How does this get an Blue label?

[awe4one]

An analogous example would be obvious crayon coloring to the cover. Would anyone seriously consider that color touch restoration or should it [rightfully] be factored as a flaw and get a blue label?

 

Or maybe it should be rejected for grading...

 

Jim

[FFB]

Then maybe the problem is that the label itself causes the stigma and reduction in value, not the book. What has always mystified me is why people are ok with this, and want to shove as many books as possible into purple labels, even though the same disclosure could be accomplished using a blue label?!? In a way, people who shun the PLOD on books with a dot of CT but buy blue label books with a dot of CT are the worst label-blind collectors there are.

 

I agree, but at the same time I would like to see some consistency. If the Junior Comics #14 copy had maybe one or two more dots of color touch, then its value would've plummeted to less than $1K if it was in a purple holder. Why should some books be placed on a pedistal because their grade doesn't change by more than half a point with the resto work, while others like the Zago book I posted take a beating?!

 

Because of the label color. Believe me, I feel your frustration! I wish they'd use ONE label color and just note restoration in a conspicuous way on the label. (Whether with a second large restoration score, or whatever.) I will bet you that if they did that, as long as the label was the same damned color, these same formerly purple books would achieve more rational sales prices.

 

What do I mean by more rational sales prices? It makes no sense to me that an unrestored book with an inked, handwritten number on the cover in a CGC 9.4 blue slab sells for $10,000, and another copy of the same book in a CGC 9.6 Slight (P) slab due to two dots of professional color touch on the cover (which probably started out as a 9.4 before the CT was added) sells for less than half that.

[awe4one]

What do I mean by more rational sales prices? It makes no sense to me that an unrestored book with an inked, handwritten number on the cover in a CGC 9.4 blue slab sells for $10,000, and another copy of the same book in a CGC 9.6 Slight (P) slab due to two dots of professional color touch on the cover (which probably started out as a 9.4 before the CT was added) sells for less than half that.

 

May not make sense but that's the market deciding that...not the label...

 

Jim

[FFB]

What has always mystified me is why people are ok with this, and want to shove as many books as possible into purple labels, even though the same disclosure could be accomplished using a blue label?!?

 

Because the restored label was created to clearly distinguish restored vs. unrestored comics. If collectors didn't care for resto to be clearly identified previous to CGC's inception, the PLOD never would have come to pass...

 

And as far as some trying to push as many comics into PLODs as possible as you speculate, that's not true. "I" just want those that are restored to clearly be identified as such. To blur the lines that some resto doesn't meet the PLOD standard just dilutes the definition and causes confusion...

 

Jim

 

Part of the problem here is that these staples on the ASM#1 don't meet any accepted definition of restoration that I've seen, so to say the book belongs in a PLOD is to assume the truth of the conclusion you're trying to prove (i.e., that the book is restored). That's why I said before that it's a circular argument.

[FFB]

What do I mean by more rational sales prices? It makes no sense to me that an unrestored book with an inked, handwritten number on the cover in a CGC 9.4 blue slab sells for $10,000, and another copy of the same book in a CGC 9.6 Slight (P) slab due to two dots of professional color touch on the cover (which probably started out as a 9.4 before the CT was added) sells for less than half that.

 

May not make sense but that's the market deciding that...not the label...

 

Jim

 

Yes, but my point is that I believe the market yields those prices because of the label. Peter (action1kid) and I have discussed this a few times, most recently in the grading and restoration issues forum. I went into a pretty detailed analysis of how the same or similar books in a blue label with restoration notes (very minor glue or very minor CT) sell for far more than their purple label slight (P) counterparts, even though both books are slightly restored.

[awe4one]

Part of the problem here is that these staples on the ASM#1 don't meet any accepted definition of restoration that I've seen, so to say the book belongs in a PLOD is to assume the truth of the conclusion you're trying to prove (i.e., that the book is restored). That's why I said before that it's a circular argument.

 

You're right...it is a circular argument. Just voicing my opinion that it should be in this case. Not that'll make any difference...

 

Jim

[Mr. Zipper]

What do I mean by more rational sales prices? It makes no sense to me that an unrestored book with an inked, handwritten number on the cover in a CGC 9.4 blue slab sells for $10,000, and another copy of the same book in a CGC 9.6 Slight (P) slab due to two dots of professional color touch on the cover (which probably started out as a 9.4 before the CT was added) sells for less than half that.

 

May not make sense but that's the market deciding that...not the label...

 

Jim

 

I know this is another whole can of worms, but...

 

Anyone that thinks label color doesn't affect perception, behavior, and ultimately, market price, does not understand consumer psychology and packaging.

[FFB]

Part of the problem here is that these staples on the ASM#1 don't meet any accepted definition of restoration that I've seen, so to say the book belongs in a PLOD is to assume the truth of the conclusion you're trying to prove (i.e., that the book is restored). That's why I said before that it's a circular argument.

 

You're right...it is a circular argument. Just voicing my opinion that it should be in this case. Not that'll make any difference...

 

Jim

 

Fair enough, Jim.

[skybolt]

What do I mean by more rational sales prices? It makes no sense to me that an unrestored book with an inked, handwritten number on the cover in a CGC 9.4 blue slab sells for $10,000, and another copy of the same book in a CGC 9.6 Slight (P) slab due to two dots of professional color touch on the cover (which probably started out as a 9.4 before the CT was added) sells for less than half that.

 

May not make sense but that's the market deciding that...not the label...

 

Jim

 

Yes, but my point is that I believe the market yields those prices because of the label. Peter (action1kid) and I have discussed this a few times, most recently in the grading and restoration issues forum. I went into a pretty detailed analysis of how the same or similar books in a blue label with restoration notes (very minor glue or very minor CT) sell for far more than their purple label slight (P) counterparts, even though both books are slightly restored.

 

Scott, I always thought that when a book received a blue label with the notation "very small amount of glue on cover", that there was glue on the cover, but it wasn't used for restoration purposes. Sort of like sticky fingers or a tape pull that left glue residue.

[awe4one]

Anyone that thinks label color doesn't affect perception, behavior, and ultimately, market price, does not understand consumer psychology and packaging.

 

Yep...but it is what it is. If there is a stigma against PLODs, and I'll agree there is one to some extent, maybe CGC need to start an education program to elevate any undue concerns collectors have against the label.

 

Personally, I think blue label restored labels will have the same effect as PLODs. Slab collectors tend to look for the best they can afford, and if they have the option, I bet they would go for a lower grade unrestored slab before spending the same money on a restored one...regardless of color...

 

Jim

[skybolt]

I think the ultimate question (which has been mentioned before on this thread) is what would the CGC grade be if the staples were completely removed, and the book was now detached. I personally think it would've graded a lot lower than 4.0, since the scans show other multiple defects (especially the back cover). Even if the staples were original, we're still probably looking at a 5.5/6.0 book at best.

[FFB]

What do I mean by more rational sales prices? It makes no sense to me that an unrestored book with an inked, handwritten number on the cover in a CGC 9.4 blue slab sells for $10,000, and another copy of the same book in a CGC 9.6 Slight (P) slab due to two dots of professional color touch on the cover (which probably started out as a 9.4 before the CT was added) sells for less than half that.

 

May not make sense but that's the market deciding that...not the label...

 

Jim

 

Yes, but my point is that I believe the market yields those prices because of the label. Peter (action1kid) and I have discussed this a few times, most recently in the grading and restoration issues forum. I went into a pretty detailed analysis of how the same or similar books in a blue label with restoration notes (very minor glue or very minor CT) sell for far more than their purple label slight (P) counterparts, even though both books are slightly restored.

 

Scott, I always thought that when a book received a blue label with the notation "very small amount of glue on cover", that there was glue on the cover, but it wasn't used for restoration purposes. Sort of like sticky fingers or a tape pull that left glue residue.

 

Nope, not necessarily. It might be holding a small bindery corner tear down. If you have a GA book that is a NM 9.4 with one spine stress, a slightly abraded top spine corner, and a small bindery tear in the lower spine corner, the book might still be a 9.4 if the bindery tear weren't there. So when you use a dot of glue to hold down the bindery corner tear, you haven't really improved the numerical grade of the book and so the book might get a blue label from CGC.

[FFB]

I think the ultimate question (which has been mentioned before on this thread) is what would the CGC grade be if the staples were completely removed, and the book was now detached. I personally think it would've graded a lot lower than 4.0, since the scans show other multiple defects (especially the back cover). Even if the staples were original, we're still probably looking at a 5.5/6.0 book at best.

 

It's hard to say. The scan is grainy, but the front cover looks 8.0/8.5 apart from the popped staples. The back cover has some chipping along the top edge and I can't tell if there's a tear along the leading edge of the back cover or not. Maybe 7.0 or so?

 

My personal opinion on this book is that it is somewhere around a 3.0 unrestored, not a 4.0, because I don't think a book with two popped staples can grade at VG 4.0. But as Zipper said, that's a "whole 'nother can of worms."

[skybolt]

One final note. In order to avoid further confusion, CGC should alter their label notation slightly. For instance, the word "very" should only be used when the amount of color touch or glue is so small that the grade wouldn't be affected, and the blue label is used. Any time the book garners a PLOD (like the Zago book), they should just say "small amount color touch on cover". At least then someone like myself won't think it's preferential treatment since the label notations are exactly the same, but each book received a different color label. Either that or have the note say "very minor color touch on cover, which doesn't affect the grade".