darkstar

On 4/19/2024 at 1:31 PM, 1Cool said:

Next you are going to tell me Stevens was better than Zeck.  Stevens was good but I'd rather collect Hughes or Campbell if I'm looking for girl art.  Regardless of your taste in artists there is no reason Stevens stuff became so hot after so many years.  They are not more hard to get then a few years ago.  Not better now than in 2021 but people are acting like they have never seen his stuff before.  The market is fickle so you have to embrace the shifts but I don't see why his stuff will remain as hot as they have been this year.

If Stevens spent his years drawing the girls of Marvel and DC the market would've been all over his books well before it started caring about Hughes and Campbell in the 2010s. 

192 and 196

On 4/7/2024 at 10:55 PM, FanBoyOfMarve'nDC said:

Now/s the time to sell pulps, before the bubble on them pops like the graded video game market bubble popped.

I actually can appreciate pulps but the hype being pushed on them is just like what was done with graded video games and the novelty with hype is driving prices thru the roof.

For a guy who's only been dealing comics for under 5 years, Ryan's analysis on comic market trends and pricing is as good as my own, and IMHO, virtually any other dealer on the forums.
 

 

Just an all around terrible take and atrocious comparison to the videogame market. This is reactionary nonsense due to price spikes and overall instability in a virgin market. Evidence of an actual pump is nowhere to be found. Where is the hype? Where is the young, outside money moving into the market? There is little evidence of either of those things. Pulp content here on the boards? Nearly non-existent. Same thing to be said about Youtube and your social media platform of choice.  

Windy City Pulp was this past weekend, fewer than 5 dealers had graded pulps, and I would estimate 90% of the people in the room were in their late 40s or older. It was the same show that it has always been. 

Graded videogames were around for years, being bought and sold for understandable prices by collectors, before any sort of manipulation set in, the market depth and interest simply was not there. That market wasn't seen as an investment opportunity until Heritage made the false press release about the Super Mario Brothers sale and then conveniently announced they would start selling graded games.  

On 2/14/2024 at 4:44 PM, Ron C. said:

I have a wedding to fund so I will be selling books in my Epic Illustrated collection. Please let me know if there are any that you need.

https://comics.www.collectors-society.com/registry/comics/PeopleSetDetail.aspx?PeopleSetID=121833

What is your price on issue #1?

On 2/4/2024 at 4:52 PM, jimjum12 said:

but CGC has had a policy of keeping the ownership info for each submission secret from the grading team to eliminate favoritism or cronyism.

Remember that time Vintage Magic, probably the largest vintage Magic the Gathering dealer in the world, opened a sealed Alpha starter deck at CGC HQ with the head grader of CGC's Trading Cards division present? And we're to believe that the people responsible for grading these cards didn't know who submitted them? CGC's policy may be true MOST of the time, but it definitely isn't true all of the time. We really don't need to rehash all the instances of exceptions being made throughout CGC's history, do we?

On 1/4/2024 at 6:47 PM, BlancoBros said:

From what's been posted, it seems that the scam revolved around reholders/custom labels only. No evidence suggesting otherwise. (so far)

Take for example submission: 4277700006    batman 442
Cgc may not have included this one because maybe it was never sent back in for me/reholder/custom label.
Briva3 may have just sold it.
So if they decided to resubmit the book raw again, it would have a different cert number. So in that case, the old number 4277700006 wouldn't matter.

It is unknown if the scammer was able to swap labels/books at home and reseal them without requiring a re-submission to CGC for a reholder or custom label. In theory he could have swapped the 4277700006 label at home with an inferior copy without ever re-submitting it to CGC. It depends entirely on whether he was able to crack the slab and reseal it without noticeably damaging it. Until that is ruled out as a possibility CGC should have released a list of every book that was ever submitted under his account and not ones that were only resubmissions.

On 1/4/2024 at 4:58 PM, HighGrade said:

The others may already be verified as OK? I mean the Batman is a 9.0, certainly looks OK to me, CGC might even have the original images to verify. Not all books are bad, probably tried to slip in a few good ones of course.

Verified by whom? 

On 1/4/2024 at 4:46 PM, sledgehammer said:

isn't that the FF 4, 7.5, that is in Briva3's previous sales on eBay?

I believe so. I just took all the certs from his eBay listings and looked up the other books within each submission to see if every cert from each submission is on the list...and they aren't.  

From the submission below the only cert on the list is 4277700004. Why? 

4277700004    asm 252
4277700001    spider-man 1
4277700002    asm 252
4277700003    asm 252
4277700005    killing joke
4277700006    batman 442

Why isn't cert # 4343218005 on the list if 4343218001, 4343218002, 4343218003, and 4343218004 are all on the list? 

On 12/28/2023 at 9:43 AM, lostboys said:

 

"We have already made significant improvements to our processes as a result of this incident..."

 

^^^Interesting

 

I wonder if the significant improvement tp the process was to provide scans of all books, starting this past summer.

I also wonder if thats actually when CGC found out this was happening.

 

 

The scans on a book's cert page are scans from the last time the book was in CGC's possession, not when the book was first graded. They have scans for swapped books on their cert pages...so no, they didn't know anything about this until the community discovered it. 

On 12/27/2023 at 2:15 AM, agamoto said:

Just so you know some facts to consider, Yorick, he bought the book a 9.4 off ebay on April 2, 2023. He had that book delivered to him, then repacked and sent with his 4 other books in the same submission on the desk of a grader, not just received by CGC mind you, but at a grader's desk, 7 business days later on April 12th, 2023.

Like the subject of the thread says... Fishy. 

 

The 9.4 wasn't swapped with the 9.8 and graded on 4/12. The time window doesn't fit. The swap occurred sometime after that and before the two sales in August. 

On 12/26/2023 at 10:23 PM, agamoto said:

@darkstar

So one of the two books you're talking about just got spiked by @comicwiz

Did you want to revise your speculation on what happened to that submission group before one of us finds the match for the ASM 252 in that same submission group?

Revise what speculation? I provided a reason for the discrepancy in grade dates for books that were part of the same order. Again your language seems to indicate that I am denying the accusation that the book in the 9.8 isn't actually a 9.8, when that has never been my position and I'm getting tired of correcting you regarding that. 

On 12/26/2023 at 10:35 PM, skybolt said:

Everything you say makes sense (if the scammer is a pro at opening and welding back cases without detection). The biggest issue I have with CGC is how in the world do they re-holder several 9.8 graded books and give the Mark Jeweler designation without opening the inner well first to check? Like I've mentioned before, a Youtuber noted that CGC told him he couldn't use the reholdering service to add a newsstand designation (he wasn't the original submitter), and would need to regrade the book instead. If that's the case, then how could this scammer get CGC to reholder his books to add the Mark Jeweler designation without inspecting the inner well first? At minimum this should've raised a red flag for the reholdering department because 9.8 Mark Jewelers are rare and command a premium. Did CGC even mention to the guy that they would have to overcharge him because the book is now worth over $10k? If the previous submitter was using a cheaper service the first time around for his regular newsstand copy, shouldn't CGC automatically regrade the book because high grade Mark Jewelers command a lot more? 

Honestly, in this scenario CGC should not even give the submitter a chance to get the book back without them inspecting it first (once there is any suspicion). If their recommendation is to open the inner well to ensure there's actually a Mark Jeweler insert in there, they should go ahead and do it anyway. They can't just send the book back to the guy, especially if it had additional defects like the ASM #252 book, and let it be someone else's problem.  My gut tells me that at minimum, the guy found a deep pocketed customer pleaser at CGC who believed his every word and would streamline these reholder requests for him without question. 

A reholder isn't the same thing as a mechanical error. If you submit a Mark Jeweler copy and CGC grades it but does not note it on the label you can re-submit it as a mechanical error as long as you make the request within the 2 weeks or whatever it is from the time it was delivered. 

On 12/26/2023 at 8:37 PM, agamoto said:

Well, I kinda have to question your own speculation then, Darkstar... Was the 238 and the 252 from that submission group sent to CCS for pressing or not? Was a mechanical error detected in those two books and that's why they went back in for regrade/relabel? Is the image we're seeing on the census an image of the book as seen by the graders or not, regardless of when they touched it? I'm all for slowing things down, thinking things through and being rational about all this, but the evidence that we are exposed to is rather overwhelming at this point and it's not like we're making wild assumptions based on a few sales and submissions. We're basing our speculation on HUNDREDS of them with oft repeated incidences as noted and plenty of obvious book-swapping fraud laid bare. 

I think the original 6 book order was re-submitted as mechanical errors. The 238 and 252 were sent to CCS, because they didn't pass inspection and were sent for re-grading, which is why their cert pages have grade dates months later, 7/10, instead of the same date as the rest of the order, 4/12.

If you read the posts in the link below starting with the post by Ramithard on Feb 23 you will see this boardie sent a book in for a mechanical error that ended up going to CCS, even though the boardie didn't request or pay for that service. CGC chose to do that on their own, which ended up delaying the simple mechanical error for months. 

Going back to the 238 and 252 the images on their cert pages likely aren't of the books that were graded 9.8 by CGC. Those books, or more likely the labels, were swapped into lesser grade slabs and then submitted to CGC as reholders or mechanical errors - due to case damage or label error. If at intake the books were deemed to not require re-grading then they were sent off to be slabbed, scanned, and shipped - which means the latest scans on the cert page are of a different book than what was originally graded. There is no way CGC is dedicating the manpower to reholders or MEs to the point that every book is being inspected closely to see that it matches the grade assigned on the slab. So unless it is obvious that the case has been compromised or that the book has incurred additional damage since grading then that book isn't going to be subjected to grading again.  

Your post reads like I don't think there is anything wrong going on here, which is obviously not true. This is definitely a big bowl of fraud, but I don't see how anyone at CGC could be knowingly involved. The sheer volume of books CGC receives, not to mention how many orders the scammer has submitted, pretty much eliminates the possibility that one person at CGC could effectively control all of the fraud books at receiving and then steer them through the entire process while at CGC.

On 12/26/2023 at 8:03 PM, agamoto said:

Since you brought it up, you're assuming they are resubs to fix mechanical errors, that's not an irrational assumption. Neither is mine. But, have a close look at the other graded on the same "altered" date from the rest of the books from that submission group. The ASM 194. The "9.8" Newsstand. 

Zoom in a little closer...

You'd think if the books were resubmitted for a mechanical error, someone in QC might have spotted the glaring problem with that ASM194 that far removes it from the 9.8 grade it received.

 

The photos on the certification page for a book are scans from the most recent time that CGC had the book in their possession - whether that was for grading, a reholder, or a mechanical error or label update, which means the copy you are seeing in the certification page photos isn't necessarily the same copy that received the grade that is shown on the label or the grade on the certification page itself.

When one of the most popular topics on this forum is one that calls into question CGC's Quality Control and has nearly 6000 posts, we should probably stop thinking that our individual books see anywhere close to the amount of individual care and attention that many seem to think they do. I don't think the people tasked with inspecting reholders or mechanical errors are doing anything more than giving a book a quick once over for anything that would warrant a re-grade instead of a re-slab and even then they are likely looking for structural damage to the case more than damage to the book that doesn't line up with the grade on the label. 

On 12/26/2023 at 3:48 PM, agamoto said:

Who told ya it doesn't update? That's not what I've found.

For example, here's a series of books our special friend submitted for grading. 

Note how most of the books were graded 4-12-2023

With the exception being 4235257005 (and 7001) which were reholdered into a custom label with the date changed to 7-10-2023

Here's notes and the images they took of the book that day. https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4235257005/

Have a good look at that top staple crease. 

9.8 you say, CGC? Huh... How about that.

 

I'm pretty sure those 5 books were submitted as Mechanical Errors and the 7001 and 7005 went to CCS after being reviewed by CGC, which is what caused the delay and grade date discrepancy with the other books in the order. And I think the scans on the certification page are the most recent scans of that book the last time CGC had it, not necessarily scans of the book that earned the 9.8 grade designation originally.  

On 12/26/2023 at 4:21 PM, MatterEaterLad said:

I'm not talking about a Blue book being switched with a lesser quality Blue book. This Hulk 181 was originally given a Green label, then regraded to Blue, in one working day, so no time for it to be sent to the seller for the switch. You could argue this was a mistake, but that same mistake has happened with 5 other Hulk 181s all sold by the same person. The switch of either the book or the label happened at CGC.

The 7.0 qualified and 8.5 universal were both graded in February. The photos show the 7.0 qualified being paired with the 8.5 universal label. That pairing was done after the initial grading of each book. The scammer re-submitted the 7.0 qualified copy with the 8.5 universal label for a re-holder and/or label update after the initial grading in February. The book wasn't re-graded which is why the grade date remains unchanged from the February date. 

It is impossible logistically for a CGC employee to be running this scam, there are simply too many steps in CGC's process for one person to be playing overwatch during all of them and on specific shipments no less.

The submitter has figured out how to either swap books or swap labels on books while doing minimal damage to the case so that his re-submissions don't always trigger a re-grading by the person inspecting his submissions. Other than that he might be marrying qualified and/or restored copies to frankenstein into universal copies, but that's all this is.  

https://www.ebay.com/itm/304548820994

On 12/21/2023 at 7:16 AM, RonS2112 said:

You aren't wrong in any of this, but the above seems to gloss over a simple point: the weak link and underlying enabler in all of this is that the CGC process allows this to happen.  

You are right that the seller in all liklihood has malicious intent in carrying out this scam.  BUT -- if it came down to a legal case, I would think he could easily claim that: a) he was simply submitting a book with a flaw, and it isn't HIS fault that CGC gave it a blue 9.0 label instead of a green 8.5 label and b) it isn't HIS fault that people will pay a premium for a book with that blue 9.0 label.

I mean, taken to a (admittely ridiculous) extreme, people are looking for grade bump-ups all the time by cracking, re-pressing and resubmitting, and at least part of that is hoping for a more lenient grader than the book might have had the first time around.  And often, it works.  How far removed is this scam from that practice?

1) Because he swapped books

2) Because he did it more than once

On 12/21/2023 at 7:02 AM, Sigur Ros said:

My bad.

The post about ebay having no reason to investigate, in response to people saying eBay should investigate, with ebay mentioned in the first paragraph, that you responded to, threw me off I guess.  👍

You'll figure it out eventually.

Do you require a condescending thumbs up emoji as well?

On 12/21/2023 at 6:55 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

if that is the case, I'd like to read about exactly that played out, The devil is in the details. Your counterfeit analogy however is not at all an accurate comparison. the act of creating counterfeit currency itself, regardless of whether you pass it off or not is a federal crime. 

Read exactly how what played out? The guy bought a 9.0 blue label Hulk 181. He bought a 8.5 green label Hulk 181 with a missing mvs. He cracked the slabs and replaced the 9.0 blue copy with the 8.5 green label copy and sent the green label copy inside the blue label slab to CGC for a re-holder and/or label update. He KNOWS the book he got back from CGC isn't actually a 9.0 blue label copy of the book, regardless of what CGC has on the label. He then KNOWINGLY sold the book as a blue label 9.0, despite knowing it is actually the qualified copy with the missing mvs. You do this once or if you aren't in the business of selling comics sure you could say it was an honest mistake or that it's too inside baseball (a marvel value stamp, what the hell is that?), you can get away with it. But if you are in the business of selling comics and have established a pattern of doing this then there is no playing dumb. 

And yes, the currency analogy is perfectly appropriate because you seem to think that an authority ruling something as authentic legitimizes the counterfeit. It doesn't work that way.