Tokyojoe90

On 8/29/2024 at 11:46 AM, LDarkseid1 said:

I mean I think I’ve made my point enough as to why one clearly looks nicer than the other, can’t explain it any further. It’s very easy to on CGC, everyone does it, no one wants to take responsibility and that the issue could be on their end. What I’ll say is you got a great book regardless so kudos to that.

Thanks for the kudos. I think you assumed that I was complaining about getting a 5.5 when I equally might have been saying the 5.0 was over-graded. In fact I think both. In my view the stained, chipped book is closer to a 3.5-4.5 range and mine more like a 6.0-6.5. Or both could be lower, I just don't think side by side a difference of only 0.5 makes sense. For what it's worth I expect that one day I'll CPR my book

On 8/29/2024 at 9:22 AM, LDarkseid1 said:

All things equal, it seems you’re wrong and your presser didn’t do a good enough job. I mean look, I’m sure they’re solid, but they could have just as easily made a mistake. Very easy to blame CGC, and not out responsibility on the presser.

I disagree with you about two things, (a) it's simply a fact that CGC refused to take another look without an additional grading fee and (b) it's not possible to know whether or not the book had those finger bends caused/added during the missing year. I'm not blaming them, just saying it's impossible to know for sure what happened when a book is lost. I don't deny it's possible my presser didn't do a great job on that book but did in terms of removing the pencil marks and dents and on the other 24 books in the submission. It's possible after removing those pencil dents he forgot to press the finger bends, there's always the possibility of human error.

Of course none of this really has anything to do with the original reason for this thread. Side by side these books appear to be much further than 0.5 apart, do you disagree with that too?

On 8/29/2024 at 7:51 AM, LDarkseid1 said:

Not true at all, I've known people over the last decade who at numerous times have pointed out an issue, a book was looked at again and regraded. If you ultimately feel a mistake was made, CGC will be open to taking a second look. An agenda is an agenda.

When you say 'not true at all' I'm afraid that you are simply wrong. I still have the emails although I'm not going to share them on this forum, suffice it to say that when I specifically asked them to 'take a second look' they refused saying that I was at liberty to resubmit at my own expense if I wished. Bear in mind this was a submission of 25 books and it was only this book I wanted them to take a second look at.

On the other matter that the defects might have been removed or improved with a press, this book was pressed (as were all of those in the submission) but lost at CGC for over a year so it's impossible to know what happened exactly during that time but what I do know is that my presser erased some pencil writing (on the 2nd W) and even the dents caused by the writing so I have confidence that it was well pressed.

On 8/29/2024 at 2:58 AM, TC33 said:

An extremely light sub crease like this is still allowed in 5.5/5.0 books per dozens of similar copies I have had graded and is also noted as allowed in those grades per the CGC grading guide.  Note, I have a championship and the all time record for best ever performance in the CGC grading competition, so I am not some new collector clueless about grading or defects.  The JIM 85 presents like a 5.0, but absolutely no defects in this book should ever drop it below 4.5 at the very worst.  I actually meant to post this on another message where a collector was complaining about a 4.5 grade on his ASM 50 that presented worse than this book, so my mistake for posting here.  However to bring it back on track with this post, I would also take this JIM 85 over that 5.0 WOW 31 with the massive water damage/staining through the whole bottom of the book and pieces out at the back.  CGC usually hits heavy water damage like that a bit harsher than 5.0 even when the rest of the book is nice, but it likely got a GA bump AND caught a friendly grader on a good day?  The Wow 5.5 is immaculate though, I would take that book or any book like that at 5.5 any day.  Huge bump potential with a press!  

If I sound a bit pissed, I have had several really bad grading experiences recently and this one just came back with this massive miss.  To add insult to injury, the micro chip at the top back of this JIM 85 was only a micro tear/bend and the grader also caused that damage on after being too aggressive with it, so I am disappointed on multiple fronts.  In the end, it is still just a micro chip, far bigger ones can be found on 5.5 books, so it's not the end of the world or cause for the big grading miss.  The last CGC grading competition had many books at 5.0+ that presented worse than this JIM 85 and even some with very similar defects.  Attached here is a TOS from the last grading competition for an even more extreme example of the big miss.  This is a 4.0, a full 1.0 grade higher than the bogus JIM 3.0 under grade.  Large spine split, detached lower staple, huge piece out, heavy wear, doesn't hold a candle to my JIM 85 that has no major defects even in the same ball park of these defects. Grading misses happen with so many books being graded by so many different graders with differences of opinion/preference on defects, different experience levels and yes even some having a really bad day or perhaps even being a bit rushed to hit their grading quota for the day.  These misses are part of the cost of doing business with a huge grading company.  From past experience, it will be getting a sizable grade bump on resubmission and with as many books as I send in and the few extreme examples like this that I absolutely have to resubmit, I speak from significant experience.    

 

 

One thing that I haven't mentioned is that when I raised the question of the grade of the 5.5 with CGC despite the book having been lost for over a year they told me that CGC never make mistakes...

On 8/28/2024 at 5:44 AM, TC33 said:

The dealer I used (comicpresser) seemed to think we were screwed and we just had to take the loss from the damage CGC caused?  I know he takes abundant before and after photos, so that should not have been an issue if CGC really covers their damage from handling?  The spine split from top staple to the very top of the book on a TOD 10 was undisclosed and I only noticed it after 6 months of deciding to crack it back open to see why the grade dropped instead of going way up.  I don't think my before shipping front cover pics show how the spine was perfectly intact before shipping, so I know I am screwed on that one. You would think graders would disclose this and be honest when they cause major damage like that and not hide it from the comic owner and their bosses, but apparently not based on my experiences and multiple others I have heard about.    

I feel your pain but I think this should have it's own thread as it doesn't have much to do with my original post unless you mean that you think CGC added the finger bends themselves during that missing year?

On 8/26/2024 at 12:58 AM, LDarkseid1 said:

Yeah I mean whoever you used for pressing, should have handled both of those defects. So the 5.5 really has potential for a decent bump, kiboshing this dilemma.

Yes, it might get a bump but wasn't what I was asking. I'm wondering how these books are only 0.5 apart when the 5.5 presents so much better than the 5.0

On 8/25/2024 at 1:53 AM, buttock said:

Yeah, if they lost it for a year they probably didn't press it with those grader's notes.  

It was pressed before it was submitted rather than have them do it and it sat somewhere in their buildings for over a year between being pressed/submitted and graded

On 8/24/2024 at 7:43 PM, KCOComics said:

Yikes. I would have expected those fingers bends and non color breaking creases to come out with a press. 

Indeed. I sometimes think about CPR but might not be worth it to maybe get a 6.0-6.5

On 8/24/2024 at 10:31 AM, KCOComics said:

I'm with you that the 5.5 looks way nicer. 

That said, 5.5 doesn't feel entirely inappropriate.  I'm guessing you didn't have it pressed? I can see some pressable defects. 

It was pressed but CGC misplaced it for over a year before they were able to grade it

On 8/24/2024 at 2:13 PM, LDarkseid1 said:

Would be great if you provided grader notes for a post like this, as it’s a bit tough to dictate grades this way. The 5.5 could very well have issues not easily seen just by looking at those photos.

For the 5.0:

Grader Notes

piece out left bottom of back cover
stain right bottom of whole book
wear left top of back cover

 

 

For the 5.5:

 

Grader Notes

moderate creasing to cover
moderate finger bends on cover

 

 

 

When I received the 5.5 slab back from CGC I was surprised by the grade thinking it would be higher... this week I saw a 5.0 of the same book and now I'm even more surprised. What do you think? Really just 0.5 between them??

On 7/28/2023 at 9:26 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

I don't think CGC deduct grades for missing inserts. The reason that you will find blues and greens like the two in your opening post is that CGC are inconsistent, and make mistakes. Even if they have a stated treatment policy (as per the link I gave you) they can still get it wrong Joe.

Absolutely I believe they can. However I have a conversation going on with them at the moment about a different book and they've assured me that they never make "grading" mistakes, they only make "labelling" mistakes 

On 7/28/2023 at 9:21 PM, Cman429 said:

I have a Spawn #1 that I submitted with centerfold poster missing on accident. Came back a 7.5 Blue when intact I’m sure it was a NM grade. I think in cases like these where you don’t specify anything CGC just takes it upon themselves to give you a blue or green as they see fit 

Interesting.... I had a book without a centrefold come back a blue .5 last month, it would have been around 2.0-3.0 intact I expect

On 7/28/2023 at 9:15 PM, KCOComics said:

My guess is,  they discounted the grade accordingly. Meaning,  they deducted the grade for the sticker being missing. 

Alternatively, they just made a mistake. 

If so I wonder how much of a hit

On 3/7/2023 at 2:52 AM, KaileeS CS said:

Hello @Bart Allen, here is the response to your question from our research team:

The 2000 A.D. #2 will be Qualified if it is missing the Biotronic Man sticker sheet, and the #3 will be Qualified if it is missing the Survival Wallet.

For the #483, since the Oink is a completely separate book, it will not have any affect on the grade or the category. If submitted, the Oink will have to be graded and encapsulated as a separate submission.
Your proposed comments for 2000 A.D. #483 will be taken into account with space permitting, as we only have so many characters to work with per field on the label. We will add all that we can fit. To notate these key comments, please kindly make a note on the submission/packing slip that you'd like this information added and we will do our best to accommodate the request.
Lastly, they mentioned to keep in mind the possibility exists that some issues of 2000 A.D. may be too big to fit into our holder- which is determined on a case-by-case basis.

Please kindly let us know if you have any additional questions. Thank you!

@KaileeS CS are you sure about that or has policy changed? How about cert 4285703001 ?

On 7/28/2023 at 9:03 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

The Universal would otherwise have to be in 7.0+ condition to be considered for Qualified. Or, perhaps the submitter requested a blue label. Maybe shenanigans are at play. One cannot be sure.

I submitted the blue one... was never asked and never stipulated anything.

Both of these boooks are missing the stickers but otherwise complete. Why is one green and one blue?

Seems to be fixed!

On 7/13/2023 at 10:34 PM, CGC Mike said:

It appears that your books were received into the system today.

Indeed they were! 

On 7/13/2023 at 9:28 AM, revat said:

Make sure they still compensate you for your trouble, happy for you though

We'll see... 

On 7/13/2023 at 9:52 AM, CGC Mike said:

Glad to hear your books were found.  It appears you have already checked regarding the 6/26 books.  I sent the e-mail anyways, and will let you know what I am told.

Thanks Mike 

On 7/13/2023 at 9:37 AM, DougC said:

Do you have pictures of the books prior to sending them in?

I am always curious if CGC has actually "found" the books or replaced them.

I have enough photos to check that when they're here. Besides there's at least one they really would struggle to replace and I had offered to accept suitable replacements anyway. 

First of all they have found my books!!!! The first lot that is... the 21 books from about 15 months ago... so that's great news

Secondly they "are currently receiving packaged delivered on 6/26, so your package should show up in our system today or tomorrow"

@CGC Mike 9461211206215408997582 and CGC6790710307

On 7/12/2023 at 10:25 PM, Joe Fox said:

"not showing this tracking number as being scanned into our warehouse yet but it may have been missed" - they asked for the submission number and would look into it... 

Just heard back and they blame the post office... they're asking me to file a lost claim with the post office even though the package must have been signed for. My biggest grail...