PGM ASM 129

highradart · **Joined:** Mar 02, 2010 9:54 PM **Posts:** 851

Since you guys are planning a grading workshop and we've been dicussing how we grade books I thought I'd put this up for discussion. This was one of the first keys I bought before I knew more about grading and I eagerly sent it in to CGC. I've since cracked it out. It looks nice but it has a few issues:

1) There's a small tear at the top staple by spidermans right foot.
2) There's a large ding on top that goes through the entire book (looks like it had a paper clip there). It's hard to see but if you look at the back cover you can see how it goes through the book.
3) There's a thumb ding on the right side (goes through the entire book).
4) The BC has a small piece missing on the lower corner and small tear on the side.
That's the major stuff.
Oh, no missing pages, cover and centerfold is attached.

I'd like to see grades from 1 - 10 and I will post the actual CGC grade later. There's a few additional pics after the FC & BC scans.

macathro · **Posted:** Jul 30, 2010 8:41 PM

Well, without looking at the OSGG for reference, I think I would grade it a 5.0 (VG/F). But, from what I heard, CGC knocks the thumb dents pretty hard so I wouldn't be surprised to see them grade it lower, say 3.5 to 4.0? I bet I am way off huh. :winkgrin:

Cimm · **Joined:** Mar 30, 2009 11:41 AM **Posts:** 1991

Garry · **Posted:** Jul 31, 2010 3:42 AM

I'm gonna say 4.0

Mr. Zipper · **Joined:** Apr 25, 2007 2:21 AM **Posts:** 6017

Wow... this is a tough one. An otherwise nice presenting book with a few killer flaws.

I'm going with 4.5.

:???

highradart · **Joined:** Mar 02, 2010 9:54 PM **Posts:** 851

Ouch. I'm glad you guys aren't working for CGC. I think you'll be surprised by the grade (looks like I shouldn't have freed it from it's imprisonment). :lol:

Ok...here it is.

Garry · **Posted:** Jul 31, 2010 5:44 PM

Wow, I said 4,0 because I thought CGC would hammer the non colour breaking stuff. I could see a 5.0 maybe but 6.0 seems pretty generous IMHO (not wanting to diss your book though :sorry:

)

Garry · **Posted:** Jul 31, 2010 5:47 PM

This is a good example of how a whole cover scan can be misleading. Most of those flaws in the close-ups don't look anywhere near as bad in the main scan.

macathro · **Posted:** Jul 31, 2010 8:41 PM

As you can see from my earlier post, the highest I would have thought would have been 5.0. My biggest concern was the paperclip dents. I also thought CGC would have downgraded because of the thumb dent just based on previous posts. :dunno:

It is a very nice book either way! :righton:

Mr. Zipper · **Joined:** Apr 25, 2007 2:21 AM **Posts:** 6017

To me, the biggest flaw was the missing corner on the back cover. Just can't believe a 6.0 can have that flaw. :???

Not to diss your book, Mike... but I would not be happy if bought this based on the front cover scan and saw the back missing corner when I received the book. :angry:

highradart · **Joined:** Mar 02, 2010 9:54 PM **Posts:** 851

It's ok if you guys diss my book. It is what it is, and I thought it'd be a good example for grading purposes (especially since I had the actual CGC grade). Like I said, when I purchased it I wasn't aware of all the grading stuff. I liked the price and it fit well with my collection - most of which is mid grade. It was definitely deceiving on the sellers part (the scan looked nice) but I was happy to get it. To be honest, at the time it never even crossed my mind to return it (maybe a little after I got it back from CGC). :lol:

If you add the flaws I pointed out and take a point off for each one - then it's a 6.0 which doesn't make sense to me. I would have said 5 to 5.5 because it looks nice even with the flaws which may be why it received a 6.0.

Thanks for playing! :stircrazy:

Garry · **Posted:** Aug 01, 2010 4:45 PM

Mr. Zipper wrote:

To me, the biggest flaw was the missing corner on the back cover. Just can't believe a 6.0 can have that flaw. :???

Not to diss your book, Mike... but I would not be happy if bought this based on the front cover scan and saw the back missing corner when I received the book. :angry:

+1

Garry · **Posted:** Aug 01, 2010 4:47 PM

highradart wrote:

It's ok if you guys diss my book. It is what it is, and I thought it'd be a good example for grading purposes (especially since I had the actual CGC grade). Like I said, when I purchased it I wasn't aware of all the grading stuff. I liked the price and it fit well with my collection - most of which is mid grade. It was definitely deceiving on the sellers part (the scan looked nice) but I was happy to get it. To be honest, at the time it never even crossed my mind to return it (maybe a little after I got it back from CGC). :lol:

If you add the flaws I pointed out and take a point off for each one - then it's a 6.0 which doesn't make sense to me. I would have said 5 to 5.5 because it looks nice even with the flaws which may be why it received a 6.0.

Thanks for playing! :stircrazy:

If you're happy with the book, then that's what counts. :righton:

Thanks for posting it up. :applause:

highradart · **Joined:** Mar 02, 2010 9:54 PM **Posts:** 851

Of course I'd be happier if it was a 9.8. :lol:

Publications

Informative

Historical

PGM ASM 129

Who is online