Vince G

Thank you!

I see, so basically, what we're saying is that anything submitted on the UV tier is a charge of $100 per book minimum, correct?

I had the showcase at 8.5 and the superman at 8.0 (for the frayed corners and, upon examining the back cover, identifying what appeared to be a miswrap).

Hey, resend it! I just looked in the grading guide and I see the grade range for the stain defect is 1.0 - 9.8 "So you're telling me there's a chance!!"

Time for me to start digging through boxes looking for books with small stains on them, and send em in!!

Join the club. You're in good company

Don't feel bad. I scored one bullseye and still wound up with 13 points for the round, grading all books low. Exactly how I started the last two grading contests, and once again, I'm out I think I'll be shooting for last place this time around... while trying too!!!

Forgive my ignorance if this question has been asked previously. I'm putting together my first submission in about 5 years and had a question about the high value vs. unlimited value tiers. If I have books with an FMV of $1500, on which tier should I submit? If I specify UV, the fee of 4% would be $60 per book, which is actually less than the fee of $85 for a high value sub (max $1000). Would I submit these books on the high value tier or the UV tier and what would be my cost per book? Again, forgive the ignorance here. Thanks.

Please add me to the contest.

I sent in a Chamber 23 to remove a ton of creasing. Nothing could be done about the long color breaking creases and I knew that going in. CCS took out all the defects that could be pressed out but the book's grade remained the same. It's not uncommon pending the type of defects already present on the book. My book does look much, much better, though

Welp, my best round was this last one. Guess I won't be finishing in last place. It's a miracle.

Did you have them press it before it was graded? Appears so but just wanted to ask.

I agree with you. I see some pressable defects but are there enough to warrant a bump in grade, say from 5.0 to 5.5? I'm not entirely certain of that. But yes, definitely speak with a presser who has lots of experience with GA books. Great book!

Considering the moderate foxing and slight interior cover tanning, I'd put this at a 4.5-5.0. However, in the current cgc grading contest I've undergraded every book by 0.5-1.5, so please take my opinion with a grain of salt.

My thinking exactly. 5.5 without the hole. I dropped it to a 4.5 considering that additional defect. Apparently, that was flawed thinking.

At this rate, I will be finishing dead last. I've undergraded every book save for 2 at this point. If I ever post raws for sale, you guys know where to come for bargains.

Agreed. Based on the cert numbers these books were all recently graded. I'm thinking the same; that grading has gotten more lenient. And that's what's confusing here. The standard shouldn't change. I have a few late 60s Marvels with similar (but lesser) corner and wear defects than the Iron Man 4 that are all 8.5 grades.

After seeing the grade on that book, I started thinking about sending my AF 15 down for regrading.

I should have known the bottom corner wear and color loss wouldn't have detracted from the overall grade on this book. But I definitely didn't think it would grade this high

Jeez, same as last time around. I grade too low. Same here on the Comet with respect to the piece out and the foreign substance on the back cover.

Nope. I have three blue label 0.5s in my collection. All are missing either the centerfold or a back cover.

Count me in the contest please.

Ah, my bad. Yes, I arrived late to the party (I think page 194 late)

That makes sense. it would be great if someone from CGC could document the process they use for verification for these types of situations. This would eliminate some of the guesswork and speculation.

So basically, CGC took the submitter's word for it that the book was in fact a Mark Jewelers'. That seems like a very bad business practice if you ask me, particularly because it would have implied that the submitter had to crack the book to verify the insert. It should have raised at least one red flag at CGC, I would have thought. Then again, it's a volume business, right? Just move 'em out.