• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

November 2017 Heritage Signature Auction- some beautiful SIlver books
1 1

Started by drdonaldblake1,

37 posts in this topic

lou_fine

lou_fine

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, kimik said:

Just looking at the Avengers #4 and JIM #83, I hope the bidders are buying the books and not the label as both look overgraded. I am hearing from others that CGC has tightened things up recently, so I guess that some of these books were graded before that? lol

From the serial number, it would appear that this copy of Avengers 4 was graded back in June of 2017 while the JIM 83 was graded back in April of 2017.

I believe they had tightened up, at least from a GA point of view, back around the middle of 2016.  Then I saw some rather less tightly graded non-GA books graded at the end of 2016 and the start of 2017.  So, maybe it's just more of an inconsistency issue or different grading teams being used to grade the different time periods.  (shrug)

After all, as they clearly state in their CGC Comics Guarantee, the assigned grade represents only their subjective opinion and is not guaranteed, and as we all know, grading is really more of an art as opposed to an exact science.  hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kimik

kimik

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, VintageComics said:

I had an X-men #2 CGC 9.2 in my personal collection years ago that had 5 or 6 spine stresses on the spine. This one seems nicer.

It all depends on how the rest of the book looks and feel sin hand.  I've seen stronger 9.4 copies but I think 8.5 is a little

If it's the same book, this book appeared at a Con a couple of years ago raw. It was pretty white in hand and really nice.

You can't blow up pictures to max size and scrutinize the defects and accurately assess the grade because the book is not that size in real life (and nor are the defects). At arms length those defects look very differently than they do magnified on a digital device.

To me the book looks like a pretty nice example of a CGC 9.6

The FF #1 9.0 looks nicer than the JIM #83 CGC 9.4. Even looking at a small scan there is no way that is a 9.4 with all of the spine creases, edge wear, and creasing upper mid right side of the front cover. If it was not a big SA Marvel key, it would be an 8.5. 

The Avengers #4 CGC 9.6 has multiple color breaking creases bottom of the spine on both the front and back covers that are visible in the small scan. A 9.6 book should not have that at all no matter how nice the rest of it looks. That being said, I subbed an IM #55 a couple of years ago for my LCS owner that came back as a 9.6 with even more spine dings than this so I am not surprised. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kimik

kimik

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, LordRahl said:

So Voldy graded the JIM 83 a 9.6 and then CGC regraded it a 9.4 and people still think that the CGC grade is a "gift"? What was Voldy's grade then? 

It is not a 9.4, hence the gift grade. I have seen strict 8.0s that look better over the years. 

Edited by kimik
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lou_fine

lou_fine

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, batman_fan said:
6 hours ago, LordRahl said:

So Voldy graded the JIM 83 a 9.6 and then CGC regraded it a 9.4 and people still think that the CGC grade is a "gift"? What was Voldy's grade then? 

A powerball win !

Are people really still paying silly money for the label as opposed to the book itself in this day and age where grading inconsistency is apparently so prevalent and rampant out there?  hm  doh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
namisgr

namisgr

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/17/2017 at 1:49 AM, lou_fine said:

Are people really still paying silly money for the label as opposed to the book itself in this day and age where grading inconsistency is apparently so prevalent and rampant out there?  hm  doh!

I think there are, not unexpectedly, significant differences of opinion on the technical grades of some of these books.  As not everyone agrees on what grade the JIM 83 or Avengers 4 is, it's not clear whether any 'grading inconsistency' is involved here.

I, for one, think both books look great, and if I were a deep-pocketed SA Marvel collector I'd be looking seriously at bidding on both books.  Especially that JIM 83, which is just a sensational copy to my eye.

Edited by namisgr
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted

Over the years there has been plenty of complaining about grades from certification services and some of it IMO is warranted and some isn't.

People expect a 9.4 book to be perfect. It isn't. You can have a variety of defects on a 9.4 book depending on how deep, long, prominent and distracting they are.

Those defects can range from corner creases to spine stresses , to tears, small pre chips, etc (or an accumulation of them - yes, even on NM range books)

Comparing a scan of a 9.4 to a scan of an 8.5 is also not a valid indicator. You can have an 8.5 book that looks like it's a 9.8 but a water stain on the inside keeps the grade down - and yet people will swear the book is undergraded.

Most of the talk of how a book is drastically over graded is based on people looking at digital scans on a digital screen.  Digital scans can be deceptive - just read up on all the grading contests here. People call 9.4 books 7.5 and visa versa. Why? Because in the process of converting an image into binary code, digital scans can introduce defects (or hide) that are not actually on the books themselves.

Meanwhile the book has passed through the hands of several experienced graders.

The real test to me personally is how I would personally grade a book if it was mine and then sending the book off to CGC to see if it gets the same grade. After studying CGC grades for about 15 years I think I have a pretty good handle on how CGC grades and my accuracy percentage is pretty high (just check my kudos thread for raw book sales. :D )

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Icculus308win

Icculus308win

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/16/2017 at 1:45 PM, Gotham Kid said:

HA has a MUCH larger bidding pool, more marketing, more reach etc. Also, less suspicion of shill bidding (given priors) if his stuff is listed elsewhere than in-house.

If I were him or anybody with those tier of books - I'd use Heritage hands down.

(And I've never consigned a thing with them, just purchases)

Edited by Icculus308win
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheFifthHorseman

TheFifthHorseman

Posted
Posted
On 8/16/2017 at 4:52 PM, VintageComics said:

You can't blow up pictures to max size and scrutinize the defects and accurately assess the grade because the book is not that size in real life (and nor are the defects). At arms length those defects look very differently than they do magnified on a digital device.

EXCELLENT advice.

I'll have to keep this in mind - I tend to "zoom & examine" quite often. We're buying books, not pictures.

Judging from your post count you've been here since the dawn of time. You have my undivided attention

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1koko

1koko

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, TheFifthHorseman said:

EXCELLENT advice.

I'll have to keep this in mind - I tend to "zoom & examine" quite often. We're buying books, not pictures.

Judging from your post count you've been here since the dawn of time. You have my undivided attention

He just talks a lot :baiting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimjum12

jimjum12

Posted
Posted
On ‎8‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 9:01 AM, namisgr said:

I think there are, not unexpectedly, significant differences of opinion on the technical grades of some of these books.  As not everyone agrees on what grade the JIM 83 or Avengers 4 is, it's not clear whether any 'grading inconsistency' is involved here.

I, for one, think both books look great, and if I were a deep-pocketed SA Marvel collector I'd be looking seriously at bidding on both books.  Especially that JIM 83, which is just a sensational copy to my eye.

Not sure when it happened exactly..... but the expectation that a NM book should be perfect seems to be a common misconception these days. The color, gloss, and suppleness of the JIM 83 are off the charts.....I would much prefer that to a dull, dry copy that has slight technical superiority... but that's just me. Call me the devil's advocate, but an 8.0 that looks like that book would be criminally undergraded 2c GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)(thumbsu

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
On 8/20/2017 at 5:38 AM, jimjum12 said:

Not sure when it happened exactly..... but the expectation that a NM book should be perfect seems to be a common misconception these days. The color, gloss, and suppleness of the JIM 83 are off the charts.....I would much prefer that to a dull, dry copy that has slight technical superiority... but that's just me. Call me the devil's advocate, but an 8.0 that looks like that book would be criminally undergraded 2c GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)(thumbsu

And that's another factor that doesn't come across in a scan.

When a book feels and smells like it's brand new, that it can add to the grade because it adds appeal to the book.

The grade is not just about technical defects but also factors in things that you can't see or feel through a scan or a slab.

So if you have a tweener that little extra might be just enough for a grader to think it's a nicer book on a given day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
On 8/20/2017 at 5:38 AM, jimjum12 said:

Not sure when it happened exactly..... but the expectation that a NM book should be perfect seems to be a common misconception these days. The color, gloss, and suppleness of the JIM 83 are off the charts.....I would much prefer that to a dull, dry copy that has slight technical superiority... but that's just me. Call me the devil's advocate, but an 8.0 that looks like that book would be criminally undergraded 2c GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)(thumbsu

Aaahhh - whadda you know...:foryou:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, VintageComics said:

And that's another factor that doesn't come across in a scan.

When a book feels and smells like it's brand new, that it can add to the grade because it adds appeal to the book.

The grade is not just about technical defects but also factors in things that you can't see or feel through a scan or a slab.

So if you have a tweener that little extra might be just enough for a grader to think it's a nicer book on a given day.

Same goes for you... :foryou:

Link to comment
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
1 1
Go to topic listing