison!

[Sal]

Personal opinion here. If the QP is not tight a book should not get a grade higher than 9.4. Please feel free to discuss.

 

QP should not be factored into CGC's grade, but should be (and is) factored into the price CGC books garner. An independent rating system for centering, print register, etc.,. would be a good addition to the current scheme. Comments?

 

i think what you're suggesting is a codification of individual buying preferences.

 

isn't it?

 

Yep, just like is currently done with the "physical" CGC grade - a 9.0 might have a corner crease, or it might have a chip out of the back of the cover, pick your poison!

 

right.

 

i'm on board. seems like BEYONDER had at one time attempted to begin discussion of what defects would fall into what level of QP grading, but it fizzled out.

 

i admit my memory would be fuzzy, and could be incorrect