Pedigreed or not pedigreed?

[Red Hook]

I think verification can come when a number of factors are pulled together... what I call the "line of procurement", the seller, page quality, other "characteristics", even as odd as the odor of the book. I personally have always felt Mark Haspel to have a super skill set when it comes to ID-ing pedigrees.

 

Heck, if it were just about the certificates, I could probably do a good job of duping them, as could others. If you wanted to go to all the trouble that is.

 

And of course it helps if you have a good story to go with it, like a guy with a gun in a mot.....uh...never mind.

 

Red

[tth2]

What? My Mile High II copies denote title and issue on the Cert.

 

Okay. So what about certain Bowling Green copies? I have a Thor which has a Bowling Green certificate but does not note title and issue. The book was purchased from Ritter so I'm comfortable its a legit pedigree copy (sans the notorious date stamp I might add). All the Big Apple copies I've purchased from Steven have a cert in them but do not note title and issue. My Oaklands are just a sticker, I could easily switch out with another book.

I have Boston copies with just a sticker. No title, no issue #

 

Also, for all the whining done about Chuckster, the average grade on my Thor mile High II copies is 9.2...not spectacular by any means but not absolute garbage either. I do agree that it should not have been assigned as a pedigree but the horse it out of the barn here. You made a decision, don't switch the rules after the fact.

 

As far as Diamond Run copies go my certificate notes title and issue as well.

I'm not getting this whole pedigree thing.

I'm going to end up with a pile up books with certs that once received CGC recognition that will never be graded because "the rules have changed".

 

The next pedigree assigned should have mandatory front and back cover scans in triplicate...of course that'll work until they hit the clean and press factory.

 

You make valid points about the various pedigrees, particularly Oakland and Boston, which have no identifying marks and come from an era (post-1964) where really nice books are as likely to not be from a pedigree collection as from a pedigree collection. You really have to question the point of designating a book from this period as a pedigree, and how accurate the designation on a CGC slab is for many of them given the interchangeability of the COAs. For example, there are a ton of 9.6 and better Captain America 109s out there with nice white pages. Other than Bechara`s word, is there really any way to distinguish a Boston copy from any other 9.6 copy?

 

Diamond Run is different. As I understand it from a thread about CGC`s "decertifying" DR`s pedigree status, it was because the original facts about the pedigree were misrepresented to CGC, and when the truth came to light the collection no longer satisfied CGC`s criteria for pedigree status. If that was the case, I think CGC was justified in saying they would no longer recognize the DR pedigree. Better for them to try to correct a mistake rather than perpetuating it just because the barn door had already been opened. And by the way, just because CGC doesn`t recognize DR as a pedigree doesn`t mean that a lot of the books from the collection aren`t darn nice. Many of them are.

 

If you`re really hung up on DR books having the DR pedigree noted on the slab, I understand PGX have had no problem in doing so.

[RedRaven]

If you`re really hung up on DR books having the DR pedigree noted on the slab, I understand PGX have had no problem in doing so.

[greggy]

If you`re really hung up on DR books having the DR pedigree noted on the slab, I understand PGX have had no problem in doing so.

[RedRaven]

If you`re really hung up on DR books having the DR pedigree noted on the slab, I understand PGX have had no problem in doing so.

[fingfangfoom]

If you`re really hung up on DR books having the DR pedigree noted on the slab, I understand PGX have had no problem in doing so.

 

Not "hung up" just questioning the decision makers and their infinite wisdom.

 

...but you are correct in that I'll probably have to seek that alternative to receive the

notation.

[tth2]

If you`re really hung up on DR books having the DR pedigree noted on the slab, I understand PGX have had no problem in doing so.

 

Not "hung up" just questioning the decision makers and their infinite wisdom.

 

...but you are correct in that I'll probably have to seek that alternative to receive the

notation.

You DO realize that a DR book is still a DR book, regardless of whether CGC says it is, right?

 

There are plenty of books that knowledgeable collectors identify by the collection name, even if not recognized by CGC. The Golden State, Slobodian and Sid`s Luncheonette books come to mind. I`m sure the Janowicz books will share that distinction too. I don`t think CGC`s not designating them on the slab has hurt sales of these books at all.

[Guardian Comics]

Clevelands seem to have a cult following as well, even though not conveyed on the CGC holder. I'd love to pick up more, especially the Surfers but either people aren't advertising them as Clevelands or people like them so damn much they don't want to sell.

 

 

Jim