The Pre-Robin Tec Club
17 17

4,731 posts in this topic

On 2/9/2021 at 4:06 PM, Hoarder said:

Hi, do you have the link to the eBay listing?  I can’t read what the .5 listing says.   Why is it a .5?

I believe you got the answer to your question right in the next post after you asked your question above:  (thumbsu

On 2/9/2021 at 4:52 PM, D84 said:

I don't have a link to the listing, but it was missing the back cover.

As I have mentioned before, not even sure why CGC uses this .5 Poor grade for the book since its overall condition level, save for the missing back cover and hnece considered to be Incomplete, is clearly higher than a true Poor condition level book.  :facepalm:

This .5 label actually impart zero information to the owner and any potential bidders as to the actual condition of the underlying book itself.  Not sure why CGC did not use their Green Qualified label for the missing back cover and then gave a proper grade to the rest of the book save for the missing back cover since this is the ideal time to be using their Qualified label here.  doh!  :makepoint:

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lou_fine said:

I believe you got the answer to your question right in the next post after you asked your question above:  (thumbsu

As I have mentioned before, not even sure why CGC uses this .5 Poor grade for the book since its overall condition level, save for the missing back cover and hnece considered to be Incomplete, is clearly higher than a true Poor condition level book.  :facepalm:

This .5 label actually impart zero information to the owner and any potential bidders as to the actual condition of the underlying book itself.  Not sure why CGC did not use their Green Qualified label for the missing back cover and then gave a proper grade to the rest of the book save for the missing back cover since this is the ideal time to be using their Qualified label here.  doh!  :makepoint:

Could have been at the request of the owner if given the choice or made the request as preference was blue label 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chicago Boy said:

Could have been at the request of the owner if given the choice or made the request as preference was blue label 

Yeah, not sure if slabbing a book at the lowest CGC Universal grade possible just to get it slabbed with a blue label is going to help with the pricing of the book in the end.  (shrug)

At this lowest possible grading bar, the owner might just do better leaving it as a raw book denoting the missing back cover and hope the much better than Poor looking front cover is enough to entice potential buyers to bid higher on the book than if it was just sitting in a 0.5 Poor slab.  hm  (shrug)

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, lou_fine said:

Yeah, not sure if slabbing a book at the lowest CGC Universal grade possible just to get it slabbed with a blue label is going to help with the pricing of the book in the end.  (shrug)

At this lowest possible grading bar, the owner might just do better leaving it as a raw book denoting the missing back cover and hope the much better than Poor looking front cover is enough to entice potential buyers to bid higher on the book than if it was just sitting in a 0.5 Poor slab.  hm  (shrug)

I definitely understand and agree with many of your points but come down on the side of the low grade blue label over a green label. As far as leaving it raw your probably right for how much money you can clear selling.  Again though I agree with slabbing. The restoration check and ease of selling slabbed is worth whatever money I’m leaving on the table. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ThothAmon said:

I definitely understand and agree with many of your points but come down on the side of the low grade blue label over a green label.

Personally, if I had a high grade GA book with a clipped coupon for example, I would definitely prefer it to be in a Green Qualified slab with say a CGC 9.0 label :luhv: , as opposed to simply having a blue CGC 0.5 slab labeled as Incomplete which really tells me zippo about the actual condition of the underlying book itself.  :p

Not sure about the reason for your aversion to a Green label, but then again, I guess it's really a case of to each their own.  (thumbsu

Link to post
Share on other sites

The  spine adjustment sure does make it difficult to appreciated the detached cover and spine split, but the front of the book does present much better.  Interestingly, the "detached cover" notation is no long present on the 1.5 and 1.8 grades, but now there's tape.  

Here's the back cover of the 1.8 

 

image.thumb.png.0f95787e32156c417852c6b348c75172.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gotham Kid said:

In case anyone is considering the Tec31 1.8 listed on CC/Metro

Well, looks like nice steady progression here.  :applause:

Is this a good sign for potential buyers since this could just be another step on the book's steady climb upwards on the grading ladder?  :devil:

Do we need to cue @tth2 at this point here so that he can provide us with his signature line now?  lol

Edited by lou_fine
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gotham Kid said:

Capture.thumb.PNG.f94d455ca0740097d071aeda23c42dfa.PNG

Oh wow........................that would certainly appear to be a very strong and possible record price on the 'Tec 30 for that grade, especially considering there's no Batman on that cover.  :whatthe:  :applause:

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2021 at 6:41 AM, Gotham Kid said:

In case anyone is considering the Tec31 1.8 listed on CC/Metro

Before

det1.15795a.jpg

 

Then

21936627%5D&call=url%5Bfile:product.chai

 

Now

det1.18379.jpg

Special note on spine "improvement"  @tth2

 

 

@Matt G Matt, the below registry number is still valid. Please remove it and update CGC census for Detective 31.

https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/0701974001/

Much appreciated.

Thanks for showing the progression. I actually went and looked at this book in person at Metropolis (the asking price was a little too much for me). I knew it had a slight bump from 1.5 to 1.8 when I did my own research but did not know there was also a 1.0 previous state. 

It's unfortunate that tape was added between the 1.0 and the 1.5 version. I wonder if that was done to take advantage of CGC's pre-2013 previous stance on tape? 

I'm also confused that the detached cover notation is missing from the 1.8 (even if it is re-attached with tape). Is this the standard policy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2021 at 6:41 AM, Gotham Kid said:

In case anyone is considering the Tec31 1.8 listed on CC/Metro

Before

det1.15795a.jpg

 

Then

21936627%5D&call=url%5Bfile:product.chai

 

Now

det1.18379.jpg

Special note on spine "improvement"  @tth2

 

 

@Matt G Matt, the below registry number is still valid. Please remove it and update CGC census for Detective 31.

https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/0701974001/

Much appreciated.

Nice Detective work. Like others have said - 'Cover detached' to 'Tape on interior cover". I assume the tape was used to re-attach the cover so that should say "Cover reattached with tape" or something similar. I'm probably missing something but it seems a little iffy to not note a detached cover or a reattached cover on the label. Wonder what the notes state.

Tape on interior cover, ok well its there now. Cover detached, oh well it happens. Still a nice 1.0. Cover reattached with tape, oh that stinks. I'd rather have a book like that with a detached cover than one reattached with tape.  I just always assumed that when a book says "Tape on interior cover" the tape was used to seal a tear or reattched a separated piece, but not to reattach a cover.

Edited by Professor Chaos
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Professor Chaos said:

Nice Detective work. Like others have said - 'Cover detached' to 'Tape on interior cover". I assume the tape was used to re-attach the cover so that should say "Cover reattached with tape" or something similar. I'm probably missing something but it seems a little iffy to not note a detached cover or a reattached cover on the label. Wonder what the notes state.

Tape on interior cover, ok well its there now. Cover detached, oh well it happens. Still a nice 1.0. Cover reattached with tape, oh that stinks. I'd rather have a book like that with a detached cover than one reattached with tape. 

I would rather have a slight resto book than a book taped up. I hate tape.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mr bla bla said:

I would rather have a slight resto book than a book taped up. I hate tape.

Agreed.  Good restoration would also not cause harm to the rest of the book it touches.  The same cannot be said of common tape.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
17 17