Market is Insane 5 5

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 hour ago, paperheart said:

that is insane. who would pay $40 for a 9.6 modern? those seeking "lowest graded on the census?"

May have been a modest figure...

[RockMyAmadeus]

6 hours ago, jcjames said:

7 hours ago, Robot Man said:

It’s all about ego and bragging rights. I would be willing to bet most people couldn’t tell the difference between a 9.6 and a 9.8 out of the slab. CGC is making a killing off our egos. 

I like raw books in the 7-9 range. Books I can actually read and present great. I couldn’t care less what others think and my wallet is a lot happier...

I remember I got slammed on the boards a few years ago for saying the exact same thing.

9.8ists insisted there were clear and obvious distinctions between the two IF you knew what you were doing as far as grading.

Who would slam you for saying something that's true? Most people can't tell you the difference between a 9.6 and a 9.8 out of the slab.

There are clear and obvious distinctions between a typical 9.6 and a typical 9.8, but since those grades are given to a wide swath of conditions, relatively speaking, even those that overlap, then yes, the difference between an undergraded CGC 9.6 and an overgraded CGC 9.8 can often be non-existent.

Most "9.8ists" on this board have agreed, too. Who were the cads who hurt you? Lemme know, and I'll rough 'em up a bit...

Edited June 4, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[MGsimba77]

3 hours ago, Black_Adam said:

I think the reason so many 9.8s have awful wraps is because that miswrapped white back cover (now on the front) hides any spine ticks that would have normally shown on a correctly-wrapped cover. I will never understand how perfect centering doesn't affect the grade of a comic like it does with nearly every other collectible...

 

Does CGC decide that a spine tick is not there or is less significant because it happens to be over a white miswrap? I think the grading standards are the same regardless of how the book is wrapped.

There's an argument to be made over eye appeal factoring in to 9.8s but then the graders would risk subjectivity pitfalls imo. Grading would become less cohesive. How would they grade a book that's mostly centered only having a very thin white border? Do they start using centimeters to measure the miswrap?

The market has already weighed in on eye appeal by putting a premium on it. BTW If you were right on the spine ticks then my IH181 along with a host of others would be 9.8s.

Eye appeal only becomes a factor when they get into 9.9 & 10

[MGsimba77]

20 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Who would slam you for saying something that's true? Most people can't tell you the difference between a 9.6 and a 9.8 out of the slab.

There are clear and obvious distinctions between a typical 9.6 and a typical 9.8, but since those grades are given to a wide swath of conditions, relatively speaking, even those that overlap, then yes, the difference between an undergraded CGC 9.6 and an overgraded CGC 9.8 can often be non-existent.

Most "9.8ists" on this board have agreed, too. Who were the cads who hurt you? Lemme know, and I'll rough 'em up a bit...

I'll give you an example.

I just crossed over an ASM 148 that came back a 9.6 after getting it pressed. I've compared it to a number of 9.8s I have. The only difference being four spine stress lines on the back spine only visible with magnification. I've seen the same book in 9.8 with minor edge wear or having a little more color break on the front spine than my 9.6. Yes there are plenty of strict 9.6s that are indistinguishable to 9.8 with the naked eye and others less so. There's wiggle room with 9.6s

[DavidTheDavid]

36 minutes ago, MGsimba77 said:

I'll give you an example.

I just crossed over an ASM 148 that came back a 9.6 after getting it pressed. I've compared it to a number of 9.8s I have. The only difference being four spine stress lines on the back spine only visible with magnification. I've seen the same book in 9.8 with minor edge wear or having a little more color break on the front spine than my 9.6. Yes there are plenty of strict 9.6s that are indistinguishable to 9.8 with the naked eye and others less so. There's wiggle room with 9.6s

What about the wrap? Or an eye appeal factor like gloss? Production flaw anywhere? 

[MGsimba77]

10 minutes ago, DavidTheDavid said:

What about the wrap? Or an eye appeal factor like gloss? Production flaw anywhere? 

Well everything regarding eye appeal you mentioned is fine. Nothing that wouldn't compare to a 9.8. Staples back cover are fine. I don't really see any production flaw that wouldn't be acceptable on a 9.8. Besides I don't believe production flaws like small bindery tears are considered but I'm not entirely sure on that. I'm just using this as an example to underscore Amadeus's point . Like I said there's wiggle room with both 9.8 & 9.6

[Robot Man]

8 hours ago, TwoPiece said:

Now I'm trying to figure out if the TOS #39 9.4 on eBay is legitimately White PQ.

How would you know in a slab? Heck it could even have white blank pages...

[RockMyAmadeus]

4 hours ago, Black_Adam said:

I think the reason so many 9.8s have awful wraps is because that miswrapped white back cover (now on the front) hides any spine ticks that would have normally shown on a correctly-wrapped cover. I will never understand how perfect centering doesn't affect the grade of a comic like it does with nearly every other collectible...

 

Because 1. comic books were mass-produced on giant machines by people who didn't care about quality of production, for 2. consumers that threw them away. 

Because there is so much variance in the quality of production, with wide tolerances in what was considered acceptable, especially prior to 1990, people who collect comics have been far, far more forgiving.

What CGC (and others) look for is the physical condition of the paper in their hands, rather than the orientation of the images on that paper...to an extent. That's why out of registration, miscut, all sorts of printing calibration sloppiness is functionally ignored. 

Baseball cards are easy. You have essentially a 2-dimension 2.5" by 3.5" piece of cardboard. It should be perfectly centered, and most of them were, because card buyers would have rejected any sort of severe variances. Comic buyers, on the other hand, had to deal with a 3-dimensional, multi-paged pamphlet that was, generally, 6.5" by 10", which left a lot more room for variance. Off-center is essentially the rule for comics, not the exception, especially for pre-1980 books.

For example: you will never find a well-centered Marvel Team-Up #33. They don't exist. But you CAN find a copy that doesn't exhibit any wear to the paper, and that's the important part. Because of that, the grading philosophy is "what is the physical condition of the actual paper?" rather than "how well was this made?" Eye appeal IS considered...it just doesn't have much bearing on the overall grade.

[Robot Man]

7 hours ago, TwoPiece said:

Aren't these market practices going to kill the hobby, too? I feel like that's a legitimate concern with excessive inflation. Sure, some people will cash-out high, but it's gotta crash at some point when you can't sell a book for ages, right..?

Either it moves to a rich man-only's hobby or kills enthusiasm for single-comic buyer's.

I'm no expert in economics, but I can't see this trend continuing. I know; A billion people have predicted another crash. The world's going to end some time, though, and that hobo on the corner will be right some day.

This hobo has been saying it for 45 years. Up to now, I’ve been wrong. I do see corrections and resistance. Those with easy to get books in 9.8 will be left holding the bag...

[SBRobin]

7 hours ago, TwoPiece said:

Because I typically agree with CGC's assessment, and would prefer the higher grade book if it wasn't ridiculously priced...

Hence the premise of the thread...

Everyone prefers the higher grade book, hence the reason for the price. Supply and demand.

[DavidTheDavid]

25 minutes ago, MGsimba77 said:

Well everything regarding eye appeal you mentioned is fine. Nothing that wouldn't compare to a 9.8. Staples back cover are fine. I don't really see any production flaw that wouldn't be acceptable on a 9.8. Besides I don't believe production flaws like small bindery tears are considered but I'm not entirely sure on that. I'm just using this as an example to underscore Amadeus's point . Like I said there's wiggle room with both 9.8 & 9.6

Well, I see a crack. Right there between Spidey's legs.

Sorry. That wasn't even clever.  

[Mercury Man]

I still say nobody can show me the difference between a 9.8 and a 9.9.  

Or a 9.9 and a 10.0 for that matter. 

You can run yourself into a nervous wreck in this hobby.  

[DavidTheDavid]

2 minutes ago, Mercury Man said:

I still say nobody can show me the difference between a 9.8 and a 9.9.  

Or a 9.9 and a 10.0 for that matter. 

You can run yourself into a nervous wreck in this hobby.  

All CGC needs is a standard called something vaguely quantifiable at best, something like, I dunno, eye appeal. Then they can grade things whatever the heck they want.

[Mercury Man]

1 minute ago, DavidTheDavid said:

All CGC needs is a standard called something vaguely quantifiable at best, something like, I dunno, eye appeal. Then they can grade things whatever the heck they want.

It's pretty silly.   I still don't see the need for 9.9, let alone 9.8, 9.6., 9.4, 9.2.    They should have just had 10, 9.5, 9, 8.5, 8, 7.5, 7, etc.  Make life much easier for collectors.   No need to complicate the 9's.  

[Kon_Jelly]

12 minutes ago, Mercury Man said:

It's pretty silly.   I still don't see the need for 9.9, let alone 9.8, 9.6., 9.4, 9.2.    They should have just had 10, 9.5, 9, 8.5, 8, 7.5, 7, etc.  Make life much easier for collectors.   No need to complicate the 9's.  

100% this. 

[lizards2]

6 hours ago, grebal said:

I've been a fan (marvel comics reader) since childhood.

Peaked at Civil War - thought died and gone to heaven.  Don't think seen any superhero since except Deadpool 2. Oh, and Venom on 'cable.'

Haven't seen Infinity War or Endgame yet.  Just saw Aquaman and Black Panther on airplane (one each going and coming).  Oh!, and Ant Man and Wasp last month on cable too.  Guess I'm getting old.

I haven't seen any of those.  

[Von Cichlid]

1 hour ago, Mercury Man said:

I still say nobody can show me the difference between a 9.8 and a 9.9.  

Or a 9.9 and a 10.0 for that matter. 

You can run yourself into a nervous wreck in this hobby.  

That is for sure.  I've been back into collecting for 3 years now and as much as I try to fight it, my OCD nature takes over more than I would like it to.  Every so often I will get an excellent copy of an old book, excellent gloss and white pages, basically looking like the day it was printed.  Instead of being happy with that, it sometimes has this effect of me going back to other issues I had from before that I was previously happy with and I begin to see flaws in them that I was not aware of before.  I guess it is just human nature that we spend so much time obsessing over what we don't have as opposed to appreciating what we do have.  

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 hours ago, Kon_Jelly said:

3 hours ago, Mercury Man said:

It's pretty silly.   I still don't see the need for 9.9, let alone 9.8, 9.6., 9.4, 9.2.    They should have just had 10, 9.5, 9, 8.5, 8, 7.5, 7, etc.  Make life much easier for collectors.   No need to complicate the 9's.  

100% this. 

1980 called...you know the rest.  That genie was let out of the bottle long ago. Buyers want....and will pay for...those differences. GPA is filled with examples. And yes, the difference between 9.8, 9.9, and 10 is demonstrable. Most people don't care, and that's fine...but for those that do, that's why they exist.

[MGsimba77]

2 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

1980 called...you know the rest.  That genie was let out of the bottle long ago. Buyers want....and will pay for...those differences. GPA is filled with examples. And yes, the difference between 9.8, 9.9, and 10 is demonstrable. Most people don't care, and that's fine...but for those that do, that's why they exist.

Just out of curiosity what's an example of a difference between a clean 9.8 and a 9.9 besides centering? Would it be lack of staple tears? Position of the staples, color depth?

Edited June 5, 2019 by MGsimba77

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 minutes ago, MGsimba77 said:

Just out of curiosity what's an example of a difference between a clean 9.8 and a 9.9 besides centering? Would it be lack of staple tears? Position of the staples, color depth?

Mostly at the top and bottom of the spine. Bindery tears? Forget it. If there's not a complete semi-circle, front to back, of unbroken paper, it's not going to be a 9.9.