PGM Creepy 21

[CatskillMike]

Corners pretty sharp. Small dirt mark on BC spine side in the middle. FC has tiny crease ULC.

 

 

 

[Pirate]

9.0

[bounty_coder]

9.0

 

Technically 9.0. I like it as a 9.2 though. Those markings to the FURC which seem to be partial creases don't look as if they crease all the way.

[Pirate]

glad i'm so technical

[KingOfRulers]

9.0

[bounty_coder]

glad i'm so technical

 

I feel that it is important to list a Technical with an "Eye Appeal" grade as well.

 

They always say that grading is an Art, not a science. If you grade purely on technical, then it is a science. If you Incorporate Eye appeal and Technical, as 2 seperate grades when grading your books, I feel it makes it an Art.

 

If you listed a book that was a NM 9.6 from the front cover but had a color breaking crease of 1" to the back cover, and it technically dropped to book to VF+ 8.5/9.0, would you list it purely as VF+ 8.5/9.0? Heck no. You would list it as VF+ 8.5/9.0, and tell everyone the truth and that from the front it presents like a fork'n 9.6. With that, if it is a desirable book, it will probably sell for more than most other VF+ 8.5/9.0 of that book, that present closer to thier technical grade.

 

I will always pay higher for a book that has chasm between Technical Grade and Eye Appeal (on the side of Eye Appeal).

 

Just my thoughts.

 

-bounty

[Pirate]

I would list it as i grade it but thats just me. I might say it presents better but would still give it the proper grade. just how i roll.