Larson Marvel Mystery Comics #9

[sacentaur]

The resubbed book was labeled as a Larson. Seems like they had no problem identifying it. I'm not saying I'm in favor of erasing markings like that (I'm not), but to say that CGC missed restoration because they didn't tag the dry cleaning is wrong.

 

So the book may have been dry cleaned, pressed, and had its pedigree identifier erased (which is rather common for Larsons, actually). Anything else?

 

The fact that the book has been monkeyed with in such an apparent deceptive manner is what really turned me off when I saw it come up...and as most of you know, I just love Larsons.

 

STEVE (make mine Larson, except for this manipulated copy)

[FFB]

Doesn't CGC had a database of all comics they grade.

That being said, I know very little about Church etc ped's but are their multiple copies of issues.

 

If not, and if CGC has a database, then it should be impossible for a PLOD 5.0 to go to a blue 5.5

 

and if CGC doesn't have a database...get one please.

 

They do have a database, but:

 

a) They don't consider pressing or dry cleaning to be restoration, and both/either can result in an upgrade (as they did here), and the pressing and dry cleaning counterbalanced whatever "damage" was done to the book by scraping away the "small glue" that used to be there, resulting in a slightly higher grade;

 

b) They don't check the database before grading a book;

 

c) Even if the book wasn't dry cleaned, pressed, or otherwise altered, they are human and no human can grade every book exactly the same grade every day, consistently. No matter who you are, there is a certain percentage of books that you're going to grade differently from one day to the next.

[FFB]

The resubbed book was labeled as a Larson. Seems like they had no problem identifying it. I'm not saying I'm in favor of erasing markings like that (I'm not), but to say that CGC missed restoration because they didn't tag the dry cleaning is wrong.

 

So the book may have been dry cleaned, pressed, and had its pedigree identifier erased (which is rather common for Larsons, actually). Anything else?

 

The fact that the book has been monkeyed with in such an apparent deceptive manner is what really turned me off when I saw it come up...and as most of you know, I just love Larsons.

 

STEVE (make mine Larson, except for this manipulated copy)

 

The dry cleaning and the erasure of the pedigree marker are the same thing. Dry cleaning just means "using an eraser to remove surface grime, pencil marks, etc." Apart from that, the book was pressed and the small dot of glue was scraped off.

 

As a Larson collector, does it really bother you that this book was pressed and the small spot of old glue scraped off? It's still Lamont Larson's old copy of MMC#9. Serious question. If I were a Larson collector, this wouldn't keep me from buying the book, so I am just having a hard time understanding why it would stop you.

[Timely]

This book was not water cleaned. Water cleaning will not remove pencil. Also the foxing stains on the top of the front cover remain, water cleaning should have removed that. As far as cover shrinking I do not see that. It looks like the cover shifted slightly down when the spine roll was removed.

 

As an aside note no one should ever erase pedigree codes. It serves no logical purpose!

 

West

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

As an aside note no one should ever erase pedigree codes. It serves no logical purpose!

 

Enhancing the possibility of successfully laundering the "potentalized" book wihout detection not a logical purpose?

[The Black Hand ®]

This copy has been manipulated in a deceptive manner for the sake of pure greed to the detriment of the hobby! What was done IMHO cannot honestly be defended.Why can't everyone just admit that the book was tinkered with, put it on the pariah list and move on to happy things, like Thanksgiving.

[batman_fan]

This copy has been manipulated in a deceptive manner for the sake of pure greed to the detriment of the hobby! What was done is cannot honestly be defended.Why can't everyone just admit that the book was tinkered with, put it on the pariah list and move on to happy things, like Thanksgiving.

 

well said.

[Mephisto]

This book is a great example of why I shake my head with the increasing number of posts I read as to why people feel safer buying old label books. They are less likely to be altered books. I'd rather take my chances of having a pressed book than a book in need of pressing due to SCS which I still feel is a big big problem. Old label books were fooled with too!

[sacentaur]

As a Larson collector, does it really bother you that this book was pressed and the small spot of old glue scraped off? It's still Lamont Larson's old copy of MMC#9. Serious question. If I were a Larson collector, this wouldn't keep me from buying the book, so I am just having a hard time understanding why it would stop you.

 

Serious question and a very valid question, Scott.

 

For me, I judge a book (and its appeal) based on its individuality. Even though the Larson copy of Marvel Mystery 9 should be one of my most sought after grails, this paricular item just failed to grab me. Maybe it was the source, maybe it was the insidious work done on the book, and maybe it just epitomized what I see as being wrong with the hobby today.

 

(BTW, well said Black Hand!)

 

STEVE (Happy Thanksgiving everyone)

[action1kid]

Marvel #9 is one of my very favorite comicbook covers,even though I have never owned one.Always found this book tuff from my personal experience.

[steelhelmet]

I agree with FFB and Timely.

 

This is not a frankenbook, cover still displays bold reds, nice PQ, no coupons cut or back cover missing as some Larsons are afflicted with.

 

 

 

How many of us have the luxury of being able to cherry pick among MM 9's? That's what I thought. Words used like "totally ruined" and "pariah" seem pretty harsh considering every board member here, if given the opportunity, would jump on this book at universal retail like a fly on jello, have a case-cracking party, and be just happy to have the book.

[action1kid]

I agree with FFB and Timely.

 

This is not a frankenbook, cover still displays bold reds, nice PQ, no coupons cut or back cover missing as some Larsons are afflicted with.

 

 

 

How many of us have the luxury of being able to cherry pick among MM 9's? That's what I thought. Words used like "totally ruined" and "pariah" seem pretty harsh considering every board member here, if given the opportunity, would jump on this book at universal retail like a fly on jello, have a case-cracking party, and be just happy to have the book.

 

I agree

[nearmint]

As an aside note no one should ever erase pedigree codes. It serves no logical purpose!

 

Enhancing the possibility of successfully laundering the "potentalized" book wihout detection not a logical purpose?

 

If that was the intention with the MM #9 then they failed miserably. It's still designated as the Larson. Simply looking the book up in the Heritage archives would make it obvious to anyone that the call-back code has been removed.

 

If someone was trying to be deceptive here, they did a lousy job of it.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

As an aside note no one should ever erase pedigree codes. It serves no logical purpose!

 

Enhancing the possibility of successfully laundering the "potentalized" book wihout detection not a logical purpose?

 

If that was the intention with the MM #9 then they failed miserably. It's still designated as the Larson. Simply looking the book up in the Heritage archives would make it obvious to anyone that the call-back code has been removed.

 

If someone was trying to be deceptive here, they did a lousy job of it.

 

Would there be any other reason to get rid of it, especially since such pencil markings aren't factored into the grade at all?

[The Black Hand ®]

I think the work on this book was done before everybody started comparing scans from heritage. Does anyone know who owns it or who had the work performed?Well, I gotta start making my chopped chicken liver, Happy Thanksgiving all!

[FFB]

This book was not water cleaned. Water cleaning will not remove pencil. Also the foxing stains on the top of the front cover remain, water cleaning should have removed that. As far as cover shrinking I do not see that. It looks like the cover shifted slightly down when the spine roll was removed.

 

As an aside note no one should ever erase pedigree codes. It serves no logical purpose!

 

West

 

West,

 

Aqueous cleaning alone will not remove foxing stains unless there is a bleaching agent present in the wash. But I agree with everything else you said!

[FFB]

This copy has been manipulated in a deceptive manner for the sake of pure greed to the detriment of the hobby! What was done IMHO cannot honestly be defended.Why can't everyone just admit that the book was tinkered with, put it on the pariah list and move on to happy things, like Thanksgiving.

 

Because it is still the Larson copy of MMC#9. Putting any book on a pariah list is stupid IMO. It may be "worth a little less" to some collectors (and indeed, it may now be worth more to others), but to shun a book (especially a pedigree copy of a very important book) because it was pressed and a number was erased? That's crazy.

[FFB]

As a Larson collector, does it really bother you that this book was pressed and the small spot of old glue scraped off? It's still Lamont Larson's old copy of MMC#9. Serious question. If I were a Larson collector, this wouldn't keep me from buying the book, so I am just having a hard time understanding why it would stop you.

 

Serious question and a very valid question, Scott.

 

For me, I judge a book (and its appeal) based on its individuality. Even though the Larson copy of Marvel Mystery 9 should be one of my most sought after grails, this paricular item just failed to grab me. Maybe it was the source, maybe it was the insidious work done on the book, and maybe it just epitomized what I see as being wrong with the hobby today.

 

(BTW, well said Black Hand!)

 

STEVE (Happy Thanksgiving everyone)

 

Fair enough, Steve. Thanks for the serious response.

[FFB]

As an aside note no one should ever erase pedigree codes. It serves no logical purpose!

 

Enhancing the possibility of successfully laundering the "potentalized" book wihout detection not a logical purpose?

 

What about the fact that they resubmitted it as the Larson copy? It doesn't appear as though they were trying to hide the fact that the book was the Larson copy at all. It just looks like someone was perhaps misinformed about the impact that the 88 would have on the grade, so they erased it.

[FFB]

I agree with FFB and Timely.

 

This is not a frankenbook, cover still displays bold reds, nice PQ, no coupons cut or back cover missing as some Larsons are afflicted with.

 

 

 

How many of us have the luxury of being able to cherry pick among MM 9's? That's what I thought. Words used like "totally ruined" and "pariah" seem pretty harsh considering every board member here, if given the opportunity, would jump on this book at universal retail like a fly on jello, have a case-cracking party, and be just happy to have the book.

 

You said it better than I could. Preach on, my brother!