Qualified or Crapified?

[fantastic_four]

We very rarely qualify a comic if it's appearance is 3.5 or below.

 

Ah! That fits every one I've got scans of and can remember seeing.

[Aces]

That explains a lot...

As a collector of lower grade early Marvels I run into the blue label qualified sometimes (GVG(Q)pin-up page out/etc...).

[Mister_Comics]

I just can't see this book being a 6.0 for any reason.

 

The thing about the "QUALIFIED" grading puzzles me. Say a brand new comic gets a 9.9 grade. Why can't it just be given a 10.0 QUALIFIED with the noted defect that kept it under a 10 grade. I know this sounds silly, but this whole QUALIFIED grade thing seems silly to me. We're saying this so-n-so book is qualified as a 6.0 but in fact its probably less then a .5 . It just makes me think that all the QUALIFIED graded books out there are really a lot less in grade then we are to believe. Now here I have a 9.4 QUALIFIED in my collection. Is it really a 9.4 because it has a detacted cover staple. Probably not. So why give it a better grade because of a GREEN LABEL. Just use the blue label and grade it at what it should be. I say get rid of the GREEN LABEL it just does not make sense. All its doing is saying gee this book can be this (fill in the blank) grade if it just didn't have this (fill in the blank) defect. So lets give it a green label. That my friends is simply wrong.

 

And if any of the legal beagles out there would care to explain why its wrong please be my guest.

[drbanner]

?

[joe_collector]

A Restored comic cannot also be Qualified. We very rarely qualify a comic if it's appearance is 3.5 or below.

 

So you're saying that taking the missing page out of the equation, this ASM #3 is aesthetically an Apparent 0.5 with the Resto?

 

Yeah right.

[joe_collector]

This book is in poor condition. Period. If the 10pgs missing were part of the Spidey story, what would CGC grade it then???

 

I think the real question should be "What if the 10 pages were missing from a Ultimate Spider-man #22?"

 

CGC 0.5

 

Question to CGC: What's the FMV charge discrepancy between a CGC 0.5 AF 15 and a CGC Qualified 6.0 AF 15?

[sborock]

"I think the real question should be "What if the 10 pages were missing from a Ultimate Spider-man #22?

 

CGC 0.5 "

 

WRONG, it would receive a Qualified grade to reflect the "look" of the comic book.

 

"Question to CGC: What's the FMV charge discrepancy between a CGC 0.5 AF 15 and a CGC Qualified 6.0 AF 15? "

 

There would be no difference, we value it at the 0.5 FMV. If the submitter sent it through the Walk-thru tier, we would have credited back their account if they valued it too high.

 

Believe it or not, we do this quite often. We believe if we are going to "bump" up a comic (Superman #2 in 8.0 from standard to Walk-thru), we should also help to stop the submitter from throwing away large amounts of money. If that comic was submitted through Walk-thru with a value of $10,000, we would have credited back the $112 and only kept $88 for the same day turn around time.

 

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Say a brand new comic gets a 9.9 grade. Why can't it just be given a 10.0 QUALIFIED with the noted defect that kept it under a 10 grade.

 

Most often, they don't give the Qualified grade to a book with such a minor defect...it's got to be some very large, point-lowering defect on a book that is otherwise in much better shape. I've seen almost total consistency with that...except for this book:

 

[Mister_Fantastic-migration]

I know this sounds silly, but this whole QUALIFIED grade thing seems silly to me.

 

It's like your SHILLY ID hammer...the label says Mister_Fantastic, but it's clear to everyone who you are!

 

A little over zealous, no? In your feeble attempt to "zing" me, you quoted the wrong poster, insufficiently_thoughtful_person!!! Yes, it's as clear as a foggy night......... I am Hammer!!!!!! Get a life, you nickel and dimer.

[fazman]

Just wondering...Has anybody ever submitted a "Cover Only" for CGC grading ?

because with 10 pages missing , we have'nt got much of a book here.

[aardvark88]

Individual wrap (interior pages) have been slabbed by Cgc from Action #1 that feature Superman. They were on ComicLink & Heritage before. Think they were graded incomplete, not Cgc 0.0.

[drbanner]

You're correct hammer, I was zinging the wrong poster...

[Mister_Comics]

The QUALIFIED grading makes no sense. CGC should just give the real grade on the blue label with noted defect. DON'T be upgrading the books.

[BachelorOfComix]

Doc, look at the staple placement of this book. Do you think that if it was a CGC 9.8 that hammer would be all over it? How the heck can a comic with staples like that be a 9.8?

[drbanner]

Probably...but the worst part of that book is that the interior pages appear to extend beyond the cover at the top and bottom, but not in the middle, that's weird?

[fantastic_four]

Doc, look at the staple placement of this book. Do you think that if it was a CGC 9.8 that hammer would be all over it? How the heck can a comic with staples like that be a 9.8?

 

The Overstreet guidelines on this are unclear. A 9.8 can have "subtle" defects at the 9.8 level (2002 OGG, pages 146-147), and "subtle" translates to 1/32" to 1/16". If this book were a perfect 10.0 in all respects but the staples, what's the grade?

 

Let's say the staples are offset by 1/8". On the one hand, you could argue that since a 9.8 can have 1 to 2 bindery/printing defects (2002 OGG, page 127), the staple offset could be considered as two 1/16" defects and fall into the 9.8 grade. On the other hand, you could argue that this defect is more severe than "subtle" at 1/8" and therefore should fall all the way to the 9.2 level since that's the first place they list "minor" bindery/printing defects as being allowed, with "minor" translating to 1/16" to 1/8". I find dropping this book all the way to 9.2 to be overly harsh.

 

The reason I say the guidelines are unclear is because "bindery/printing" is too broad a defect category. Does this mean that offset staples by 1/8" is downgraded the same as a 1/8" miswrap? That doesn't make sense to me; a 1/8" miswrap is MUCH more noticable since it's not ONLY 1/8", it actually creates a rectangular area that is 1/8" by whatever the height of the comic is--let's say 10.5"--which yields a total affected area roughtly equal to 1.3". Offset staples affect a TINY total surface area, which is why they're not as noticable as an offset. You can spot an offset right away, but misplaced staples can take 5-10 seconds to spot because the area is so small. Spotting offset staples can be even more difficult if the staples are well-hidden in the art.

[musicmeta]

If that's a 6.0 in any plane of existence, then I'll eat the book with mustard.

 

It's not a 6.0, it's a "Qualified 6.0 10 pages missing".

 

I'm a big proponent of qualified grades, and this book is exactly why. For those who collect only NM books, it's a bit of a foreign concept to deal with low grade/incomplete books, but this is a great book for someone. "Qualified 6.0 10 pages missing" has a lot more information and tells the buyer a whole lot more than Fair/Poor/Incomplete/whatever does. So what's the grade? Whatcha think g?

 

And hey...I thought you were for more information on the label?

 

(Anyhow, thanks for not calling me an imbecile! )

 

 

I question the fact if this book was just a common non-key book would you still get the same 6.0 qualified grade. This book should have received no higher than a

0.5 universal grade since 10-pages are missing IMHYWO. THAT'S 10 PAGES!!!.

I am unable to see how CGC can give this book even a Qualified grade.

 

 

[shadroch]

I think there is a place for a Qualified label but this example is the poster child for good intentions gone bad.

What I never quite understood is if I replace the MVS in a Hulk 181, it becomes a restored book,yet with the piece missing CGC will give it a qualified NM whilst Overstreet will give it a poor at best.

[fantastic_four]

I think there is a place for a Qualified label but this example is the poster child for good intentions gone bad.

What I never quite understood is if I replace the MVS in a Hulk 181, it becomes a restored book,yet with the piece missing CGC will give it a qualified NM whilst Overstreet will give it a poor at best.

 

I don't think Overstreet is clear on the issue of books that have one defect that is significantly worse than all the others. Let's say that this AF 15 was a 9.4 in all respects but the missing pages...going by the maximum severities listed for the various defect categories in the Overstreet guidelines, the missing 10 pages would obscure the distinction between this otherwise-Fine book and the hypothetical otherwise-Near Mint book because they would both rate Poor by those guidelines. However, the chart in the 2002 OGG has defect count ranges for the various grades, and for the Poor grade, it shows a minimum of--if I remember correctly since I don't have the guide near me--somewhere around 20 or so defects. Arnold Blumberg keeps repeatedly affirming that you can't go literally by those severities, and the min-max defect counts support that assertion...however for these types of books the guidelines are a bit lacking in helping you to determine what the grade should be.

 

I'm not sure I agree with the Qualified grade, but the one thing it does do is allow a distinction between variable amounts of secondary defects beyond the one or two major defects.

[joe_collector]

I'm not sure I agree with the Qualified grade, but the one thing it does do is allow a distinction between variable amounts of secondary defects beyond the one or two major defects.

 

Are you really saying that a book missing 10 full pages could ever be graded Fine by Overstreet?

 

If so, I've seen responses from OS where both readers and dealers have asked what grade a comic with a MVS cut out could attain.

 

The answer: No better than a VG

 

Think about that for a minute.