EastEnd1

Thanks for all you're doing to help solve the situation and bring this loser/scammer to accountability.

Yep, I'm also a strong proponent of EVERY graded book the scammer has touched being put on the list, including this one. Just wondering if this trimming issue can be taken off the table.

I've lost track of whether you still have this book in hand... if you do, does the bottom edge look trimmed to you or just a misprint (ie, is that sliver of white edge at the bottom the first page peeking thru or just white cover paper?)? It looks like a printing flaw to me, but again I'm just looking at a two-dimensional picture. I'm wondering if there are other FF #2's with a similar printing flaw at the bottom.

Nice find... and thanks for posting. I was wondering how that guy in the most recent "scandal video" could be so CERTAIN that the book was trimmed at the bottom and right edges from the grainy image he put up. It's difficult to identify trimming with any kind of certainty from a sharp photo let alone a blurry one. This image from 2014 would seem to indicate that the book is likely untrimmed (unless the scam pre-dates 2014).

And nearly a thousand followers!

Yeah, just tough to say when we still know so little. I can tell you that if I was in charge at Heritage or Comiclink or MCS, I'd be pulling every slab I had in my possession consigned by the scammer and giving them a VERY GOOD looksie. I have to assume CGC has shared the name of the scammer with them. The question then becomes, if they do find some evidence of tampering of a book not currently on the list, what do they do? What do they say? The repercussions business-wise could be significant if that gets out. My expectation is that a lot of conversation is going on right now behind the scenes between CGC and the large platforms about this possibility. Hopefully the conclusion will be that most, if not all, of the holders remained tamper-evident.

They wouldn't... but CGC may now know whether the books sent in for re-holdering had noticeable defects on the holders or not. And if they didn't, then that makes the direct sale scenario more plausible, and PERHAPS likely. No one "in the know" has spoken yet about the condition of the holders. It would be helpful for CGC to make a statement about it either way, assuming they know of course. I fear though that they may never tell us outright because of litigation concerns.

Thank you for the update and transparency.

Maybe CGC photographs the books that come in for reholdering just like regular submissions?

We really don't know what the scammer actually did... CGC has confirmed very little other than admitting that he tampered with holders, it got thru their process, and providing a list of doctored books who's qualification for the list isn't defined. What we know for certain is that the scammer swapped books... whether the holders had identifiable damage or not, no answer still. And we have a chemist that demonstrated in pretty quick fashion that the current holders can be opened and resealed without obvious damage. That makes me nervous that the scammer may have been able to do the same... and without any scruples about ripping people off. So yes, I think every graded book he's touched should be on the list.

I think every graded book the scammer consigned to the selling venues... Heritage, ComicLink, MCS, even eBay (if still identifiable),etc... should be on the list. If the list of 350 is just reholdered books, it's well short of the total population of suspect books... unless and until someone can demonstrate that mr scammer wasn't able to open and reseal holders without noticeable defects. I'm sure CGC has been in communication with the major selling platforms and the name is known to them... we know for certain that they've spoken with ComicLink.

I mostly agree with this, UNLESS further scandals happen in succession because the old holders are too easy to open and reseal without a noticeable defect. Transparency into that issue is still muted.

Tell that story to all the dealers still trying to get pandemic pricing...

I've actually doubled my people on "ignore" with this thread. Was a great evidence based thread until some silly people showed up more recently.

Should work out for you then when you're ready to sell yours

That's great news! Now lets wait and see how the upcoming Heritage and Clink auctions work out.

Agreed, there is a noticeable lack of transparency when it comes to this issue. It's a simple question really: was the scammer able to reseal holders without producing obvious defects? I have to think CGC knows the answer to that question at this point.

I think we have to wait and see how the upcoming major auctions do before the question can be answered, particularly with regard to the books that the scammer most preferred to doctor up. Hopefully no decline, but that is not an evidence based answer right now.

Agreed, someone has to keep a master list. Seems like CGC is best positioned to do that. The selling venues should share all scammer transactions that went through their sites. They should all know who the scammer is at this point.

Agreed, and this is why we need any books the scammer consigned to Heritage, ComicLink, ComicConnect, MyComicShop, etc added to the list. Throw in eBay as well. Unless someone can demonstrate that the scammer was not able to swap books without creating a noticeable holder defect, these books are just as suspect as the reholdered ones. CGC, and now ComicLink, are to be commended for their commentary and keeping us updated. But the transparency on the potential for a simple holder swap is still lacking.

Thanks Josh. Does the list include EVERY book consigned by the scammer to ComicLink, or just the ones that went thru a CGC reholder/ME process? I ask because it's been surmised that the scammer is able to open and reseal holders WITHOUT creating an obvious defect. So every graded book he's touched is suspect, unless that possibility is wrong.

There's an awful lot of Spidey #300s on that list.

Ok, that's another possibility that I actually prefer to believe, cause my potential explanations (other than maybe the clerical error) give me agita.

The cleaning at the back cover actually looked pretty good to me... it's not easy to clean off soiling/fingerprints on such a bright yellow cover without degrading the surface color... and I'd expect some slight remnant to remain as it does here. But again, the lighting in the two photos is dramatically different, so who's to say.