Tony S

Member
  • Content Count

    3,057
  • Joined

  • Last visited

8 Followers

About Tony S

  • Boards Title
    I was posting here when you were in diapers.

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Social Work Supervisor
  • Location
    Evansville, Indiana

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. A few of us care. Matt Nelson - back before his business was purchased by CCG (parent company of CGC and others) used to have a detailed article with graphs showing how there OUGHT TO BE more 9.9's and 10's than we see. They should be expected to be seen in some predictable ratio to the other better than NM grades. But they were not. When he got owned and moved in house with CGC, that article went away. In the absence of any logic or expected ratios of 9.8 to 9.9 and 10, it sorta looks more like (winning) lottery ticket's than grades. Just sayin. And something I find even more.....interesting.... for lack of a better word is that all the 9.9's of the older vintage books were handed out in the first couple of years CGC was in business. Then never - or almost never - again.
  2. The overall ramifications and implications escape me. The customer knows what books they sent it. They did the submission online. . So you send in 20 books and get an email back saying "these four books didn't pass the pressing screening and will not be pressed." It doesn't take a lot of brainpower to understand the other 16 books will be pressed. Efficiency is generally good.
  3. It would actually be a good thing - for the longevity of our vintage newsprint comic books - if the hobby could reach a point where the use of buffering agents to neutralize acidity in newsprint was accepted. There have been lots of discussions and debates about the use of micro-chamber paper. Does it really help? Does it need to be periodically replaced? Voldy doesn't use it for instance. There is no debate about micro chamber paper in the library science field. Because deacidification of paper (books, documents, etc) by applying a buffering agent (that is to say spraying the pages with something like Wei-To) is the GOLD STANDARD for conservation/preservation. In the library science field, the only thing micro-chamber paper is ever used for is to make stinky books and magazines smell better. Trapping and removing odors. But right now, spraying your comic books one page at a time with a buffering agent (that is to say wetting them down with such) would earn you a conserved label/notation from the grading companies. So if or until public opinion changes, the best we can do is keep our books in climate controlled darkness. Which fortunately in developed countries is easy enough to do. If you heat your house in the winter, cool it in the summer and keep you books in boxes with lids then you are preserving them as well as can be. But if you are hot and sticky in your house, so are your precious comics.
  4. Cleaned or new staples will not detract from (or lower) the assigned numeric grade. If sent to CGC, a book with cleaned or replaced staples - minus any other work that counts as restoration - will get a conserved label. Collectors greatly prefer unrestored, blue universal label comic books. It's unclear right now if collectors are more accepting of conserved books over restored. Many of us believe that in time collectors will view conserved books as more desirable than restored books. But the universal blue label, unrestored is always going to be the most desirable, worth the most $$. Below is a couple of links to CGC articles/news releases on restoration and conservation standards. You might find these helpful https://www.cgccomics.com/news/article/4030/ https://www.cgccomics.com/news/article/4083/
  5. Some replies have been along the lines of "I think". So I'll post up with what I know. Unwitnessed signatures on the front cover get a green label from CGC. On the interior they get blue label. You can if you wish request a blue label for most defects that normally get a green label and take the numeric grade hit instead. In answering the OP's question, I - and many other collectors - are OK with green labels for unwitnessed signatures IF said signature(s) look legitimate. I won't pay any premium price for a green label CGC book that is a result of unwitnessed signatures. But neither do I expect to buy it cheaper than blue label. Voldy does not have a green, qualified label. Nor a Purple restored label for that matter. Any such issues are text on the label. Voldy offers a signature verification service. Where a signature expert looks at the book and says "yes or no" to if they believe it is an authentic signature. IF the signature fails authentication or IF the submitter chooses not to pay for the service (and it isn't cheap at $25 for one signature) then the "writing" on the front cover is treated as a substantial defect. I've seen a fair number of such books and 6.5-7.0 seems the highest possible grade if the signature cannot/is not verified. Like CGC, unwitnessed signatures on the interior of a book are treated as a minor defect if not witnessed or authenticated.
  6. I've submitted - for clients - a good number of signed on the inside of front cover TMNT 1's. One graded 9.8. There have been several in the 9.2-9.6 range. So while unwiitnessed signatures on the interior of the book are treated as a defect, it is a very, very tiny defect. With minimal impact on grade. If your book graded "very low", there are other defects - maybe lots of other defects - that is affecting the grade.
  7. Well, that could be. But the thicker holder is - as near as I can tell - simply a different, deeper back half of he slab. It appears CGC probably has several - maybe more - back half of the slabs in various depths to accommodate thicker books. So same front half of the slab, backs of different depths, all the same materials and design. I don't believe there was any materials change until Barex - the plastic CGC (and PGX) used for the inner holder - became unavailable. Which was around the time of the new holder. Ineos, the maker of Barex, closed the only plant making the plastic sometime in 2015, I say sometime because the date the plant actually closed is hard to nail down. It was announced they were closing the first quarter of 2015, but there were also reports that upon that announcement they had an influx of orders as businesses that used Barex made orders large enough to give them time to find alternatives. Which resulted in the plant in Lima Ohio staying open longer than originally planned. Voldy started out in 2014 using PETG - and everyone in the comic slabbing business is using some version of polyester film (PET) now for the inner holder. I don't believe CGC has ever actually stated what plastic is used for the outer holder. I worked a few years in the plastic industry and I am 99.9% certain it is common and inexpensive high impact polystyrene. Which is used in packaging all sorts of stuff that values rigidity, potential clarity and low cost. It's the same stuff that is used to make clear CD cases. Like you can purchase in 50/100 packs at Office Depot super cheap. So think of your CGC outer holder as a larger, thicker CD case. A bit of blue tinting added to give it the premium, glass like look that the marketing types love.
  8. If this is so I'm unaware. I've unslabbed hundreds - maybe close to a thousand - CGC graded books. Any difference between the holders from the very first to April 2016 isn't obvious. Just changing the appearance of the labels (you mention "old label gen 1") wouldn't mean anything as far as the holder goes.
  9. Mystafo had the correct reply. The OP's book currently sits in a Generation 1 (the original) holder. The Generation 2 holder that caused waves was only used for a few months - April 2016 to June 24, 2016 . There is NO REASON to believe the CGC case is causing waviness in the OP's book. The book could be reholdered for a modest fee ($15 plus shipping). But IMHO, the best route with this book would be: 1) Send it to CCS for pressing evaluation (screening) . If CCS says it's a good pressing candidate, go for it. If they say no, then get the reholder. For a book at this price level, the evaluation will be free IF the book is subsequently pressed. But if you are categorically opposed to pressing, just send the book back in for reholder. It's cheap, the new holder looks nice. You could even ask for and pay the extra $5 for the Captain America label.
  10. Absolute, best comment I've read in months. .. Being old has a few advantages, right?
  11. There is nothing in my collection I have not read. Even the encapsulated books I've read the stories at some point in time. I also purchase very few new comics and what few I do buy I read.
  12. CGC's stance on tape is that adding tape can never improve the grade. So the question becomes "why is the tape on the book? If the tape is sealing a tear, CGC will grade the book as though the tear is still there. If tape reattaches a cover or a piece of the book, CGC will grade the book as though the cover or piece is detached. If the tape doesn't "fix" something, then the tape itself is treated as defect and the grade is affected. Your question was which is better, tape or a tear. If the tape on the first book is sealing a tear (and it probably is) to CGC when grading the book there is no difference. BOTH books have tears. Collectors generally dislike tape - and for good reason. Over time it will slowly damage the paper. But personally the first book - the one with some tape - has much better eye appeal. Stronger color, little creasing and wear. If they are about the same price I'd want the better looking book. Even though it has a small amount of tape. Welcome to the boards.
  13. Nice resource. This might not be so bad. i have a number of the DC books for Sept 1963