2 story pages missing 1 1

[Yorick]

6 minutes ago, Spaceguy said:

I'm presuming that CGC is saying large piece missing each of pages 9, 10 and 11;  affects story

Yes, it is incomplete.  I have no problem with the defect description.

However, Qualified 0.5?

[Spaceguy]

Sorry, just my weird sense of humor.  I found it ironic that the description of your incomplete comic was incomplete.  

[The Lions Den]

27 minutes ago, Spaceguy said:

I'm presuming that CGC is saying large piece missing each of pages 9, 10 and 11;  affects story

Yes, that's correct.

And if you really want to live on the edge, search eBay for books with the following descriptions: "CGC .5", "CGC NG", "CGC Qualified" and "CGC Restored." 

[The Lions Den]

26 minutes ago, Yorick said:

Yes, it is incomplete.  I have no problem with the defect description.

However, Qualified 0.5?

Believe it...or not!   

[The Lions Den]

54 minutes ago, Yorick said:

Please note that since it's Qualified, the entire notation is in capital letters. Not only that, CGC used to write it as "9th, 10th and 11th page" to describe the defect; now they appear to prefer writing it "page 9, 10 & 11."  

Edited October 2, 2019 by The Lions Den

[Yorick]

I could understand a blue 0.5 (since it's incomplete).  I've got a blue 0.5 missing the entire back cover.  To make this a green 0.5 must mean that it is a real stinky pile of... stuff.

[The Lions Den]

7 minutes ago, Yorick said:

I could understand a blue 0.5 (since it's incomplete).  I've got a blue 0.5 missing the entire back cover.  To make this a green 0.5 must mean that it is a real stinky pile of... stuff.

From what I've seen, this isn't as uncommon as you may think. A recent eBay search yielded some very interesting results. There are some rather frightening examples out there... 

[Yorick]

They are human, and they don't publish their grading standards...

[silversurfer275]

4 minutes ago, Yorick said:

They are human, and they don't publish their grading standards...

I mean even with the green label that comic looks like a 1.0 anyway  maybe a little higher so that 0.5 makes sense

[The Lions Den]

1 hour ago, Yorick said:

They are human, and they don't publish their grading standards...

In all honesty, their standards were allegedly developed by taking input from a number of prominent collectors and dealers in the hobby at the time (at least that's the story I heard). That explains why some of the things they do are occasionally greeted with what I would call "guarded skepticism." By not publishing their grading standards, they're simply protecting themselves from differences of opinion in the way they apply those standards. I will also say that CGC has a good track record of going above and beyond the call of duty to satisfy their customers, which is increasingly rare these days…  

[theCapraAegagrus]

12 hours ago, The Lions Den said:

In all honesty, their standards were allegedly developed by taking input from a number of prominent collectors and dealers in the hobby at the time (at least that's the story I heard). That explains why some of the things they do are occasionally greeted with what I would call "guarded skepticism." By not publishing their grading standards, they're simply protecting themselves from differences of opinion in the way they apply those standards. I will also say that CGC has a good track record of going above and beyond the call of duty to satisfy their customers, which is increasingly rare these days…  

Boot licker.

[The Lions Den]

1 hour ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Boot licker.