THE_BEYONDER

On 1/3/2024 at 6:40 PM, LordRahl said:

At this point why would you try to offload when you'd likely get busted? CGC is going to buy it back, presuming at the price paid for the book. In fact people that bought during the pandemic bonanza are probably ecstatic that this guy scammed them because they just made their money back and most of the books on that list are going for considerably less now than they were during the pandemic craziness.

I doubt CGC is going to reimburse the purchase cost.  Most likely they will offer current going rate 

I’m curious how many of those ASM 300s are currently for sale…

On 1/3/2024 at 6:24 PM, LordRahl said:

And 194's weirdly enough. I think it's the second highest number of books after the 300. Why 194's? Am I missing something about that book in particular? 

Maybe a bigger jump in price from 9.4/9.6 to 9.8 than most books?

On 1/3/2024 at 6:25 PM, LordRahl said:

Ok, this is twice we have posted pretty much the same thing at the same time. There is a glitch in the matrix

On 1/3/2024 at 6:17 PM, EastEnd1 said:

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

No kidding.  The scammer really likes 194 as well.  

On 1/3/2024 at 6:10 PM, bc said:

Just picking a random one from the list:

0003601-001

Iron Man #1

1968

9.6 (Universal)

 

If I look up that cert # it shows it was graded on 12/29/2023

 

Isn't that a very early cert number to just be graded last Friday? Others that start with "00" go back to 2008/2009 grade dates.

-bc

New grading date but maintained original cert number?  I thought regrades got new certs….

On 1/2/2024 at 12:54 PM, comicwiz said:

Quck update, I've now expanded the dataset to 1680 records of listings intermingled between three different ebay accounts this person used. This now spans the timeline from 1/29/2011 to 12/19/2023. Below is an infograph which I've updated as well, the highlighted numbers indicate where green to blue swaps occurred, that number in the circle cross-references to the matrix I've created for the six green to blue swaps. As the qualified were not originally sold by this seller, but purchased by the seller to swap it to a blue/universal, all you are seeing is blue/universal sales on the first list. In instances where multiple attempts were made to sell the same comic, with the same certification number, and was recorded as a past sale, I've colour coded and tied by linear markings. In cases where it was one of the green to blue books, only one instance is recorded as an individual entry on the matrix.

Below we have the earliest Hulk 181 sale by this seller, again depicting the slogan we've seen now across three eBay accounts, dated Oct 6, 2013. 

Is the first recorded swap from green to blue in 2019?

On 1/2/2024 at 7:56 AM, Steven Valdez said:

That ship has sailed... horse has bolted... genie out of the bottle.

So…just change nothing?

On 1/2/2024 at 7:27 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

Here's a possible invisible barcode strategy that doesn't require printing a unique barcode for each inner sleeve and holder.

Inner sleeve: preprinted X# of sleeves with 12345

Holder: Preprinted x # of holders with 6789

specific copy of ASM-252: Normal barcode: 123456789(not visible on the label)-A2345gh595 where the trailing digits are specific to the individual copy of the book graded.  The inner sleeve and holder comprise the verification of the sequence expected for a specific book.  There's little chance a scammer could find or know, sight unseen what the inner and outer sequence is to match them or marry them with the same book in a lesser grade to swap out.  When CGC receives a reholder they scan the inner and outer well to verify the invisible barcode.  Fast and efficient. Is it 100% foolproof? No, nothing is 100% Not ever, but it's a possible improvement that could be cost-effective. 

This would be great moving forward, but what do we do with the millions of slabs already out there? How do we make them immune to the current switcheroo?

On 1/2/2024 at 12:29 AM, wombat said:

Well we certainly hit a record for someone quoting their own posts. 

It’s a unique posting style for sure 

On 12/31/2023 at 7:09 AM, AbsoluteCarnage said:

On 12/31/2023 at 4:35 AM, MagnusX said:

Dr. Octopus vs Reed Richard.

very cool one. Never saw it before. 

It’s a great story arc.  Reed is actually trying to recruit the Doctor 

On 1/2/2024 at 12:11 AM, Iconic1s said:

How about they keep doing reholders as they have been but refrain from any kind of favortism for “big” submitters?

I think the idea that the CGC machine doesn’t know whose books they are working on is out the window at this point.

A few months ago CGC posted a video where the Toddfather mentioned whose book he was signing… I questioned this and they said that while the signer knew whose books they were signing that the graders still didn’t know.  I thought that the signers knowing was also garbage!  If the entire CGC process is not 100% anonymous, certain cool people might get better sigs/sketches (or maybe their reholders aren’t looked at as close).  It’s supposed to be an “impartial” service throughout and it is clear it is not.

If what I’ve come to believe keeping up with this thread is true, then this guy used his name recognition to get one over on CGC, while CGC’s apathetic attitude towards QC and impartiality, facilitated his success. 

Has it been confirmed that the scammer is a major submitter known to CGC?

On 1/1/2024 at 11:56 PM, drotto said:

Yes, speculation a bit on my part, but it seems very reasonable based on what is known at this point. I am not sure what CGC is going to do at this point.  Any guesses at that would also be speculation.

I assume new reholder protocols along with a list of all the impacted books is all we’ll be getting from CGC 

On 1/1/2024 at 11:32 PM, onlyweaknesskryptonite said:

Instead thanks to CGC polling some "Trusted members of the community " this is what the label for that book looked like.

The scammer could get that put into a blue label lickety-split.

On 1/1/2024 at 11:26 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Lol I hope 🙏 Lord willing I was clear enough.

When normal reholder slabs break it ain't pretty or flawless. I dropped mine on the floor. I didn't then stick it in the oven like the video really and try to melt the plastic back together.

 

The scammer was trying to avoid CGC scrutinizing the book itself.  A slab that shows no damage helps achieve this goal.

On 1/1/2024 at 11:22 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Cgc doesn't require you to play humpty Dumpty and put a case back together for reholder.

Period the end

And…,

fade to black

On 1/1/2024 at 11:08 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

When cgc assesses a reholder it is the book not the case they assess simple as that

On 1/1/2024 at 11:15 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Cgc does not just print labels, or their not supposed to.

I've sent for reholder. @Iconic1s has too but idk how badly his case was damaged.

I dropped mine in the garage, it barely fit together. Cgc looked at the book!

The after looking at the book and assessing that condition looked at the label, said close enough and REHOLDERed.

At no point during that was I thinking I need to break out a sonic weld and glue

 

If the case wasn’t tamper evident, they are more likely to just reholder the book without further scrutiny.

On 1/1/2024 at 11:08 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

No it doesn't 

On 1/1/2024 at 11:04 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

But at no time does a CGC slab need to look flawless to somehow "get by CGC on a reholder!" Lol

To avoid a regrade…it does 

On 1/1/2024 at 11:02 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Ya I'm not yelling at you @THE_BEYONDER

I just happened to be quoting you, or responding with a tag.

My bad but it IS really important 

I’m still trying to ascertain what point you’re trying to drive home….

On 1/1/2024 at 10:43 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Cgc was supposed to make sure the BOOK matches the case and hasn't diminished in grade with the examining the BOOK period the end.

People who are new must not have never sent for a reholder.

1. Reason one the case broke, then determine the BOOk and see if it still matches the grade in the case. Slabs don't need to be resealed nor look pretty for reholder. The BOOK has to be evaluated period the end. Your lucky if the slab breaks retention and still has the label with the slab. It doesn't need to be resealed as the case isn't the inspection it is the BOOK.
2. A resealed case that looks pretty or even a regular sealed case with wrong notation on the label? It is STILL THE BOOK that needs the inspection then the correct label.
3. ABSOLUTELY NO ONE NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO RESEAL A CASE THEN SEND TO CGC FOR REHOLDER. THE REASON THE SCAMMER DID IT WAS TO HAVE CHC RESCAN FOR LEGITIMACY ON THE CERT LOOKUP.
4. THE ONLY REASON ANYONE NEEDS TO RESEAL A CASE AT HOME IS TO FOOL OTHER BUYERS not to fool cgc @THE_BEYONDER
5. SHAME ON THE VIDEO FOR EXISTING AND SOME OF US FOR ASKING TO SEE IT!
6. 

The scammer had a legit 9.8 ASM 252 newsstand slab.  To turn that into a 9.8 MJ insert book….they needed to have it reholdered.  Prior to the reholder, the 9.8 MJ slab doesn’t exist.
 

What am I missing?

On 1/1/2024 at 10:36 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

If the label notation needs to be fixed the slab is not perfect is what I said

I’m not sure where you’re going with this….

On 1/1/2024 at 10:32 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

The slab doesn't need to be perfect to correct label notations

 

You said there would be no reason to reholder books if the swap was already perfect. The reason for the reholder is to get the MJ insert notation.