What to do?

[october]

I will (and already did) concede the point that there is some minimal level of water damage that allows for a higher grade.

 

You conceded that a 1mm interior water spot allowed for a higher grade. I gave an example of a 1.5" by 1.5" water spot on the cover. Not exactly the same thing and I wouldn't call the latter "minimal" at all.

 

Yet I am curious if you would have given a raw book with 1" stain on the spine a 7.0 before the revelation that CGC would.

 

I would have given it a 7.5 actually. The rest of the book looks great.

 

Well, this is probably the root of our disagreement. I think water damage is a major flaw, bad by its very nature, and yes a 1.5" by 1.5" water spot on the cover is not minimal (we agree) and would make the book VG+ at best IMO (we don't agree).

 

I can't see your book with a 1" stain on the spine, but again such a flaw would not permit such a grade in my book.

 

My opinion of weighting water damage so heavily stems from my own personal aesthetics (which I am sure differs from many others') and my experience in selling books with various forms of water damage (they must be heavily discounted).

 

I understand the "personal" grading scale. I wouldn't give any book with a significant production miswrap better than a F/VF....but all that goes more to what we are willing to pay for a book rather than its technical grade. My point was just that there isn't anything to prevent a book with a water stain from going above 7.0 according to the OSGG or CGC.

[the blob]

"Not sure of your point here. Are you two on board as characterizing Heritage as undergraders? (I thought any book Heritage felt was undergraded or had not yet reached "full potential" could not be bought by an outsider)."

 

i think we're mainly talking about inexpensive books not worth slabbing. admittedly, i haven't bid much on heritage books for a while, but a lot of that stuff they list looks like clearing inventory and now and then you can get a decent deal. as for undergrading, all I'll say is that I didn't take issue with their grading with the 15-20 or so raw books I bought from them over the years. The scans were huge, so I knew what I was getting. One might have been overgraded, washed out by one that was undergraded, with the rest being about right.

[whomerjay]

I will (and already did) concede the point that there is some minimal level of water damage that allows for a higher grade.

 

You conceded that a 1mm interior water spot allowed for a higher grade. I gave an example of a 1.5" by 1.5" water spot on the cover. Not exactly the same thing and I wouldn't call the latter "minimal" at all.

 

Yet I am curious if you would have given a raw book with 1" stain on the spine a 7.0 before the revelation that CGC would.

 

I would have given it a 7.5 actually. The rest of the book looks great.

 

Well, this is probably the root of our disagreement. I think water damage is a major flaw, bad by its very nature, and yes a 1.5" by 1.5" water spot on the cover is not minimal (we agree) and would make the book VG+ at best IMO (we don't agree).

 

 

I can't see your book with a 1" stain on the spine, but again such a flaw would not permit such a grade in my book.

 

My opinion of weighting water damage so heavily stems from my own personal aesthetics (which I am sure differs from many others') and my experience in selling books with various forms of water damage (they must be heavily discounted).

 

I understand the "personal" grading scale. I wouldn't give any book with a significant production miswrap better than a F/VF....but all that goes more to what we are willing to pay for a book rather than its technical grade. My point was just that there isn't anything to prevent a book with a water stain from going above 7.0 according to the OSGG or CGC.

 

I agree... not even sure if OSGG (and certainly CGC) says anything about water stains.

[drbanner]

Or is it more hit and miss with them? If you are arguing that careful consideration of Heritage listings will enable you to find undergraded books and avoid overgraded books, to me that is a dangerous game with them.

 

It is hit and miss with them, just as it is with CGC, Metropolis, and pretty much anyone else. My main point is that you're going to hear a lot more about the overgraded books than the undergraded books, no matter who the grader is - you'll notice that there aren't too many "Check out this 9.4 I bought from ebayer xxx as an 8.5!! " threads, but plenty of "Is this really a 9.x!?!? " threads.

 

Anyhow, I'm certainly not going to come on here trumpeting about my success buying raw from Heritage...or maybe I am?

[whomerjay]

It's funny, but on ebay it seems it doesn't take long for people (mostly forumites) to find the undergraders, at least those sellers who list with any kind of frequency . After a while their auctions have curious winning bids wll over "graded" guide.

 

In fact, I think purposefully undergrading and playing dumb is a great strategy (assuming you hav somthing people want). Many bidders overcompensate when they know.

 

Of course, I'm sure there are several known to but a few. But it's hard to keep a good secret in such an open economy.

[seank]

No one complains about buying an undergraded book. Buying and overgraded book makes you feel ripped off.

 

I'm ticked Heritage didn't disclose the water damage. Had I known, I proably wouldn't have bought the book.

 

I was not ticked several years ago to buy a raw 5.5 ShockSuspenstories #6 that should have been a 7.5 or 8.0. I have no plans to make up the price difference in grades by writing Heritage a check.

 

For the record, I've generally had positive experiences with Heritage. I'll buy from them again, but will be more careful next time.

[Durden08]

Also, does Heritage not show scans of back covers? I noticed there was none with the auction for this particular book.

 

I know Heritage usually shows back cover scans only in their big "Signature" auctions. Their smaller weekly auctions do not, so I assume this purchase was from a weekly auction.

[october]

It's funny, but on ebay it seems it doesn't take long for people (mostly forumites) to find the undergraders, at least those sellers who list with any kind of frequency . After a while their auctions have curious winning bids wll over "graded" guide.

 

In fact, I think purposefully undergrading and playing dumb is a great strategy (assuming you hav somthing people want). Many bidders overcompensate when they know.

 

Of course, I'm sure there are several known to but a few. But it's hard to keep a good secret in such an open economy.

 

You are definitely right in some cases. I can't even get near Zillaf's auctions anymore.

[Aces]

I believe Nochips recently received a refund on a raw book purchased from Heritage, even though their published return policy states no returns.

 

What do you grade the book at now? It's possible that Heritage simply did not downgrade as much for the water damage as you do...

 

Would this be a good thread for Beyonder to post his CGC 7.0 book with the water damage on the back cover?

[Aces]

I will (and already did) concede the point that there is some minimal level of water damage that allows for a higher grade.

 

Yet I am curious if you would have given a raw book with 1" stain on the spine a 7.0 before the revelation that CGC would.

 

I agree with you that FVFs should not have a lot a water damage but CGC is the standard and I saw Beyonder's 7.0 (I can't recall the DC ~Was it a HOM?) with major water damage on the back. And the book was barely a VF without the H2O.

[seank]

Here's the offending back cover that started this thread:

 

 

The browning at the bottom left is water damage. The cover is rippled from the corner all the way to the left of the coupon. There's also damage seen on the scan at the top left corner. The browning/ripple that goes through "Which" is from water and extends at lessening depth down to the chip near "All Around."

 

The entire left edge appears to have been moistened. The book has an overall feel and smell like it was kept in a high humidity environment.

 

Like I said, I'm upset about the lack of disclosure, but right now, my inclination is to keep the book.

 

Caveat emptor!