Get Marwood & I

That's the image I always think of

I can't imagine CGC ever revealing that kind of information Gaard. I'm about to make my first submission, and I'm a little nervous as to what may come. I'm nervous of paying a not inconsiderable sum, getting my book back with one or more of the issues in this thread, and then having to argue with CGC about remediation. No one knows what % of submissions end trouble free, and it's likely to be the vast majority, but if anything can go wrong, I'm the type it tends to happen to. So I'm nervous, if I'm honest. CGC choose to advertise a crystal clear product with superior optics which they say is carefully QC'd before being released. That is what you pay for. But they also state in other channels that the plastics that they use can result in an off-putting optical effect which they say is normal and acceptable. And, of course, we see all the evidence we need in this thread to establish very clearly that not all books are QC'd, as they say. So should one deal with a company that effectively wants its cake and eats it? I accept that mistakes can happen in any business, but it's the attitude prevalent in this thread and the lack of apparent after care that troubles me. If my submission goes wrong, what battles will I have to face and over what period of time? When Roy Batty went back to the Tyrell Corporation seeking more life he was told it wasn't possible. Lots of options were discussed but the four year life span was hard-coded and that was that. Tyrell didn't advertise anything other than that because it was not technically possible to extend a Replicant's life beyond four years. So should CGC advertise crystal clear cases, when the close proximity of the plastics that they use can and does result in an optical effect that all but only the very obtuse would describe as 'crystal clear'? Should they state all books are carefully QC'd when they clearly are not? This thread could run for another four years and I don't think anything would change. At the end of the day, it gets dark, and we have a choice. Submit, and take the chance, or don't. It's that simple. I'm going to give it a go, as it seems to be the only way I'll be able to eventually sell my book for what it is worth. That is the nature of the beast now that CGC have positioned themselves as the be all and end all in the hobby. Few people will buy a high value book for what it is worth now without that CGC guarantee. But I'll be crossing my fingers very, very hard. You don't need to be a regular submitter to have a view on this. As a first time submitter, this thread - especially the CGC responses within it - puts me off. I suspect it puts others off too. But there is no sign of anything changing. Submit, or don't. Wish me luck!

I agree with this. I don't think it is for CGC to determine what flaws are acceptable, whether that be Newton Rings, scuffs or these cracks. Would CGC tolerate any of these examples in their own advertising? If they graded a 9.9 AF15, and wanted to show it off to the world in all its crystal clear glory, do you think it would ever display any of these issues?

Yes, they're all at it now Andy. They do like our soccer!

Once seen, it cannot be unseen. Typical Deadpool, messing with our heads

Indeed. A lot of example gathering and a lot of plotting, over a long period would be required to do it justice. All Marvel titles would be needed, hiatus / UKPV bearing or not, then the examples from other publishers and their dates would need to be considered. Also, those books in the window that remain T&P stamped or stickered. Unlike other exercises I've done, my instinct tells me there will be no clean pattern here. We may end up with a much larger body of data but with no new or significant conclusions to those we can already draw right now. And I say that understanding as well as anyone the 'you won't know until you look' concept. When I set out on one of these exercises - and I've done so many of them over the last ten years - I need to have a sense or instinct of the reward that may come. The best exercises for me are those that allow you to show the world what exists and the date ranges, or those which prove a conclusive pattern, like the T&P stamp number plotting. There's value in the end product. My feeling at the moment, based on an already quite extensive set of saved examples, is that all we will prove with the 'Gold Star' work is that there was a cover date window of about a year or so in which a host of unbranded stamp types appeared in significant numbers in and around the second Marvel UKPV hiatus window. One or more of those stamps may be attributable to Gold Star given the written evidence unearthed so far but a smoking gun discovery linking their name to any of the available stamps feels unlikely. We're unlikely to be able to demonstrate whether the books arrived sequentially (as the T&P stamp numbers indicated), on time, or whether they all rocked up together after the event. So I'm personally leaning towards not taking this any further as I have other comic searches ongoing which already show that they will prove something 'worth knowing' (threads / journal entries for another day). To illustrate, when I first happened across a Harvey 15 cent variant, whilst looking for Miller price stamps, I was excited as I thought I'd made a new discovery having heard nothing about them at that point. Initial online searches came up with nothing. Not one comment to be found anywhere. Subsequent extensive research concluded that they were known about albeit with very little documented. A chap in the USA was a Harvey expert and he'd found a few of them but did not know why they existed. At that point I could have left it - he was the expert on Harvey. But then I found another and another. So on I went. A year later, I'd found scores of them, identified the date ranges, established beyond reasonable doubt that the books were UK distributed (hence our American friend's limited exposure) and then discovered a variant second indicia within the 15c books that itself would act as an indication as to whether the outstanding books in the date range would exist. That was a very satisfying piece of work for me, identifying for the first time, 50 years after they were published, a definitive statement of what exists backed with an unassailable reason as to why. I have had these Gold Star folders sitting in my UKPV Marvel folders for years and I add to them when I see copies: But I don't feel the reward at this stage to spend the dedicated hours and hours that would be needed to bulk the examples out. I think the Spidey / Daredevil quick reviews that I posted earlier proved that the cover date ranges covered a year or so of issues. If all the other titles follow suit - or don't, for that matter - what more have we learned? I currently plot Roberts & Vinter stamps for Charlton as there is an end in sight that I can attribute to them and which sits neatly within a greater overall research piece. Gold Star stamps aren't branded, so we can only speculate an attribution to them in the absence of a definitive piece of information. If we found one snippet of historical data that allowed us to know what stamps were Gold Star, that would be more useful that a thousand plotted examples. So my focus, if any, would be on looking at those old fanzines to see if anything could be found. In the meantime, this simple chart below has value as it shows that pretty much all the missing UKPVs have copies extant with the 10d oblong and shilling circle stamps, which can't be coincidental: The fact that none of the non-UKPV bearing titles have stamps is telling and indicates a link to them. Only previously UKPV bearing titles appear to have been picked up and 10d oblong / one shilling circle stamped which indicates conscious decision making. The Gold Star attribution remains speculative however - which is why it is in inverted commas - albeit historical evidence clearly puts them as the front runner.

Can anyone else see a tiny Deadpool head slap bang in the middle of that defect?

Further to Robot's irregular shillinged DD#34... My working assumption on the various stamps that exist in the second UKPV hiatus is that they are likely to be the work of Gold Star. I think they were responsible for the 10d oblong and this one shilling in a circle version given how often they cross paths: So these two stamp styles, for me, are Gold Stars: Why there are two, who knows. I think I speculated once that it could be geographical but that seems a bit iffy as there are no other examples of it that I can think of. Robot's DD#34 shilling stamp has a different font to the one we see the most of above, but that version also turns up often enough in the 'Gold Star' window - here it is again on DD#33: I have it on many others. So could that also be a Gold Star stamp? The Gold Star 10d oblong isn't branded, so would it matter? Here again is the DD#29 that has both the alleged shilling and oblong Gold Star stamps: On this Charlton of mine below however, the Gold Star 10d oblong overlaps the other shilling version: I have other examples on this theme. So what do we think? Are all these shilling variations in and around the second UKPV hiatus likely to be Gold Star stamps? Or maybe just the most common one. Or none of them, for that matter? We see T&P over-stamping their own prices, after all, so why not Gold Star? The only other explanation is a second distributor but who could that be, if so, and why would they be competing on the same books? And is it likely that one would overstamp the other's price? And who won the FA Cup in 1963? Tis a mystery. And let's not forget the O.P. stamps: As I said in an earlier post, I think I need to expand the search dates and start capturing all the stamp types, not just the three in the graph above. See you in five years!

That would be telling.....

Indeed. Come to think of it, Ned Leeds....? Les Leeds, surely?

"He doesn't like your grading. I don't like your grading either!"

Cheers Rich! I've got five hundred Earth dollar grading credits to squander, so I may send in two thousand Charlton pence copies. That'll teach em. Not sure what I'll do with the other $489 though

Funnily enough, it's just been updated! #6 a 69er!

I was! Just having my first cup of tea and taking it all in Jolly. I'll be back later when I've woken up

Marwood & I Jbpez CGC Mike Warlord

That fifth la is crucial Richmond. Take greater care with your las please.

La-la-la-la-la Look In

Yes, JJJ hired GG to work with PP and RR before marrying MM

9d nags (Which wouldn't look out of place in the oddly similar thread)