Heritage's Next Event Auction has started posting books ! 31 31

[lou_fine]

4 minutes ago, comicnoir said:

8 hours ago, lou_fine said:

  I guess the only way to tell for sure is for you to contact CL so that they can let the winner know you are willing to buy the book from them (at a higher price point of course ) so that you can crack it out of the slab and check it out for yourself.  

I'll let you do the heavy lifting on that one. Just worried my HG copy of GSX 1 gets the proper treatment when I send it in for it's inevitable clean and press before I cash out. Soon.

No problem at all............just PM me your unlimited Amex credit card or bank account details and I'll contact Josh for you first thing in the morning.  

Seriously though, I hope you are getting your clean and press done through CCS because if they do mess up which is quite possible, it's all in the family and they'll squint their eyes and give you your grade because you've already paid your dues in full.  

[comicnoir]

1 hour ago, lou_fine said:

No problem at all............just PM me your unlimited Amex credit card or bank account details and I'll contact Josh for you first thing in the morning.  

Seriously though, I hope you are getting your clean and press done through CCS because if they do mess up which is quite possible, it's all in the family and they'll squint their eyes and give you your grade because you've already paid your dues in full.  

I always get my comics mangled and cut corners at CCS. Not always a guaranteed grade, although if you complain they'll deny everything and do as you ask.

[sagii]

13 hours ago, adamstrange said:

 

Funny, when i posted the book earlier before its closing day, I didn't even notice the grade bump (maybe because it was in the new pedigree slab , so my eye didn't go to the number in the corner). 

Imaging that 

[lou_fine]

15 hours ago, Mmehdy said:

17 hours ago, adamstrange said:

It was for a tiny bump of .2 from 9.4 to 9.6.  Would the auction result have been much different if the book was unpressed?

possibly as 9.6 to me it is a serious upgrade from 9.4

Well, since we are doing comparisons here and the two of you certainly have a lot more experience in this hobby than me, can you point out the differences for this File Copy of Crackajack Funnies that warrants not a tiny bump of 0.2, but a more serious upgrade of 3 grade increments,

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/crackajack-funnies-9-file-copy-dell-1939-cgc-vf-nm-90-off-white-pages/a/830-91039.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

 

Or is this 3 incremental step upgrade due to a press job done properly since it was most likely done when Matt was still at CCS:  

 

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/crackajack-funnies-9-file-copy-dell-1939-cgc-nm-96-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7169-92033.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515#

 

My bad as this is really more of an increase of 4 grade increments as the 9.6 is no longer in the census and has been replace by a CGC 9.8 graded copy instead.  I guess my eyes must really be going since I just don't see enough diffferences between these 2 scans to warrant such a big difference in grading to go from a CGC 9.0 all the way up to a CGC 9.8, or was the initial grade incorrect in the first place?    

[Mmehdy]

2 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

Well, since we are doing comparisons here and the two of you certainly have a lot more experience in this hobby than me, can you point out the differences for this File Copy of Crackajack Funnies that warrants not a tiny bump of 0.2, but a more serious upgrade of 3 grade increments,

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/crackajack-funnies-9-file-copy-dell-1939-cgc-vf-nm-90-off-white-pages/a/830-91039.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

 

Or is this 3 incremental step upgrade due to a press job done properly since it was most likely done when Matt was still at CCS:  

 

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/crackajack-funnies-9-file-copy-dell-1939-cgc-nm-96-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7169-92033.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515#

 

My bad as this is really more of an increase of 4 grade increments as the 9.6 is no longer in the census and has been replace by a CGC 9.8 graded copy instead.  I guess my eyes must really be going since I just don't see enough diffferences between these 2 scans to warrant such a big difference in grading to go from a CGC 9.0 all the way up to a CGC 9.8, or was the initial grade incorrect in the first place?    

I think in terms of price...why the sudden rise to double...yes this is a hot market, but the upgraded number is significant in terms of it being one of highest if not highest graded copies which would make those price changes somewaht explainable.

[lou_fine]

8 minutes ago, Mmehdy said:

I think in terms of price...why the sudden rise to double...yes this is a hot market, but the upgraded number is significant in terms of it being one of highest if not highest graded copies which would make those price changes somewaht explainable.

Really much more interested in the visual or technical reasons for such a huge bump in grade from CGC 9.0 all the way up to CGC 9.8, as the increase in the price realized makes perfect sense due to the grade increase.  

Edited April 5, 2021 by lou_fine

[Mr. Lady Luck]

1 hour ago, lou_fine said:

Well, since we are doing comparisons here and the two of you certainly have a lot more experience in this hobby than me, can you point out the differences for this File Copy of Crackajack Funnies that warrants not a tiny bump of 0.2, but a more serious upgrade of 3 grade increments,

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/crackajack-funnies-9-file-copy-dell-1939-cgc-vf-nm-90-off-white-pages/a/830-91039.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

 

Or is this 3 incremental step upgrade due to a press job done properly since it was most likely done when Matt was still at CCS:  

 

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/crackajack-funnies-9-file-copy-dell-1939-cgc-nm-96-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7169-92033.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515#

 

My bad as this is really more of an increase of 4 grade increments as the 9.6 is no longer in the census and has been replace by a CGC 9.8 graded copy instead.  I guess my eyes must really be going since I just don't see enough diffferences between these 2 scans to warrant such a big difference in grading to go from a CGC 9.0 all the way up to a CGC 9.8, or was the initial grade incorrect in the first place?    

This grade bump is pathetic.

[buttock]

29 minutes ago, Mr. Lady Luck said:

This grade bump focus on insignificant, but correctable for a profit defects by CGC is pathetic.

FTFY.

[tth2]

9 hours ago, lou_fine said:

I guess my eyes must really be going since I just don't see enough diffferences between these 2 scans to warrant such a big difference in grading to go from a CGC 9.0 all the way up to a CGC 9.8, or was the initial grade incorrect in the first place?

Not that I'm defending pressing or resubbing in any way, but it kind of drives me nuts when you (and others on these boards) base a grade solely on a scan of a slabbed book.

Even when you're holding a comic in hand, you can't grade it accurately through a slab or through a mylar.  When you try to grade a scan of a slabbed book, you're now trying to grade something that is two steps removed from the real thing, plus the only thing you're looking at is the exterior of the cover.

[lou_fine]

19 hours ago, tth2 said:

Not that I'm defending pressing or resubbing in any way, but it kind of drives me nuts when you (and others on these boards) base a grade solely on a scan of a slabbed book.

Even when you're holding a comic in hand, you can't grade it accurately through a slab or through a mylar.  When you try to grade a scan of a slabbed book, you're now trying to grade something that is two steps removed from the real thing, plus the only thing you're looking at is the exterior of the cover.

Had a eerily sleepless night last night and I couldn't quite figure out why until I woke up this morning to find a rather surprising and significant disturbance in the Force within the comic book universe.    

It would appear that @tth2 who had lost his trademark scarasm for the love of this hobby just last week based upon his post a couple pages ago may at long last be moving from the side of light towards the side of darkness.  Especially since tiny miniscule upgrades of only 1 or 2 grade increments based upon only comic book scans used to upset his love for this hobby of ours, it would now seem that far larger upgrades of 3 or 4 grade increments is much less of an issue today as we now need to have the actual book in hand before we can really comment on the grade of a book.    

Seriously though, in full agreement with the fact that you cannot grade a book on its own from just a scan as you really need to have the book in hand to grade it properly.  The situation here though is that we are talking about the exact same book with what are obviously widely different grades since the first grade is CGC 9.0 and the final grade which we do not have a scan of is CGC 9.8.  Since the exterior covers appear pretty much the same to me at least, I am also in full agreement that the reason for the 4-step incrmental upgrade could be due to defects in the interior of the book.  Which then presents the question if interior defects are being "fixed" to this extent inside the book, wouldn't this type of work normally (depending upon the type of work) be considered to be either restoration or conservation at a minimum.    

Being a Dell File Copy from the late 30's and early 40's, I am quite confident that the interiors of these book are pretty much immaculate as they were properly stored, as opposed to those much later Harvey File Copies which were all just stored in a massive warehouse.  All I know is that the Dell File Copies from the 30's/40's which I have along with the Curch Mile Highs and the Allentowns will definitely be the last books to leave my personal collection when that sad day eventually comes long long in the future hopefully.    

Now, Darth Tim here   is making me real curious as to the grading differences between the submissions of this exact same book here.  If I was placing a bet here since this is a Dell File Copy, my bet would be that any defects would most probably be limited to the exterior covers, as opposed to the interiors of the book.  Then again, it might just be changes to their undisclosed grading standards, loose grading vs. tight grading time periods, or dare we hopefully not say that a CGC 9.0 versus a CGC 9.8 is simply within CGC's acceptable grading margin of error when it comes to the grading of GA books. 

   Hmmmmm..................maybe I need to set me self up a GoFund Me page to front this 5 bucks that it's going to take to access the Graders' Notes just to satisfy my own curiosity here now.  

Edited April 6, 2021 by lou_fine

[mstrange]

On 4/4/2021 at 3:15 PM, adamstrange said:

 

Did the pressing cause the fading in the color or is that just the scanner setting?

[adamstrange]

4 minutes ago, mstrange said:

Did the pressing cause the fading in the color or is that just the scanner setting?

Most likely just differences in scanners.

[lou_fine]

On 4/6/2021 at 1:36 PM, lou_fine said:

   Hmmmmm..................maybe I need to set me self up a GoFund Me page to front this 5 bucks that it's going to take to access the Graders' Notes just to satisfy my own curiosity here now.  

Ok, since I just HAD to satisfy my curiosity here, I decided to Mannup and forked over the 5 bucks only to find out that the cost was $10.    

 

On 4/6/2021 at 1:36 PM, lou_fine said:

If I was placing a bet here since this is a Dell File Copy, my bet would be that any defects would most probably be limited to the exterior covers, as opposed to the interiors of the book.

Looks like my initial thinking that any defects as posted above would be limited to the exterior covers were correct in the end, as the only 2 comments in the Graders' Notes were as follows:

Front Cover Writing

Top Back Cover Lite Shadow

Since those Graders' Notes were for the CGC 9.0 graded copy, as I couldn't access any for the CGC 9.6 graded copy since it's now in a CGC 9.8 slab, the only part I found a bit confusing is that those 2 same noted defects that supposedly took it all the way down to only a 9.0 grade are still clearly just as evident on the 9.6 graded copy here as before on the 9.0 graded copy:     

Definitely another part of this whole grading game that I don't really care for is the inconsistency in grading at times, changes to their undisclosed grading standards, and the handling of their submission process for some of their customers.  Although I do understand the rationale for it from a corporate business point of view, it definitely doesn't mean that I have to like it.     

Now, if I was a betting man, my bet is that those 2 noted above defects that took the grade all the way down to a CGC 9.0 is most likely still just as evident on the book even though it is now residing in a CGC 9.8 slab.    

Also don't really care for their rather inconsistent application of how they handle tell tale signature markings that's associated with certain pedigrees or file copies as evident here.  Athough long time collectors like me always prefer to have the pedigree codes, markings, or names on their books for sentimental collecting purposes, I can understand why some collectors will try to erase these markings since CGC will seemingly at times view these as writing defects and hammer them accordingly when it comes to the determination of the final grade.    

Edited April 7, 2021 by lou_fine

[RareHighGrade]

This appears to be the case of a 9.4 book initially being undergraded and thereafter being overgraded (the damaged upper left corner should keep it from being graded higher than 9.4).  The only encouraging aspect of this evolution is that it doesn't appear the book was damaged along the way by being pressed.  The spine of the book in the 9.6 case looks as plump as it was in the original 9.0 case.  Even though the grade inconsistency is puzzling, at least the book wasn't damaged during its climb up the CGC ladder, as sadly occurred to other books discussed in this thread.

[Aman619]

the CGC graders notes were never meant to be a resource where CGC notated every book's flaws or condition.  They took time to write, and some graders were into it, while others weren't.  And as CGC has stated, the only reason they were created and kept initially was for the other graders.  They didnt want them to waste time and the notes allowed the followup graders to examine the areas mentioned in the notes by the previous grader.  Thats why they are hit and miss. Now they are a lot easier to add to the grading process... and appear to be some kind of pull down menu since the wording is identical for each defect.

what Im saying is that overall, the presence of a grading note does not signify the importance of the note for any given books condition, nor does the absence of any note (or mentions of visible defects) infer their lack of importance to the grade of the book. Especially the longer ago the slabbing took place.

[lou_fine]

19 hours ago, RareHighGrade said:

This appears to be the case of a 9.4 book initially being undergraded and thereafter being overgraded (the damaged upper left corner should keep it from being graded higher than 9.4).

Yes, I am actually rather surprised they didn't note the upper left hand corner bump since that would be a much bigger defect as opposed to the "File Copy" writing notation and that very light and small shadow line on the back cover.  Makes me wonder if the CGC graders also consider the Mile High codes on the Church books or the more obtrusive "Larson" name written on the Larson pedigree books as defects to be taken into account in the determination of the final grade.  If so, this would definitely be a grade killer when it comes to the Okajima Camp copies or the pencilled in check marks done throughout the Cosmic Areoplane books.  I always though of these tell tale signature markings associated with a pedigree book to be a positive, but I guess the graders see them as a negative when it comes to the determination of the final grade.    

I guess the only exception they probably make for writing on the comic books would then be their own Verified Signature books since I assume they would be getting a cut of the money there.   Can't remember here, but if it's unverified and they didn't get their share, are signatures considered to be a defect or do they go into those Green Qualified slabs?    

 

19 hours ago, RareHighGrade said:

The spine of the book in the 9.6 case looks as plump as it was in the original 9.0 case.  Even though the grade inconsistency is puzzling, at least the book wasn't damaged during its climb up the CGC ladder, as sadly occurred to other books discussed in this thread.

You are 110% right when you talk about the seeming plumpness of this book here.  I have over a dozen of these Dell File Copies from the late 30's / early 40's and besides the fact that they look like they just came off the printing press is the actual "feel" of these books.  They are definitely plump and feel like they were probably stored in filing cabinets , as opposed to being flattened in big warehouse piles like the much later Harvey File Copies.  Definite keepers in my personal collection and they sure do look nice in their glossy mylar holders.  

As for its climb up the CGC grading ladder, is it possible that the bump from 9.0 up to 9.6 was a straight resub, especially since that upper left hand ding is still on the CGC 9.6 copy.  If so, as you had alluded to nothing more than being undergraded as a CGC 9.0 and then being overgraded as a CGC 9.6.   If any pressing was done for the 9.6 upgrade, probably most likely done by Matt from the time frames that we are looking at here and another press might have gotten rid of that ding enough to bum it up to CGC 9.8.    

Edited April 8, 2021 by lou_fine

[lou_fine]

17 hours ago, Aman619 said:

the CGC graders notes were never meant to be a resource where CGC notated every book's flaws or condition.

Well, I would certainly hope that they would at least list the biggest defects which would be affecting the grade of the book, like that top left hand corner bump that RHG had mentioned in his post.  From all of the Graders' Notes which I have purchased before in the past, they seem to clearly identify the type , extent, and location of the defects in quesion on a book.  

 

17 hours ago, Aman619 said:

what Im saying is that overall, the presence of a grading note does not signify the importance of the note for any given books condition, nor does the absence of any note (or mentions of visible defects) infer their lack of importance to the grade of the book. Especially the longer ago the slabbing took place.

If this was the case, then we most definitely should not have to pay to get access to these notes here if they do not provide us with the necessary information on a book's condition.  Maybe this is our rationale to convince them to provide the notes for free to us.    

[Sauce Dog]

Latest round is closing up soon (live auction just started, but all the books I wanted were right at the start for once). Looked like the Sandman cover lovers showed up, as I was expecting low grade Adventure Comics to go for a little less. I'm happy they are getting their due (especially #60, which I already own a nice 3.5 restored copy), but it unfortunately meant I could only afford to buy one right now (edit: nope - seems it didn't win the auction even though I was clicking the bid button to raise it until the end. Very odd - guess I lost out)

Edited April 19, 2021 by Sauce Dog

[lou_fine]

Was watching part of the HA Sunday Auction earlier this evening and it's nice to see that there's still some love for the Seven Seas books:  

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/seven-seas-comics-6-leader-1947-cgc-fn-65-off-white-pages/a/122117-17521.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

 

Have always loved this cover here and sadly, the only one now missing from my Seven Seas run and looks like I won't be getting a copy any time soon as this nicely presenting mid-grade copy sold for $5,040.  

[Crowzilla]

3 hours ago, lou_fine said:

Was watching part of the HA Sunday Auction earlier this evening and it's nice to see that there's still some love for the Seven Seas books:  

Have always loved this cover here and sadly, the only one now missing from my Seven Seas run and looks like I won't be getting a copy any time soon as this nicely presenting mid-grade copy sold for $5,040.  

With the 4 climbing out of the price range of most, it's time to focus on the next best cover