VintageComics

Would those people be any less happy with those books though? That would be up to them to answer. Everyone finds enjoyment in a different way but happiness wasn't really the point of my post. It's important to keep the discussion in perspective. We are talking about getting what you pay for when buying a comic and fact is that you are getting that to a much greater (almost 100%) degree post CGC than you would be pre CGC. Like I said, I remember older back issues from catalogs and often getting entirely the wrong book, let alone the wrong grade or with resto. And if you don't like CGC, no problem. You can either crack your graded books out (something many people who enjoy touching their comics do) or simply buy raw based on your own skill set.

There are plenty of people who use 3rd party grading so that the book they buy doesn't have to be a crapshoot. Not all books fetch crazy premiums and many collectors on this very forum actually avoid collecting books that fetch crazy premiums but still buy and collect CGC graded books. There's obviously more than one type of collector and some collectors have more than one type of collecting style. I collect raw and graded books.

Nobody said it's a one-in-a-million-what's-the-big-deal kind of thing. It is isolated, relatively speaking. It's in the minority. Nobody has produced concrete numbers but there is no reason to believe it's commonplace. From my own experiences I've placed it at less than 1-2%. And LordRahl as correct, everybody benefits from CGC. Not just dealers. Making this incident look like the sky is falling (because some "people in tight with CGC" said that CGC are not perfect) is a gross misrepresentation of what is actually happening because it removes the perspective that CGC has over all done more for detecting restoration and setting some sort of a grading standard than any other single entity. How can I say that? Because even when Overstreet guidelines were in print: a) anybody buying books on eBay pre CGC or buying books leading up to CGC at shows, mail order, etc knows full well how often what you got in the mail was a crapshoot. You'd be lucky to get the correct issue number or title sometimes, let alone grade, resto, etc. b) you picked up that large collection from HE a while back if I'm not mistaken and I assume the majority came back with Blue labels. Imagine picking up the collection and not knowing if the books were restored or not and finding out 20 years later? c) for every improperly graded CGC book, we can't calculate how many times CGC has saved a buyer's bacon because the majority of books that are accurately graded and resto checked is unaccounted for. Rest assured it's a large percentage of anyone's graded collection (well more than 85% in my opinion ) Just imagine out of 3 Million comics graded how many would be sitting with unknown resto and unknown grades in people's collections.

It depends on the circumstances and the individual. Like others here, I have enough experience in judging a book's grade and in restoration to be comfortable making a judgement on a raw book. If a raw and a slabbed were in the same grade and the similarly priced, I would buy the raw for my collection, allowing me to examine it fully. I would buy the slabbed if I wanted to resell in the holder, as it would save me time and money in getting it graded. For example, I bought a slabbed 5.5 Mister Mystery some years back. Looked very nice until I cracked it and there were a pair of spline splits...about 3/4" at the top and a "spider-web split" smack in the center of the spine of about an inch, going about 1/2" into the back cover. Had I seen that raw I would not have paid as much as I did. Don't think these boards represent the general world of comic collecting. This is a fairly rarefied atmosphere. We have developed a baseline that includes CGC. It colors our perception of what the collecting world is really like. This. Thanks FT. Not sure what is going on but for a while now 95% of my posts are not replied to. I appreciate it. You should probably try including more unsupported arguments, overstated attacks on CGC or its defenders, and direct criticism of the posts of others. Bingo. The reason people don't reply to POV is because he's usually bang on.

You are taking isolated incidents and extrapolating them like it's common place. It isn't. How do you know it's not more common? How does anyone? As I've always said, I'm commenting based on my own sample size, which is usually a few 1000 comics a year. Some regrades, some raw, some resubmissions. Not scientific by any means. Gotta go for now. Dinner calls!

Fair comment. I didn't even weigh the variables when CGC raised prices because as a consumer of their product, whether I pay $125 or $150 for a $3000 walk through makes relatively little difference to me but I can see your point of view though and raising prices on cheaper tiers can make using their other services challenging for some markets. It's probably why many dealers are starting to move cheaper books raw with tight grading. They don't need to invest the money. Thanks for explaining.

That was my very simply and quick reply, its a little more complicated and trust me, he's a mod/in so tight with them might as well be one. I am not going to dig it all back up, he had a bunch of information which only the mod I was debating with had. He's NOT a mod. You're wrong. I don't think he is either. There's a zillion people that are 'tight' with CGC but that doesn't mean they are all going to lie when confronted about something. Vendettas on this forum are a cancer.

After Park tried to lay a big wet one on me yesterday I'm not so sure I trust you.

I don't think it was a red herring. It was meant to show that a) perception is important b) nobody is perfect and yet people continue to pay large sums of money for expensive cars just like they do for books. Commonplace is relative to what is NOT common. Out of 3 Million books, what is common? To find inconsistency or consistency? I would venture to say that consistency is more common based on my experiences. As has been mentioned in another thread, until there is a statistical audit and the results are published nobody knows for sure what percentage those discrepancies make but I'd bank on the fact that they are relatively small.

I don't know, is it? I typed it out pretty fast and it's a poor analogy, I'll admit. His point is that the hobby has jumped the shark because of grading inconsistencies. My point is that there is less grading inconsistency than there was when 2000 dealers across the country were grading 3 Million books than when an independent 3rd party is grading 3 Million books. That really is what is at the center of the discussion. EDIT: Wait, I thought you were an English teacher??

There's nothing unusual about that. If someone hits the quote button in an attempt to reply before the thread is zapped they can read the quote and keep it indefinitely (or as long as that browser is kept open). It's happened to me on many occasions and it happens to many who spend a lot of time on this forum...

You are taking isolated incidents and extrapolating them like it's common place. It isn't. I made a living fixing Benz's for the last 11 years of that career and yet they are regarded as awesome cars. Why? Because they're perfect? If they were perfect they wouldn't have 10 or 15 dealerships in Southern Ontario to repair them.

And I would disagree with you. The average North American consumer is thrifty (cheap sounds demeaning and I don't want to offend anybody). Just look at all the coupons, rewards programs, surveys, freebies, lotto purchases, etc. These things drive a huge portion of the economy. Look at black Monday and Boxing day shopping. and This capitalistic, industrial society is in a constant death spiral towards cheaper at the expense of quality. Perceived quality is all that matters. But that's a discussion for another forum.

To which my answer is "the reason it is "No" isn't necessarily because the customers are cheap, but that the value for the price paid may not be there", to which I added a clearcut example, complete with rhetorical question at the end to illustrate it. I really don't want to argue. I want to leave this discussion. I think we both agree on most things but we are often just slightly talking past ourselves but I can't spend all day here. That's kav's job now.

While you and I might know this, CGC doesn't have to explain or justify why they charge $X any more for grading a book than you or I need to for selling a book. Granted. But the discussion wasn't about what CGC can or cannot, or should or should not, do. Your original contention was that CGC could consider raising prices to provide a better service. But that suggestion fails if the price customers are paying *already* exceeds the value they are getting, real OR perceived. And, the uproar about raising prices after a set period of time may, in fact, be completely justified in that regard. And clearly, the value they are getting for the service price for that 1976 book can't be considered reasonable, in the face of the facts about the 1980 book. The 'value they are getting' is a grey area and subjective to experience and personal interest. And it wasn't my point to suggest CGC needs to raise prices, rather I was trying to show that most businesses try to find a balance between the charges the offer to their customer and a relationship. There is no 'perfect', absolute, black and white formula in this economy. charge. Some things work better than others and I would say the pricing of the grading tiers fall under that statement. There is only what the customer will pay...and as long as people keep paying CGC will continue to

It was probably changed because it sounded better than pregrader.

While you and I might know this, CGC doesn't have to explain or justify why they charge $X any more for grading a book than you or I need to for selling a book.

I agree The difference is in how large the variable is, and is it worth their time and effort to a) prevent graders from attending shows (I'm sure that CGC didn't pay for their head graders to fly off to Seattle without good reason) b) hire and train more graders c) pay them more d) have them spend more time grading each separate book 3) charge more per book The flip side of the coin is that you can ask the consumer the question: "Would you be willing to pay more for a better product?" The answer is usually a consistent "No." It's the way of the modern world. We want it all and we want it cheap and we want it now. This can be shown by the outrage when CGC did change there prices a few years ago for the first time in nearly a decade. I personally would pay more for a better service if it meant better service but then I'm usually in the minority. Maybe it's because the prices being charged are *more than* the value that price provides to the average CGC consumer. Example: a single 1976 Marvel comic book worth $100 in the slab costs $35 (before discount) while a single 1980 comic book worth $100 costs $18 (before discount.) There is functionally no difference between that 1976 Marvel and that 1980 Marvel. It takes exactly the same amount of effort and cost to grade...but it's (almost) twice the price. CGC has clearly demonstrated that they *can* grade that book for $18...so why do they charge almost double? This isn't the only example, there are many such inconsistencies in the fee structure. There are many different types of market. I've been saying this for years. There are many types of raw markets and many types of CGC markets and those that are able to diversify across them and arbitrage between them will profit the most.

Just change the page number in your own URL at the to of your browser and then it will work, no? I just posted the link to show everyone page number 67 at the end - not to use my link.

I dont see what you mean, here is the url info I see: http// boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7576218&Main=335447#Post7576218 You are quoting on posts. Quote on any page of the thread and then the URL has the page number at the end of the URL. Example: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7576227&fpart=67

Good points! (thumbs u

I'm pretty sure most if not all people who participate in public discussions want fairness. Everyone just perceives it differently and goes about voicing it differently. There's money involved and where there is money there is politics. I think it goes without saying that I'd love consistency and I've posted as such several times over the years.

'Very' being an understatement. Are you saying that all of my CGC books may decrease in value if confidence in CGC was to waver? Not sure if serious.... He's got the type of vested interest that pokes fun at people who have a vested interest in CGC. The fact that some people have a vested interest in CGC and that some of them may be posting in this thread is a complete shock to me! I think they should all have to wear a scarlet letter before posting.

'Very' being an understatement. Are you saying that all of my CGC books may decrease in value if confidence in CGC was to waver? Not sure if serious.... He's got the type of vested interest that pokes fun at people who have a vested interest in CGC.

'Very' being an understatement. There is nobody without some sort of vested interest in this thread. Dealers who rely almost exclusively on CGC graded books (like myself) and collectors who enjoy collecting them want them to do a good job of maintaining their public image but we also want CGC to do their job properly. Nobody of any reasonable reputation wants CGC to 'take the money and run' by handing out gift grades. That's short sighted. There are people who absolutely hate CGC and want them to crash and burn and take every opportunity to post and say so. There are collectors who want them to grade as tight as nails so they have better looking books. There are dealers who don't want them too tight because for some of our inventories it literally means the different between a 5 and a 6 figure income. So there really are very few people without some vested interest in the topic and I'd say that most who enjoy or sell comics have more than just a passing vested interest.