Pgm is this seriously a 9.8 0

[Kingkongcraig]

This is a store exclusive thing 

The bottom spine has similar 

It is double sized so not sure if it gets leway 

The rest looks great 

[jcjames]

Bindery tear, common printing defect during manufacture especially on thicker folded-spine issues.

CGC tends to overlook bindery tears when they are very common to a particular issue so, yeah 9.8.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2018 by jcjames

[Bomber-Bob]

23 minutes ago, jcjames said:

Bindery tear, common printing defect during manufacture especially on thicker folded-spine issues.

CGC tends to overlook bindery tears when they are very common to a particular issue so, yeah 9.8.

 

 

I agree. These double sized are problematic. However, IMO, it's still a flaw. I don't understand how the community is so accepting on some of these flaws in 9.8 . If you bought a new car would you be okay with a big dent because they said it came off the line like that ? Again, just my opinion. It's a 9.8 because the CGC label says so.

[jcjames]

9 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

I agree. These double sized are problematic. However, IMO, it's still a flaw. I don't understand how the community is so accepting on some of these flaws in 9.8 . If you bought a new car would you be okay with a big dent because they said it came off the line like that ? Again, just my opinion. It's a 9.8 because the CGC label says so.

To me it's more like the hood not being perfectly aligned, as is common on even spotless off-the-assembly-line cars.

Now if there were cb spine-creases (like in many dark cover issues) that came from handling after the books are assembled, this would make 9.8s hard to find (which they are in many dark-cover issues) and so that'd be more like the big dent in the new car analogy.

But if I had a choice between a 9.8 with bindery tears and 9.8 without, obviously the one without would be the one I'd want.

 

[Bomber-Bob]

29 minutes ago, jcjames said:

 

But if I had a choice between a 9.8 with bindery tears and 9.8 without, obviously the one without would be the one I'd want.

 

Since CGC is already giving the book with bindery tears a 9.8, how can they distinguish the ones they may see without the bindery tears ? The service CGC is providing should give the higher grade to the book that is in better condition. I know, buy the book and the not label, but most put their faith in CGC and simply look at the label. 

[Artboy99]

1 hour ago, jcjames said:

To me it's more like the hood not being perfectly aligned, as is common on even spotless off-the-assembly-line cars.

Now if there were cb spine-creases (like in many dark cover issues) that came from handling after the books are assembled, this would make 9.8s hard to find (which they are in many dark-cover issues) and so that'd be more like the big dent in the new car analogy.

But if I had a choice between a 9.8 with bindery tears and 9.8 without, obviously the one without would be the one I'd want.

 

the real question is:

if they print 10,000 copies of a book and 10 of them do not have any bindery tears but the other 9,990 do have them, is the bindery defect then always ignored when grading because for the most part the books always have them?

And furthermore: how does CGC know that the books with bindery defects will all have them? There may be copies out there that do not have this defect.

My opinion: when it arrives from the manufacturer with a defect it should always be considered in the grade. In other words all CGC 9.8 books should appear to look the same.

[jcjames]

18 minutes ago, Artboy99 said:

the real question is:

if they print 10,000 copies of a book and 10 of them do not have any bindery tears but the other 9,990 do have them, is the bindery defect then always ignored when grading because for the most part the books always have them?

And furthermore: how does CGC know that the books with bindery defects will all have them? There may be copies out there that do not have this defect.

My opinion: when it arrives from the manufacturer with a defect it should always be considered in the grade. In other words all CGC 9.8 books should appear to look the same.

A 9.9 and a 10 do not allow bindery tears do they?

So CGC does have a point at which the bindery defects do become "visible" to them and affect the grade. They just "allow" it in a 9.8, like they would one or two small spine-ticks.

[Artboy99]

20 minutes ago, jcjames said:

A 9.9 and a 10 do not allow bindery tears do they?

So CGC does have a point at which the bindery defects do become "visible" to them and affect the grade. They just "allow" it in a 9.8, like they would one or two small spine-ticks.

a CGC 9.8 should not have such a major defect as a bindery tear though. It also seems to only be allowed in books that are manufactured with lousy paper that tends to tear when folded.

So to me it appears they are picking and choosing when it is allowed.

[jcjames]

1 minute ago, Artboy99 said:

a CGC 9.8 should not have such a major defect as a bindery tear though. It also seems to only be allowed in books that are manufactured with lousy paper that tends to tear when folded.

So to me it appears they are picking and choosing when it is allowed.

Yeah, true. That does allow more 9.8s.

[Ride the Tiger]

To me they should use the same standard regardless of manufacturing defects. So they got messed up in production. Who cares. Its still a lower grade on any other book. Are you going to have a list of every comic book ever created and put on it "production flaws common for this issue"? Then the graders can look up and see if that book normally has a bindery tear? Thats crazy. The book is what it is. No more. No less. Grades should not have a different standard for every book. 1 standard. 1 grade. Peace out.