• 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.

Superman #1 .5 universal? With color copy cover .
2 2

38 posts in this topic

Ok I was searching on ebay tonight and this came up. 20200720_221411.thumb.jpg.300c1504a5fe0e7a2cf8989fecbc744b.jpg

It may be just me , but I am surprised that CGC gave this a universal .5 . I know they note it, but with a cover less that has a color copy cover that has Logo and superman image cut from original and taped to copy as well as tape on centerfold,  How is this not restored or conserved ? It just leaves me shaking my head..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shadroch said:

I'm not sure how you wanted them to grade it. They called it coverless and assigned it a .05  

I'm fine with it.

It wasn't so much that I wanted them to grade it any certain way and I do realize they did note it's flaws. Which is why I posted here to see what others opinions were of this copy.  I do have my own reservations to this being universal considering that it is a cut up original cover Logo and superman cut and taped to a color copy.  That to me is not universal and should be restored , conserved,  or at least qualified. I know most married covers get a qualified,  but to add tape usually gets a conserved.  Again this is only my opinion and yes I know they are the experts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, shadroch said:

In my opinion, they graded the book as if it was coverless. It's not restored. It's not an apparent grade. I see it as a coverless book with a bonus replica cover. I'm sure others may disagree.

I agree with your logic and I'm ok with the grade,  but isn't it weird to encapsulate a historic book so the only part you can see is the replica? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, KCOComics said:

I agree with your logic and I'm ok with the grade,  but isn't it weird to encapsulate a historic book so the only part you can see is the replica? 

 

 

But you also see the original superman logo and his entire body. I think it's a good idea if you owned those cutouts and the original coverless copy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first instinct was to agree with the first comment:

8 hours ago, jcjames said:

That is an abomination. 

 

But I at least get where it kind of puts them in a pickle. It has portions of the original cover that would otherwise be loose without being attached to the repro cover. Typically if the front cover is missing and the back is intact the book could get a .5 so I am guessing because it has portions of the actual cover it got the .5? A repro cover though with pieces of the real cover presumably glued on seems like poor restoration though, so I don't get why it is universal. Did I just talk myself back into?:

8 hours ago, jcjames said:

That is an abomination. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, shadroch said:

In my opinion, they graded the book as if it was coverless. It's not restored. It's not an apparent grade. I see it as a coverless book with a bonus replica cover. I'm sure others may disagree.

Kind of...  

CGC has usually graded coverless books with facsimile covers as NG before.   Remaindered copies have gotten a .5.  However, the book's original logo and cutout of Superman place it in the realm of having a partial cover like a remaindered copy.   They probably were torn between restoration and a partial cover... so... they considered it as a partial cover .5 with a facsimile copy of the cover along with it. 

Edited by Buzzetta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not Superman, it's Frankenstein.

They should have left it coverless, and you'd be able to see much more of the interior art, and in fact you'd see interior art that most humans never see, still with the same grade

 

 

 

Edited by jcjames
Coverless are NG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure the book is coverless. It had part of the front cover, enough that the logo and Superman image were salvaged and attached to a repro background.

While I agree that it is an abomination I also understand why it is a 0.5 over NG.

My issue is should it be universal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, jason4 said:

I think coverless is a ng...not a .5. It earned a .5 with the cutouts being present. It should really be a .3? Lol

That is correct. Coverless would be NG. I stand corrected.

I'd still take that over the Frankencover shown.

What if the pieces (Superman logo and Sup image) were sent in for grading as a partial cover?

Could get two NGs out of it.

 

Edited by jcjames
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kav said:

It looks glued not taped.

See that's what I was thinking,  but cgc doesn't note it as glue and that would definitely render this restored where as the tape with the new rule gets a conserved, with this exception it seems.O.o

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
2 2