Tri-Color Brian Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 OK, I will just refer to the PM for the answer...which I just got via PM... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Back to good news. Purchased raw on eBay as a VG+. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ltpink2002 Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Congrats on the books! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Congrats on the books! Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Roberts Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 This was sold to me raw as an unrestored FN/VF by ... guess who? (Hint: Not Richie M.) I would like to know who wouldn't take the book back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robot Man Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Just back from a prolonged vacation in sunnier climes. Happy with the grade, although I thought it had a chance to go higher. Very nice book. Would the mis-wrap on the right side be the cause? I hear that is not much of a factor to CGC. I don't know how a perfectly centered copy and one with a mis-cut/wrap could get the same grade. I have seen that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tri-Color Brian Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) This was sold to me raw as an unrestored FN/VF by ... guess who? (Hint: Not Richie M.) I would like to know who wouldn't take the book back. From what I understand, the return was not pursued due to the perceived "hassle" it would entail and the seller's reputation for, uh...certain delays and problems due to a financial situation...If that is wrong, Sqeggs can correct me... Anyway, all dealers screw up once in awhile, and I doubt the resto was even known to the guy that sold Sqeggs that book... Edited November 20, 2015 by tricolorbrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Just back from a prolonged vacation in sunnier climes. Happy with the grade, although I thought it had a chance to go higher. Very nice book. Would the mis-wrap on the right side be the cause? I hear that is not much of a factor to CGC. I don't know how a perfectly centered copy and one with a mis-cut/wrap could get the same grade. I have seen that. I think outside of the highest grades, CGC goes easy on so-called production defects, of which St Johns have more than their share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 This was sold to me raw as an unrestored FN/VF by ... guess who? (Hint: Not Richie M.) I would like to know who wouldn't take the book back. From what I understand, the return was not pursued due to the perceived "hassle" it would entail and the seller's reputation for, uh...certain delays and problems due to a financial situation...If that is wrong, Sqeggs can correct me... Anyway, all dealers screw up once in awhile, and I doubt the resto was even known to the guy that sold Sqeggs that book... May well be. Given the dollar amount involved and the possibility of a hassle with the dealer, I figure I'll just eat the loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 This was sold to me raw as an unrestored FN/VF by ... guess who? (Hint: Not Richie M.) I would like to know who wouldn't take the book back. If I had bought if from you, I would have sent it back pronto! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tri-Color Brian Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 It seems to me that sealing a tear should not be considered resto. A piece of tape on a tear inside a book or even on the cover is not considered Resto, so why should a sealed tear be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 It seems to me that sealing a tear should not be considered resto. A piece of tape on a tear inside a book or even on the cover is not considered Resto, so why should a sealed tear be? I guess the fact that it has the C designation indicates that they considered it to have been done in an amateur way -- not with rice paper or something else easily reversible. At least, that's my interpretation of the new restored/conserved rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tri-Color Brian Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) It seems to me that sealing a tear should not be considered resto. A piece of tape on a tear inside a book or even on the cover is not considered Resto, so why should a sealed tear be? I guess the fact that it has the C designation indicates that they considered it to have been done in an amateur way -- not with rice paper or something else easily reversible. At least, that's my interpretation of the new restored/conserved rules. My point was...a sealed tear, no matter how it was done, shouldn't be considered resto or conservation. It should just knock the grade down a little like any book with tape on it... Who wrote those rules anyway? Someone without any common sense? Edited November 20, 2015 by tricolorbrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 It seems to me that sealing a tear should not be considered resto. A piece of tape on a tear inside a book or even on the cover is not considered Resto, so why should a sealed tear be? I guess the fact that it has the C designation indicates that they considered it to have been done in an amateur way -- not with rice paper or something else easily reversible. At least, that's my interpretation of the new restored/conserved rules. My point was...a sealed tear, no matter how it was done, shouldn't be considered resto or conservation. It should just knock the grade down a little like any book with tape on it... Who wrote those rules anyway? Someone without any common sense? Yeah, I know. The rules have become like figuring out what constitutes a catch in the NFL these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tri-Color Brian Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Or trying to figure out a Chinese food menu...now let's see, which item did I get free eggroll with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjpb Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 It seems to me that sealing a tear should not be considered resto. A piece of tape on a tear inside a book or even on the cover is not considered Resto, so why should a sealed tear be? I guess the fact that it has the C designation indicates that they considered it to have been done in an amateur way -- not with rice paper or something else easily reversible. At least, that's my interpretation of the new restored/conserved rules. My point was...a sealed tear, no matter how it was done, shouldn't be considered resto or conservation. It should just knock the grade down a little like any book with tape on it... Who wrote those rules anyway? Someone without any common sense? Restoration, conservation, preservation, these are just semantics. While the purple label adds stigma for those who like their books slabbed, a tear seal really shouldn't be that big a deal in mid grade and lower books. Unless the tear is big enough it wouldn't be considered a 6.0, it's a bizarre aspect of this hobby that folks would far prefer the tear to be untouched with the risk of getting larger, than sealed for preservation. Still, because of the negative reputation of such work, it should always be disclosed if known, and I'm a firm believer that books not inspected personally before purchase should always be returnable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tri-Color Brian Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Just to keep the argument going...why should it matter if a tear is sealed, or a small piece of tape exists, or god forbid, an invisible piece of rice paper on the inside staple area? I can't see the rice paper, and I would just lower the grade for the tape or tear seals. I see no reason to call any of that "restored" or "conserved". To me, and many others, the term restoration should be reserved for books that have new, significant pieces added or significant color touch or re-wording on the covers or interior pages. What we refer to as Moderate and Extensive restoration should be the only categories to get a PLOD. A little glue or rice paper is not resto...it's a tiny fix. It should lower the grade by whatever proportion of the book it affects, and nothing more. The way it is defined today is just strange... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Roberts Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 This was sold to me raw as an unrestored FN/VF by ... guess who? (Hint: Not Richie M.) I would like to know who wouldn't take the book back. If I had bought if from you, I would have sent it back pronto! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Bought this on the boards as a GD/VG. In a three way tie for second highest graded (behind a 7.5). The White pages is pretty unusual for a St John book, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 One of my favorite Baker covers. Bought raw as a 6.0. Tied for lowest graded (out of seven). White pages a plus, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
