Superman2006

I don't think the matter of loose slabs relates to changing whether or not the label is tethered to the top part of the inner well. I'll have a take a closer look when I have more time, but if I recall correctly, all slabs with the slightly smaller grade box in the top left corner had labels that were heat sealed to the inner well, so presumably all of those are safe from this particular scam. I'll have to look at the latest grade dates I can find for those slabs.

Just to consolidate the deets: Green 7.0: 4115260001 Blue 7.5: 4115170002 Both have graded dates of 08/24/2022 The Green 7.0 sold on Sept 3rd, 2022. 10 days after grade date. That is pretty fast to arrive to the person who subbed it. The Blue 7.5 sold on Nov 9th, 2022. A little over two months after it first appeared for sale as a green label. Is there any logical reason for the scammer to have submitted a book missing the MVS in order to get a green label Hulk 181? I can't think of one. If the scammer didn't submit the Hulk 181 with green label, then I think the most likely explanation for the same grade dates is that it is just a coincidence. Am I missing something?

Then when switching a resub over to one of their new custom labels, they'd have to open the inner well to recover the comic, then seal it in a new inner well along with the new custom label. Hulk head hurt. Yes, but at least it would add another level of security. Of course, no matter what CGC does scammers can try to find a way to get around it (I don't like to explain possible ways, lest the scammers get any ideas). If they put all that work into an honest days work, they'd still make money and not have to look over their shoulder for when it all falls apart : (

But reholders retain the same certification number. So I remain confused over this situation. Scammer could have purchased the blue and green label from different sellers that just happened to have been graded on the same day. Scammer could then take the book from the green slab, insert in blue slab, send it back for a reholder and maintain the same blue label info (except now it has the qualified book inside the slab).

Great detective work by comicwiz and others...

Someone already suggested an inner well that has the label sealed inside of it, yesterday. they need to figure this out. I mentioned a few pages back that CGC used to seal the label to the inner well. Some boardie(s) may know the approximate date when they stopped doing that...

Reholders do not get a new date - they maintain the original grade date. So if he reholdered the 7.5 after the August date it would still show August. I know this because I just reholdered a FF5 in a 2nd Gen holder - it shows up in CGC census photos with new holder but original 2011 grade date. Take the legit Blue 7,5 out - insert green 7.0 for beholder - resubmit original 7.5 as a raw for new cert number. Expand You beat me to it... Also, one, both, or none of the green and blue labels may have been submitted by the scammer. He might have just acquired them on the after market and then did the old switcheroo later on... In fact, it's doubtful the scammer would have submitted the green label; you'd think he'd just buy green labels to turn them into blue. No reason he'd submit a green label...

Reholders do not get a new date - they maintain the original grade date. So if he reholdered the 7.5 after the August date it would still show August. I know this because I just reholdered a FF5 in a 2nd Gen holder - it shows up in CGC census photos with new holder but original 2011 grade date. Take the legit Blue 7,5 out - insert green 7.0 for beholder - resubmit original 7.5 as a raw for new cert number. You beat me to it... Also, one, both, or none of the green and blue labels may have been submitted by the scammer. He might have just acquired them on the after market and then did the old switcheroo later on...

Back in the old days, CGC used to heat seal the label to the inner well. With that design, I don't think a scammer could simply replace a label or an inner well and seal it back up or send it back to CGC for a reholder. Approximately when did CGC stop heat sealing the label to the inner well?

Last time I did business with clink was back in 2016 and they were charging $35 for the CVA sticker Not directed at you in particular, but in response to CVA cost comments in general; Looking at their website, https://cvacomics.com/pricing/ it looks like the prices vary by the "declared value", and can be as high as 2% of "declared value" on items valued at >$3K. So I guess a sticker on a million dollar book would be $20K! Minimum charge per invoice is shown to be $50.

Just a couple of thoughts to add: I don't think combining the cover with a coverless would grade as high as a green 4.5. Think what a blue label grade a book would get due to a complete spine split / detached cover, and then put it in a green label since it would be a married cover, so probably something under 2.0 in green label. With that said, while it might only get <2.0 green if married, I suspect all Tec 27 values have increased in 2023, given some of recent Action 1 sales (such as the 0.5 and the page 1), and given the sale price of this cover only, so maybe it would still be worth 500K as a green <2.0?

Thanks again, I used to be able to locate sold items on the Metro or CC website, but couldn't figure out how to do that anymore, and then I saw your post.

Ahh, I see. Thanks. I must have missed that auction.

Who was the seller of the CGC NG earlier this year for $126k?

As a couple of sports card examples, 1986 Fleer Michael basketball has a Michael Jordan card and sticker, and 1987 Topps / OPC has a Brett the Hitman Hart card and sticker and in each case I believe the card sells for more than the sticker there as well.

I suspect that most books with trimming have at least one edge of their covers trimmed as well. If that's the case, then the book would need color touch as well, in which case CGC should have a better chance of identifying the fact that work had been done to the book (at least to the cover).

Bringing over one of my comments from the other thread, the Batman #1 shown in your post above no longer has any notes of trimming in the graders notes, but it does now have a notes of "pieces added cover A-5" and "pieces added interior A-3". I think that if CGC were consistent in their notes and detection of work done that CGC should note "pieces added" on all books that had treatments (leaf casting, or grafting, whatever that is lol) to add back ALL portions of the book that had previously been trimmed off. In that way, I don't find it surprising that CGC would no longer note that such books are trimmed, but assuming CGC detected the work that was done, I would expect to see all such books with "pieces added" notations instead, similar to what we see in the graders notes for the Batman #1 above. In other words, such books should still get a purple label but with pieces added notes, rather than trimmed notes.

Unless this was done to one of your books where you've seen this done for a fact, is it possible that something was lost in translation, and that Mike just meant that he was able to get the trimmed notation removed, but that it now has a "pieces added" notation like the Batman #1 in your earlier post? You wouldn't happen to have an example of a book that had a "trimmed" notation in the past, but which no longer has a trimmed or "pieces added" notation, would you? Or even some sample "after" scans of a book which has had such a treatment, would you? I'm curious if one could see the work that was done in a clear scan, or if it is truly next to impossible to detect - at least in a scan; maybe in hand it would still be possible if someone knew what to look for.

Weird, I've replied a few times already, but my responses aren’t showing up in the thread; at the risk of my prior posts all of the sudden showing up, here it is again; No, it shouldn't be able to go to a blue label, unless CGC missed the work that was done. If CGC catches the work that was done then it should get a "pieces added" notation + purple label.

Again, the trimming was not removed via leaf-casting. It was done with dry grafting. Right, but it's still considered "pieces added", and hence it would still get a purple label.

I think Susan Ciccone was doing leaf-casting on comics before Kenny, but who knows? Dry grafting is something else entirely. And I misread Mike's post. It didn't go from Purple to Blue, it stayed Purple, but he was able to get trimming removed from the label. So if a book was Purple for trimming and nothing else, conceivably it could be turned into a book that CGC would grade Blue. Seems like a game-changer. But maybe others do it as well? Is this like the early days of pressing when people were doing it and not talking about it? Has this ever been discussed over in Comic Book Grading and Restoration Issues? I talked to Mike about the process and was about to send him a book for similar treatment, but then Hero imploded and he went dark. So glad I didn't send him that book. If a book was purple for trimming and nothing else and it had leaf casting done to add back what the trimming took off, then I would think it would still state "pieces added" on the label, and therefore still get a purple label.

Good luck - hopefully your bid stands up!

Congrats @Withering Wind @Point Five and @TheGeneral. Great job to @Morganmi and @boron as well; TheGeneral is the last person I would want to face off against in a tie breaker!

I updated the spreadsheet that I use to track cumulative contest results for cumulative contest rankings. Congrats @Deputy Dan, I see that you have an average score of 22 over the 2 contests. The cumulative rankings thread I started has a minimum contests requirement = total contest / 2 - 0.25 = 8 / 2 - 0.25 = 3.75, so you don't have enough rounds to qualify for those rankings yet, but if you did, your average score would be good enough for the top 10!

The cumulative CGC grading contest rankings ignore tie breaker rounds, so without further adieu, following are the "MVP", "Diamond Club", and "Honor Roll" award winners based on performance through the first 8 CGC grading contests (I set the qualifying requirement at just under 50% x total contests to date = 3.75 contests; 3.75 contests x 4 rounds per contest = 15 rounds to qualify); Thanks again for CGC Mike for coordinating another fun contest and for providing the contest results for each round in an easy to copy / paste format! Congrats to all the award winners for contest #8, and hopefully you'll join the next one!