• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Action #1 Sighting on EBAY...it's THAT copy!

Started by Shield,

43 posts in this topic

jonnydouble

jonnydouble

Posted
Posted
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2180839156&category=35752

 

I wonder what the reserve is, and I wonder if it'll sell?

 

I think it was Graham Crackers..don't remember what the reserve was , but I do recall it didn't sell...but consensus here was that it was very over-graded

 

J.D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted
How can a book with a big ole' hunk ripped out the front be labeled a G+??

 

 

Did you notice that Neat Stuff actually posts the GD description from Overstreet in the auction?

 

"The largest piece allowed missing from the front or back cover is usually a ½” triangle or a ¼” square."

 

As I wrote earlier, I could almost see giving it a GD if the book were otherwise in the VF or NM range and just had a 3"' by 1.5" piece missing. This book looks to be on the GD/VG border TO BEGIN WITH because of the staining/discoloration, creasing and other, smaller pieces missing, so that theory is right out the window. This book is, without a doubt the single worst overgrade I've ever seen from CGC.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lofwyr

Lofwyr

Posted
Posted
This book is, without a doubt the single worst overgrade I've ever seen from CGC.

It's almost blatantly fraudulent. Giving that much exception to a golden age book means a difference of THOUSANDS of dollars. Thus the overgrading could potentially be gyping the buyer out of what he could really be getting with his money. Let's assume that if the book was actually assigned the actual grade the bidding would probably top out around 15k.

 

Man, what a rip off. This doesn't help my confidence with CGC any. I've already had mentioned my suspicions about some of their grading for high end books.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rip

Rip

Posted
Posted

I had pointed this piece of garbage earlier. (Not that I still wouldn't mind owning it). I believe I first saw this book from Jay Parrino then Gram. Say, what if you were the NEW head of CGC... how would you handle this problem. Ask for the book back (pay for shipping etc.) and give it a lower grade... or just let it stand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lofwyr

Lofwyr

Posted
Posted
I had pointed this piece of garbage earlier. (Not that I still wouldn't mind owning it). I believe I first saw this book from Jay Parrino then Gram. Say, what if you were the NEW head of CGC... how would you handle this problem. Ask for the book back (pay for shipping etc.) and give it a lower grade... or just let it stand?

 

It's controversial but legally I don't believe CGC can ask for any book back for a retroactive regrade. I've heard of them regrading books when the owners sent in cracked cases etc.. when they "notice" the book was actually overgraded. If I was the owner of CGC I wouldn't ask for it back but I would put a footnote in the grading notes specifying the "reasoning" behind the grade and put a "buyer beware" disclaimer up front about it.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arty

Arty

Posted
Posted

CGC should buy this book and regrade it.

That defect is so obvious it's not even guaranteed that they'll lose money when they resell it with a lower grade?

 

I'm not sure are they willing to admit such a mistake though.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BlackShotzy-migration

BlackShotzy-migration

Posted
Posted

The book was originally slabbed by CGC for "Dad" (Jay Parino). This same book was on JP_theMint's website approx 2.5 years ago with several other slabbed lowgrade Action 1s that were also dubiously overgraded, a 3.5 that was a 2.5 and a 4.0 that was no better than the 3.5.

 

Interesting to note is that a book with 1/15th of it's cover surface area MISSING ENTIRELY, can be a 2.5, with the rest, aside from the huge chunk missing, not being any better than 3.5 to 4.0 material at best!

 

Note the long, lengthy, and uncalled for description by the seller. I love the part where explanations are given on missing pieces and assorted unnecessary historical minutae. I'm surprised that he didn't bother to include going into how George Bessolo committed suicide and Christopher Reeve was thrown off a horse!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FlyingDonut

FlyingDonut

Posted
Posted

I'm assuming the reserve is $25K - that's what the sticker price on this book was at WizardWorld Philadelphia. I think $25K is not that bad for this book - $38K is low good. I would grade it a 1.8, based on a bunch of other 1.8s I've seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

Donut - - this is one seriously ugly Action#1... 25K can be better spent on lots of other nicegolden Age books, dont you think its better to wait and even pay more for a copy you can look at (or show off) without gagging? Its not like there are only 10 copies around... there are more low grade copies that look nicer..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FlyingDonut

FlyingDonut

Posted
Posted

Oh, I didn't say I'd pay $25K for it - I just think that's a fair price, given that 2.0 good is $38K. 65% of good is reasonable for a book in that condition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonker

Zonker

Posted
Posted
How can a book with a big ole' hunk ripped out the front be labeled a G+??

 

Did you notice that Neat Stuff actually posts the GD description from Overstreet in the auction?

 

"The largest piece allowed missing from the front or back cover is usually a ½” triangle or a ¼” square."

 

As I wrote earlier, I could almost see giving it a GD if the book were otherwise in the VF or NM range and just had a 3"' by 1.5" piece missing. This book looks to be on the GD/VG border TO BEGIN WITH because of the staining/discoloration, creasing and other, smaller pieces missing, so that theory is right out the window. This book is, without a doubt the single worst overgrade I've ever seen from CGC.

 

Well, I'm not sure I want to find myself defending the CGC grade on this one, but the complete quote (I'm trusting this is an accurate quote from Overstreet!), emphasis mine, is "The largest piece allowed missing from the front or back cover is usually a ½" triangle or a ¼" square, although some books have had a price corner box clipped from the top left front cover and may be considered Good if they would otherwise have graded higher. Spine roll is likely. May have up to a 2" spine split. Staples may be degraded, replaced or missing. Moderate staple tears and stress lines may be present, as well as rust migration. Paper is brown but not brittle. Centerfold mat be loose or detached. Moderate interior tears may be present."

 

So looks like the argument would be: the paper is better than brown, the other allowable defects for Good do not apply, so the overall condition is better than Good, all things considered.

 

Let me add though, that I'm really disheartened to see the relaxation of Overstreet standards for Good to Very Good books (the grade I generally collect when going after Golden Age.) As I've ranted elsewhere, Overstreet now allows tape to be used all the way up to VG. 893frustrated.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted
How can a book with a big ole' hunk ripped out the front be labeled a G+??

 

Did you notice that Neat Stuff actually posts the GD description from Overstreet in the auction?

 

"The largest piece allowed missing from the front or back cover is usually a ½” triangle or a ¼” square."

 

As I wrote earlier, I could almost see giving it a GD if the book were otherwise in the VF or NM range and just had a 3"' by 1.5" piece missing. This book looks to be on the GD/VG border TO BEGIN WITH because of the staining/discoloration, creasing and other, smaller pieces missing, so that theory is right out the window. This book is, without a doubt the single worst overgrade I've ever seen from CGC.

 

Well, I'm not sure I want to find myself defending the CGC grade on this one, but the complete quote (I'm trusting this is an accurate quote from Overstreet!), emphasis mine, is "The largest piece allowed missing from the front or back cover is usually a ½" triangle or a ¼" square, although some books have had a price corner box clipped from the top left front cover and may be considered Good if they would otherwise have graded higher. Spine roll is likely. May have up to a 2" spine split. Staples may be degraded, replaced or missing. Moderate staple tears and stress lines may be present, as well as rust migration. Paper is brown but not brittle. Centerfold mat be loose or detached. Moderate interior tears may be present."

 

So looks like the argument would be: the paper is better than brown, the other allowable defects for Good do not apply, so the overall condition is better than Good, all things considered.

 

Let me add though, that I'm really disheartened to see the relaxation of Overstreet standards for Good to Very Good books (the grade I generally collect when going after Golden Age.) As I've ranted elsewhere, Overstreet now allows tape to be used all the way up to VG. 893frustrated.gif

 

But that's not a clipped corner price box. That would be neat and not so unappealing. This much larger and was obviously the result of a violent accident which not only tore the cover, but the first page or two as well. It's incredibly ugly. Looks aside, to me, that's just too much paper loss for any shade of GD. If I were selling this book I would grade it in the FR to FR/GD range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing