s-dali

Member
  • Content Count

    58
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by s-dali

  1. I believe Alterna Comics use newsprint. At least they say they do. I have yet to but one of their comics.
  2. Newton rings are one of the main reasons I do not submit comics to CGC. When I buy a slab, if it has newton rings, it does factor into my buying. I have passed on comics where the rings were just too bad. They do make a difference on the desirability of the comic IMO. I've held off saying anything because a lot of forum members dismiss what people say who haven't been active here for forever and a day. Regardless, I'm going to say what a lot of people are thinking. CGC will only address this issue when it hits them in the wallet. When submissions start to falter and Voldy slabs start selling at equal prices, then and only then will CGC do something about it. The rub of this is, by ignoring the issue, they are only helping that scenario become a reality. Unfortunate, but true.
  3. If I had known that back then, I would have apologized. Since I am just finding this out now, I will apologize here. I am sorry that I assumed something without knowing all the facts. Kudos to you for your accomplishment!!! I mean this sincerely!! You should feel pleasure for your part in that change!!!
  4. I don't know why you are surprised. I mentioned that fact to you back on May 5th in the Marvel pence thread. Here is the link to the page.
  5. On that, I totally agree with you!!
  6. All this talk about CGC listening to people on the boards is hilarious to me!!! Yes they may take some things into consideration, but the bottom line IS the bottom line. After years of talk on these boards, it took Voldey noting the Pence Variants to make CGC do the same. And what about Newton rings? After years of complaining and a poll on the forum, the official line is STILL that some amount of Newton rings is acceptable. Meanwhile, there are two competitors who have proven that Newton rings don't need to be there. Granted, those two each have their own issues, but Newton rings isn't one of them!!! Sorry, if anything, I see CGC reacting to competition a lot faster than to anything stated here. I think some people are over stressing the influence they perceive that they have.
  7. Torches don't kill people, people kill people!!
  8. @TwoPiece Yep!!! The series is only seven issues long. It was published back in the 90's. Here is the ComicVine link to the series.
  9. @TwoPiece do you just collect legit #666's?? Or would Milk and Cheese #6 be of interest to you?
  10. I quit ordering from them after I received a shipment where it looked like someone hacked a loogie all over the plastic that was covering the comics. No comics were damaged, thankfully. I emailed them and they responded with "So sorry that happened. Have you seen our latest store variant?" Yeah ... I don't know what I was expecting, but I was expecting a little more than that!!!
  11. I couldn't agree more!!! Cheers!!!
  12. I just have to chime in. I find it curious that this thread was started in 2017. And judging by the first post, this has been a topic that has been around for quite some time. Yet, when CGC finally decides to put price variants on the label, everyone is saying that CGC is finally listening. I can't help but wonder if CGC would have done this if Voldey hadn't already started doing it in the fall of 2018. My initial thought is that people would still be asking for it. Say what you want, but I'm glad that there is some competent competition out there. I think it has made CGC a better company all around. Just an observation.
  13. This was posted a few hours ago on that facebook post. If the CGC bag can be opened that easily, I'm a little concerned also. Too many scammers out there looking to make a buck any way they can. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYRmtk7vIiE&t=9s
  14. I got this from the Make Comic Book Collecting Fun Again Facebook group. I'm pretty certain that all of these fall under the $100 mark.
  15. If it really bugs you, all the "Adventures of Steve Martin and Jerry Lewis" and "Adventures of Jerry Lewis" comics can be read online at Read Comic Online. I looked at the covers on ComicVine. Issue #96 is of a drive-in, but there is no scene like what you are describing in the comic.
  16. Both of these are very great points and ones that I lost sight of. Thank you for the reminder!!!!
  17. @Tony S I appreciate your comments!! I agree that a detailed description of each grade is unrealistic. However, the complete opposite (total vagueness) is not doing the community any good either. I'm saying that they could, and IMO should, give the public a minimal idea of where they can expect their comic to grade at. For instance, if a comic cannot grade higher than a 9.6 with a digital code removed, state it. If paper can be brown, but not brittle at a 4.0, say it. I realize that CGC does not need to do this, but the scale they have now is more useless than a wooden frying pan. I realize that the more experienced a person gets, the less they need a guide. But what about the newcomer? Is it too much to ask that the current leading comic book grading company give a useful grading scale for reference? I'm beginning to think it is. Is that what they have become? Screw the newcomer?? Let him go elsewhere for answers??? Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I have respect for other collectors and our hobby. I want this hobby that has brought me so much joy over the years to bring joy to people for generations to come. Nowadays, part of that joy, for better or worse, is to possess a graded copy of a comic in your collection. The easier it is for people to access guidelines and scales, the better it is for the community. That's my two cents.
  18. Or you can use the new CGC scale: G2.0 A collectible that shows extensive evidence of handling with numerous moderate-to-major defects. G-1.8 A collectible that shows extensive evidence of handling with numerous major defects. Fa/G1.5 A collectible that shows extensive evidence of handling with a heavy accumulation of major defects. Fa1.0 A very poorly handled collectible with a heavy accumulation of major defects.
  19. 2.0 GOOD (GD): Shows substantial wear; often considered a “reading copy.” Cover shows significant wear and may even be detached. Cover reflectivity is low and in some cases completely absent. Book-length creases and dimples may be present. Rounded corners are more common. Moderate soiling, staining, discoloration and foxing may be present. The largest piece allowed missing from the front or back cover is usually a 1/2″ triangle or a 1/4″ square, although some Silver Age books such as 1960s Marvels have had the price corner box clipped from the top left front cover and may be considered Good if they would otherwise have graded higher. Tape and other forms of amateur repair are common in Silver Age and older books. Spine roll is likely. May have up to a 2″ spine split. Staples may be degraded, replaced or missing. Moderate staple tears and stress lines may be present, as well as rust migration. Paper is brown but not brittle. Centerfold may be loose or detached. Moderate interior tears may be present. 1.8 GOOD- (GD-): Fits the criteria for Good but with an additional defect or small accumulation of defects that detracts from the book’s appearance by a perceptible amount. 1.5 FAIR/GOOD (FR/GD): Shows substantial to heavy wear. Books in this grade are commonly creased, scuffed, abraded, soiled, and possibly unattractive, but still generally readable. Cover shows considerable wear and may be detached. Almost no cover reflectivity remaining. Book-length creases, tears and folds may be present. Rounded corners are increasingly common. Soiling, staining, discoloration and foxing is generally present. Up to 1/10 of the back cover may be missing. Tape and other forms of amateur repair are increasingly common in Silver Age and older books. Spine roll is common. May have a spine split between 2″ and 2/3 the length of the book. Staples may be degraded, replaced or missing. Staple tears and stress lines are common, as well as rust migration. Paper is brown and may show brittleness around the edges. Acidic odor may be present. Centerfold may be loose or detached. Interior tears are common. 1.0 FAIR (FR): Shows heavy wear. Some collectors consider this the lowest collectible grade because comic books in lesser condition are usually incomplete and/or brittle. Cover may be detached, and inks have lost all reflectivity. Creases, tears and/or folds are prevalent. Corners are commonly rounded or absent. Soiling and staining is present. Books in this condition generally have all pages and most of the covers, although there may be up to 1/4 of the front cover missing or no back cover, but not both. Tape and other forms of amateur repair are more common. Spine roll is more common; spine split can extend up to 2/3 the length of the book. Staples may be missing or show rust and discoloration. An accumulation of staple tears and stress lines may be present, as well as rust migration. Paper is brown and may show brittleness around the edges but not in the central portion of the pages. Acidic odor may be present. Accumulation of interior tears. Chunks may be missing. The centerfold may be missing if readability is generally preserved. Coupons may be cut.
  20. There isn't. Yet, the other two companies and Overstreet are able to accomplish it. This is an example from another site : "9.6 NEAR MINT+ (NM+):Nearly perfect with a minor additional virtue or virtues that raise it from Near Mint. Only subtle bindery or printing defects are allowed. No bindery tears are allowed, although on Golden Age books bindery tears of up to 1/8″ have been noted. Cover is flat with no surface wear. Inks are bright with high reflectivity and a minimum of fading. One corner may be almost imperceptibly blunted, but still almost sharp and cut square. Almost imperceptible indentations are permissible, but no creases, bends, or color break. Small, inconspicuous, lightly penciled, stamped or inked arrival dates are acceptable as long as they are in an unobtrusive location. Spine is tight and flat. Staples must be original, generally centered, with only the slightest discoloration. Paper is off-white, supple and fresh. Only the slightest interior tears are allowed." Compare that to the new CGC Grading Scale: "NM+ 9.6 A very well-preserved collectible with several minor manufacturing or handling defects." If you don't see a difference in that, I'm not sure how to explain my complaint to you. Like I said, this scale is so generic it could be applied to ANY collectible word for word!!! It almost makes me think that CGC is going to branch out and start encapsulating other forms of collectibles. Why else would you word it so generically?
  21. Well, actually I can. LOL!!! Any other company in any kind of grading business (coins, stamps, etc) will give you some sort of idea of their grading guidelines. They are usually parallel to accepted standards withing that community. This is not "propriety information". What they use to grade, the materials they use, their process of encapsulation, security features, etc, those are all propriety information items. Grading guidelines were established LONG before CGC came on the scene, they just converted it to a numerical scale. Honestly, I just see this as a slap in the face to the comic collecting community. No longer are they saying that they are grading by generally accepted standards. Now, they are basically saying that they are able to call the shots and decide what effect defects have on a book. They get to decide what a minor or a major defect is. Hell, they don't even mention cover, spine, paper ... NOTHING comic book related in the new grading scale!!! You could take this grading scale and use it for Funko Pops!!!! If you love this hobby, you should feel insulted by this!!!
  22. @newshane Cool!! Seriously, these are grading guidelines. Overstreet has a published set of guidelines. Voldy has a published set of guidelines. And honestly, that Seattle outfit has probably the best published guidelines that I've seen. Grading guidelines are supposed to be generally accepted community standards. I understand that there are things that cannot be quantified and I'm not asking for every scenario, but CGC doesn't even try with these guidelines!! They are vague in the extreme!!! There should be some kind of guidelines to go by. What if they decided that color touch was not restoration? Or, less extreme, that a 9.8 could have up to a 1/4" tear? I'd want to know that before submitting. And yes, I totally agree that there have been swings in consistency and that is why this bothers me. We, as consumers, now have no way of disagreeing over a grade with CGC because they are not stating what their guidelines are. Grading guidelines are just that - guidelines. I just want to have some idea where CGC stands on some things and now I have no clue. Are date stamps and markings now going to take a harder hit? Is a missing Marvel stamp now overlooked? What is the max grade a comic can get with the digital code used? There is nothing now to guide people as to how CGC sees these. There is less accountability on their part with these vague descriptions. It is not a good thing for us as consumers. As for mirroring Overstreet word for word - that is what they did for over 19 years!!! They had the Overstreet guide on their website with a disclaimer that they do not follow all the guidelines. This all changed at some point in the last six months (approximately). It wasn't ideal, but it was better than what they have now!!!
  23. Oh, I understand. I just found it hilarious that you took my comment to the extreme. I meant that cult comment as a reference to keeping things secret (like Coca-cola does with its' recipe). In no way was I inferring that CGC was a cult. I could have easily said that the Pentagon keeps secrets also. Would that make CGC a military installation?? I don't think so.
  24. Well, they sure aren't Coca-cola!!!!