How are modern production flaws graded?

0

The more and more I pay attention, the more I see this problem on new books every week. Nearly every book on the shelf can suffer the same problems as the ones shown below. What do you guys think CGC grades in this type of situation? The damage comes from production not from shelf wear, as these were pulled out of the box from Diamond this way. Corners peel up, split, and the cover even flakes off all along the edge. From my understanding, these things are not marked down. What are your experiences?

Yep, it's been my experience that CGC doesn't grade down on those corners for 9.8 slabs. I've subbed a few books like that (and worse) and gotten 9.8's. I even used to have a 10 with square corners with little frays of 'paper hair' fanned out across the corner. Just the slightest amount, had to look close to see it.

I think there is something more about how the comic lays down that qualifies for 9.9's and 10's The 9.9's and 10's I've seen have come from more thicker covers.

Jerome

I agree with Lethal. I've had several books come back in the high nines despite spines that look like that. Still, it's is ugly as sin to see that, and we should blame the publishers.

Also, see my related post on a similar topic.

So this brings up an interesting philosophical debate. As collectors, do we want CGC to identify these major differences between books or should we just stick to labeling everything 9.8 with its manufacturing problems?

On one hand, the reason people pay such a massive premium for 9.8 books is the guarantee of the condition. Since it comes manufactured that way though, it gets ignored? If people are paying a premium for that guarantee, wouldn't they want the best possible book they could get? I think that's the reason this whole grading thing is important to people.

Below are the two best copies I could find, from 3 different stores looking at roughly 50 copies. In my opinion, to say they are roughly the same quality as the books I posted above is just wrong.

I've stated many times that a flaw is a flaw and CGC should downgrade no matter if production or not. Not only for Moderns but all eras. I really hate those long production creases on some Silver Age books that CGC ignores.

I've stated many times that a flaw is a flaw and CGC should downgrade no matter if production or not. Not only for Moderns but all eras. I really hate those long production creases on some Silver Age books that CGC ignores.

I agree!

These moderns with tears at the top and bottom are not 9.8's to me, and CGC should change the policy.

So this brings up an interesting philosophical debate. As collectors, do we want CGC to identify these major differences between books or should we just stick to labeling everything 9.8 with its manufacturing problems?

On one hand, the reason people pay such a massive premium for 9.8 books is the guarantee of the condition. Since it comes manufactured that way though, it gets ignored? If people are paying a premium for that guarantee, wouldn't they want the best possible book they could get? I think that's the reason this whole grading thing is important to people.

 

Below are the two best copies I could find, from 3 different stores looking at roughly 50 copies. In my opinion, to say they are roughly the same quality as the books I posted above is just wrong.

 

Yes, but would the 2 best copies posted be 10's when compared to the first photos which might be 9.8 or 9.6(or below)? You said it yourself that you looked at 50 copies and found only 2 that "pretty". That sort of fits the definition of scarce, which should be reflected in the CGC census.

I understand the OP questioning how much a production flaw can detract from a books grade and I see how it leaves the door open to alot of inconsistency. It seems like the difference between condition and presentation. Does CGC grade a books condition ? or its presentation? And does that top spine split detract from the condition all that much? Opinion here would say it takes away from the presentation greatly.

I feel hammering a books grade based on presentation is just too inconsistent to be relied on. Yes a I can see why it would affect selling price of a given grade but it is those minutia that make the difference during a sale in the end. I also feel that the different ages are on a different grading scale in terms of production flaws and should be weighted accordingly.

Yeah. It really ticks me off that these flaws on  modern books are given 9.8 scores. I also hate that golden and silver age books -- particularly mid 60's and earlier - are graded on a curve by CGC. 

Are the scores intended to be empirical or relative?

I think they need to expand the grade range to account for all these "micro-defects".