Does CGC Grade Restored Books More Harshly?

[lou_fine]

As we already know, CGC gives out the PLOD to all restored books which has had a resulting negative impact on the prices of these books. I was wondering if CGC is also applying a double whammy to these books by grading them a lot more harshly.

 

I have certainly seen a lot of really nice looking restored books that on appearance only, appears to be undergraded. Especially in comparsion to some of the fugly looking HG books sitting out there in blue labels.

 

The latest example of this would be the recent Church run of GL books in the Heritage auction last month. Out of 28 Church GL's in the Heritage auction, only 5 issues did not make the 9.0 or higher grade, with the majority of them grading out as either 9.4 or 9.6. Interesting to note that 4 of these 5 issues were all graded as either NM or NM+ in the original Mile High catalogue.

 

Not surprisingly, both of the restored issues did not make the grade as they were both slabbed with 8.5 VF+ labels. That works out to a perfect 100% strikeout average for the restored books while the unrestored books only had a strikeout average of 8%.

 

Coincidence or does CGC apply a much higher grading standard on restored books on top of the stigmitizing PLOD label?

[G.A.tor]

my opinion would be a half grade bump "down", due to the defect of the restoration...this is just my opinion based on the books I have submitted, that I would otherwise grade slightly higher via eye appeal alone, and not structural grade (and I am typically right on with cgc)

gator