BCR

I actually disagree. I think re-holdered books will be scrutinized more aggressively by buyers. I think buyers will finally be more discerning when it comes to buying a book based just on grade. Actually look at the book you’re buying, ya know? Have your OWN grading system that you can apply to the book. of course books with tattoos, coupons, etc, I think those will require an investigation if they’re in the new label. Also, this won’t have any impact whatsoever on modern books tbh. This is more of an issue for bronze, silver and golden age. And further? I think we’ll see a policy change at CGC where re-hollering is now a new grading (which is what it should have always been). Last, I genuinely could see CBCS getting a bit of a boost because of this.

I’m actually SHOCKED CBCS hasn’t come forward to tell us all why this could never have happened under their watch. Every single CGC that has ever been re-holdered is now potentially a counterfeit on some level. Lesser grade, a literal counterfeit… We can never buy another CGC book as collectors if that book has been re-holdered. Especially if that book is in the thousands of dollars.

The glaring thing to me, and correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t it literal the policy of CGC that if we send in a book for re-hollering, that that book will be subjected to re-grading? Like, think about how preposterous it would be if you could send in ANY book that’s currently within a holder and you automatically receive the same grade. That’s not just non-sensical, it’s absurd, hence — to my understanding — there is a mandatory re-grading with every re-holder. On the particulars, this person might’ve done this with the same newly submitted book over and over and over and over again. On our end, we would only see the two books (the submission and the re-holder), but he then still has that original book. He then resubmits it and it all starts all over again. He could’ve done this 50 times with the same book. Always buying a cheap version (say, green label) version, and going through this process. This could be hundreds of thousands of dollars in fraud. Again, it’s imperative that we find out who has purchased these books so that they can file this fraud with the FBI. Each one of these cases are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. This person needs to be removed from civilized society. And CGC needs to help do it if they want any chance of coming back from this.

Oh, yeah. I doubt they’re doing all fraud books. This is probably one or two fraud book per submission. So one or two fraud re-holder/custom label and the rest just submissions.

Basically you type in the very number (say, ending in 4), and then type the next cert number down 3, 2, 1 etc. When we do that, we see books that the person has/had on their site for sale — and the types of books they typically sell. It’s not perfect and irrefutable, but likely. Again, though, CGC knows exactly who this account belongs to with regards to the books that we know are fraudulent re-holders.

It appears to be the same account judging by the cert number comparisons. One of the videos started numbering down from known fraudulent certs and the books appear to be books that the seller has on their eBay store. So it is one person doing this. And CGC knows (objectively) who it is.

How has CGC not yet released the list of all cert numbers this customer has submitted. We need to find the actual people who own these books so that they can submit their complaint to the FBI, perhaps collectively. Every single one of these cases of wire fraud are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. CGC should aid in finding the owners of these books if possible, and work with them and the FBI. This is tens of thousands of dollars (at minimum) in fraud. We can’t stop until we find out who committed this fraud, who was defrauded, and they’re brought to justice.

So, I only looked at the first two on the slip so that I could be surprised when the books arrived. Plot twist —

Woo HOO! The money, the submissions, the wait, the emails and calls - all feels worth it. So happy CGC took the time they didn’t have to take to make sure they got it right and made the change.

90s 10%, 00’s 5% and 10’s 1-3% is the rule of thumb. No reason to break your brain too much beyond that.

Videos are kinda cringe on the part of the Youtuber.

Thanks for the suggestion. I’ll 100% do that. I also planned on maybe making a video afterwards just to inform Overwatch fans of the differences, etc. The good thing is that the first printing “Convention Edition has it written in the top right corner (though it’s very small), and so it’s just issues #1 and #7 that really require scrutiny, as there’s only 1 printing of #6, #8, #13 and the free comic book day Zarya first appearance.

Oh — sidebar. The customer service lady I talked to today was a big Overwatch fan (especially of their animated shorts), so I think it was good that she at least sorta understood what the comics even are. Haha

That’s exactly right. The one on the right (the toy pack version) is also a normal cover stock, while the first printing on the left has a card stock cover. Issue #7 has a similar exchange, going from card stock on the first printing to regular paper on the reprint. Overwatch is a massive video game obviously, but if it ever becomes “mainstream” like other properties, this would have caused a huge issue for passive buyers (especially for issues #1 and #7, which are both substantial key books). The dad picking up a graded #1 for his kid’s birthday or the girlfriend grabbing a slabbed book for her boyfriend likely isn’t going to know the difference by eyeballing it. So I’m just extremely grateful if CGC can get the census to accurately reflect things. At the very least it will give the grader a moment’s pause to investigate what they’re looking at.

So what’s interesting about Overwatch/Blizzard is that they first released their comics digitally. After that, they printed a small amount of convention editions for #1 (McCree first appearance) #2 (Rheindhart first appearance) #7 (Ana and Pharah first appearance, and #13 (Doomfist first appearance). Years later, they reprinted issues 1, 2 and 7 to go with the backpack hanger toys. But they ALSO did FIRST printings of issue #6 (first appearance of Torbjorn) and #8 (not sure if it has significance off the top of my head). So, for instance, the #8 that’s on the census today is JUST the toy comic, as there is no other version of the book. As to why someone would get the toy comics of 1, 2 and 7 graded? #2 first print has gone for some pretty high prices graded. But really it’s like everything else in pop culture, it all depends on broader outcome and appeal. Overwatch is a massive property, but those gamers are still young, and we haven’t seen life action adaptations of it yet. Personally, I could see issue #1 and #7 falling into a kind of “Whitman” category, as they were specifically printed for the toy AND are of a lesser cover stock, potentially making them more difficult in high grade. HOWEVER, they’re entirely ubiquitous and the print run is likely in the tens of thousands, unlike the first edition card stock covers. So — who knows? Haha

So WOO HOO? Maybe? Just got off the phone with CGC and they’re going to try and stop shipment, pull the books and re-label the reprints as reprints, which will accomplish what I set out to do — create the census tier for the reprints. It’s funny because she was concerned that we wouldn’t know which #1 was the reprint, and I told her that it’s the one that was intentionally damaged. Haha She laughed and was like “FOUND IT!” So I’m really glad I damaged the reprints so that it made this whole thing easier. So — fingers crossed. At the very least when a book comes in in the future, the grader will be able to see “reprint” as a category and will pause to figure out how the book should be labeled. I’ll update once it’s confirmed. Hopefully they were able to stop shipment before it goes out. When I told her this was officially the nerdiest call I’ve ever made, she said, “Well, you called the right place.” Haha

I think most people agree on one piece of the census — the 9.8s are reflective of an (almost) absolute truth. Every grade beneath that is always going to be subject to potential cracking. But 1) This isn’t just about the census, it’s about the collectible being correctly labeled. And 2) Overwatch isn’t Spawn #1 or some massive Spiderman book with tens of thousands of graded copies. This specific census is in its infancy, and what I’m trying to do is help (as a customer) to lay the correct foundation. Of course it could still be subject to the same issues as other books, but what it should not be subjected to is having #1 first prints and #1 reprints (that have different set covers AND different paper stock covers) filed under the same category. Especially since this is an issue I’ve brought up to them multiple times to the point where I’ve sent in my physical books and paid to ensure that the census and labeling be as close to accurate as is possible. The grader was given BOTH books in the same submission. The books are WILDLY different. And the grader is filing these two WILDLY different books under the same census tier. Knowingly and purposely doing their job incorrectly. I am (marginally) satisfied with them creating the “convention” tier for the 1st printing of #2, despite what issues that creates for previously graded books, and despite it assigning the incorrect publication date to the 2nd printing (an egregious error that is easily rectified), but for #1, it’s just an abject and intentional failure on the part of the grader. The books are literally right now today with CGC. They can right now today fix the issue I’ve previously and am currently pointing to. There’s zero excuse not to fix the issue.

I’m not sure I understand the “hobbying wrong.” There isn’t a wrong way to hobby IMO. The census being as close to correct as possible and the labeling being exactly correct every time when paying for a service seems reasonable. As it pertains to the first appearances of characters from Overwatch, I would only be able to compare them to things like Sonic, Mario, Pokemon, God of War, Last of Us, etc. It’s a different line than superhero books, but I’d say they’re no more or less important to the people who care about video game characters. Like everything else, it’s a niche within a specific hobby.

I care somewhat about the census, but probably even more about the labeling of the collectible being correct. Secondarily, though, I think the census should have some effort put into it by the community. For instance, when you crack a slab you’re supposed to inform CGC so that they remove it from the census. The tidier the census, the better the hobby IMO.

If the grader is holding two books with completely different paper stock used (literal card stock cover vs non card stock) it feels like they have to intentionally not want to do their job correctly if they’re ignoring notes attached to them.

This is a similar situation where, to my knowledge, CGC has not assigned a reprint status to the toy comic for Incredible Hulk 314. This is a reprint published at a later date. People in the know might be able to discern that difference, but the difference should be established on the slab itself.

I sent in very clear and succinct notes attached to the physical books. I reiterated that they are reprints and even provided their publication date on the note. Additionally, the books are physically different — different stock for the covers. I’ve also since put images in this thread.

The notes on the physical comics (which are composed of differing stock) stated succinctly the source of the reprints. The issue with #2 is that it isn’t reflecting the correct publication date for the reprint toy version. Additionally, the “convention editions” are already under “Issue 2” tier. This creates a new tier. I’m fine with the creation of that new tier for that comic, but the publication date is still incorrect for the toy version reprint.

The convention editions are the first printings — but it’s not super relevant that they say “first printing” as much as the toy versions are lumped on the census with convention editions. The much more complex issue is #1. Because there are no identifying difference between the first print and the second print except for a slight alteration to the artwork. If you’re holding the physical book, the first print is card stock, and the second print is normal floppy paper.

The notes on the books were concise. The notes read: “2nd printing toy box comic” Additionally, the actual submission form noted the two second printing toy comics. They ignored both the physical notes attached to the comics and the submission form. The only “action” they took was to create a NEW tier on the census for Overwatch #2 called the “Convention Edition” — which all (to my knowledge) of the graded Overwatch #2’s already are. These are issues I’ve also called them about, spoke to human beings who said they understood the issue. Literally paying money to have the census corrected was my final option. So to see it even now not being addressed is bothersome. Hopefully since they are still in the process of slabbing, it can be amended. Hence the email and the post here.