Pedigree grading discussion

[kelholt]

I was talking with a long-time dealer a couple weeks back and a few things from our discussion really got me to thinking. One item that he said was that "generally, comic collectors have found that most Crippen D CGC graded books were over-graded and that is seen when these books hit the market now some for the 3-4 time since original auction from Heritage. The lower prices that these books are bringing is testament to that over grading. Believe me I was on the auction floor and some weren't pretty. " The topic I was wanting to discuss is whether this is a generally known opinion, and have other pedigrees ( Mile-high, Rockford, Ohio, Nic Cage, etc.) shown to be given a 'benefit of pedigree bump' in the CGC grading.

 

-Kelly

[Forbush-Man]

There were roughly 13,000 books in the Davis Crippen pedigree originally. 2000 or so were first brought to market around 1991. The remainder turned up for sale 15 years later. Due to storage conditions the second batch didn't fare as well, in my understanding. So the only piece I would suggest to this discussion is the pedigree would do well to be split into to two segments; the 1991 books and the later books (these are the ones that seem to exhibit the inside cover tanning). Just MHO.

[Mio]

I have a 7.0 from the second batch of Ds. It has the rustiest staple & rust transfer I've ever seen and a 1 inch margin of soiling on the back cover among other defects. I would have said fine, or fine minus... yet Heritage and CGC both said 7.0. Pretty lame! But at least the case/label/certificate look nice...

[tth2]

Mile Highs are notoriously overgraded. When selling MHs to me, please be sure to price them as if 2 levels were deducted from the label. Thank you.

[esquirecomics]

There is no doubt, IMHO, that many pedigree copies are given a special "pedigree" bump by CGC.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

Yeah, the Crippen books were given the benefit of the doubt, no question.

 

Here is one that if it were a true 9.0, would have sold for more then the paltry $598 it garnered. The wear on the back cover spine, and the foxing and rust stains really detract from what should be a classic Schomburg war cover. Its still a nice book, but a 9.0?

 

 

[MCMiles]

I've often thought that there is a Pedigree bump from CGC, even Silver Age Peds. The Crippen books are definitely given the bump in my opinion, but I've also heard that CGC is easy on foxing, which seems to be the major problem with Crippen copies.

[Moondog]

There are many 9.8 Gaines copies that don't deserve that grade. Not even close.

[nearmint]

Yeah, and I hate foxing. With all the Nedor Crippens that became available a few years ago, I couldn't bring myself to bid on a single one.

[buttock]

I don't buy many peds, but this year I bought 3 CGC graded Mile Highs and a White Mountain. I cracked them all out and they were all very tightly graded. In each case I agreed with the grade, but wouldn't have argued had they been a single increment higher.

 

However, I have to agree that the CGC graded Crippens I've seen seem to be by and large overgraded. Foxing and rust seem to be ignored.

 

I don't think you can transfer either observation to grading of pedigrees in general.

[esquirecomics]

Unfortunately I view the pedigree bumps as detracting from CGC's credibility as truly independent and honest (and I'm not using that term in the sense of the opposite being dishonest, but more "true" to standards) in their assessments, but perhaps that is just me.

[Bunky Brian]

Forgive me if this goes off topic,

 

However, I have always found CGC grading with ANY golden age book, completely off and up ticked by at least a full grade, or so. Yes, perhaps more so with Church copies.

 

I was told once by someone, that CGC does not bell curve with the grading, and explained that comic age bands or groups from that given "time period" are used as the comparative books, when assigning the given grade, HUH? is not that the description of grading to a curve?

 

I like a insufficiently_thoughtful_person, have always graded any book, from any time period, to an example of another book, as if it was printed today.

 

Thoughts?

B

 

 

 

 

 

[Moondog]

Forgive me if this goes off topic,

 

However, I have always found CGC grading with ANY golden age book, completely off and up ticked by at least a full grade, or so. Yes, perhaps more so with Church copies.

 

I was told once by someone, that CGC does not bell curve with the grading, and explained that comic age bands or groups from that given "time period" are used as the comparative books, when assigning the given grade, HUH? is not that the description of grading to a curve?

 

I like a insufficiently_thoughtful_person, have always graded any book, from any time period, to an example of another book, as if it was printed today.

Thoughts?

B

 

Of course. Age should not be a factor in the grade. If GA NM/M books are for the most part so rare that they are nearly non-existent, so be it. A VF is a VERY nice book.

[G.A.tor]

Forgive me if this goes off topic,

 

However, I have always found CGC grading with ANY golden age book, completely off and up ticked by at least a full grade, or so. Yes, perhaps more so with Church copies.

 

I was told once by someone, that CGC does not bell curve with the grading, and explained that comic age bands or groups from that given "time period" are used as the comparative books, when assigning the given grade, HUH? is not that the description of grading to a curve?

 

I like a insufficiently_thoughtful_person, have always graded any book, from any time period, to an example of another book, as if it was printed today.

Thoughts?

B

 

Of course. Age should not be a factor in the grade. If GA NM/M books are for the most part so rare that they are nearly non-existent, so be it. A VF is a VERY nice book.

I only grade GA books (For myself), but I use the same standards "if" I grade any other book from any other "age:

[Silver Surfer]

Unfortunately I view the pedigree bumps as detracting from CGC's credibility as truly independent and honest (and I'm not using that term in the sense of the opposite being dishonest, but more "true" to standards) in their assessments, but perhaps that is just me.

 

Mark I'm sure your not alone with this assumption but most people would hesitate when it comes to echoing your concerns. Certain auction houses benefit/profit from these "bumps" as well. I find it funny how its almost become the norm to chalk up these questionable grades as just "GA or pedigree bumps", almost like that's the way it should be?

 

 

[tth2]

However, I have always found CGC grading with ANY golden age book, completely off and up ticked by at least a full grade, or so. Yes, perhaps more so with Church copies.

I've got a few slabbed GA books of 9.4 and higher grade which I think compare very favorably with slabbed SAs and BAs of equal grade. People who know me well know how fanatical I am about grading at the high-end level, so this is not a statement that I make lightly. I do believe, however, that CGC is more lenient on manufacturing defects in GA books than they would be on books from later eras.

 

Perhaps people who believe there is a GA bump are commenting more on the fact that most GA books (even Church and Reilly) aren't as "fresh" looking as a typical SA and BA book of equal grade, and therefore in their minds the GA book is noticeably dingier than the SA/BA book when held alongside each other? But CGC generally doesn't factor in freshness into their grades, only structural grade. Also, and I would defer on this to collectors who are much more knowledgeable about GA than me, weren't GA books generally printed with much less glossiness than SA books? I can point to numerous SA Marvel and DC books, particularly Marvels that have a lot of dark blue or red in the cover, where the glossiness and eye appeal is off the charts, even where the structural grade may not be that fantastic. Were many/any GA books printed with the same ink composition?

 

 

[tth2]

Forgive me if this goes off topic,

 

However, I have always found CGC grading with ANY golden age book, completely off and up ticked by at least a full grade, or so. Yes, perhaps more so with Church copies.

 

I was told once by someone, that CGC does not bell curve with the grading, and explained that comic age bands or groups from that given "time period" are used as the comparative books, when assigning the given grade, HUH? is not that the description of grading to a curve?

 

I like a insufficiently_thoughtful_person, have always graded any book, from any time period, to an example of another book, as if it was printed today.

Thoughts?

B

 

Of course. Age should not be a factor in the grade. If GA NM/M books are for the most part so rare that they are nearly non-existent, so be it. A VF is a VERY nice book.

I only grade GA books (For myself), but I use the same standards "if" I grade any other book from any other "age:

Well, beat up is beat up in any age.

[buttock]

One point that's raised by this whole discussion is what exactly constitutes a "pedigree".

 

A true "pedigree" should have qualities that set it above other copies. I'd argue that a lot of collections that CGC recognizes as peds are nothing more than large collections. The fact that Crowley, Rockford, and Crippens are often avoided, rather than sought tells you something about the collection. A lot of these are collections that came to light during the CGC era. Thus, more of them are graded and the opportunity to recognize a "pedigree bump" is slanted toward them. "Toronto" books are another one to throw in here, although not really recognized as a pedigree. Many of those seemed to be overgraded, and a little dull with relatively poor state of preservation.

 

In that sense, if a Church, Reilly, or White Mountain gets a little bump - I'm not so concerned because I would expect it to be nicer than other books of similar structural quality. However, if foxing and tanning get ignored in favor of structural quality, the opposite holds true.

 

This may simply speak to CGCs focus on structural quality when assigning a grade.

[adamstrange]

Unfortunately I view the pedigree bumps as detracting from CGC's credibility as truly independent and honest (and I'm not using that term in the sense of the opposite being dishonest, but more "true" to standards) in their assessments, but perhaps that is just me.

 

Mark I'm sure your not alone with this assumption but most people would hesitate when it comes to echoing your concerns. Certain auction houses benefit/profit from these "bumps" as well. I find it funny how its almost become the norm to chalk up these questionable grades as just "GA or pedigree bumps", almost like that's the way it should be?

 

 

CGC is producing a single number to describe the condition of a book and to that end they have to choose which defects to include in that number as well the relative weight to each defect. The reason that I've heard stated for a pedigree bump is related to comparatively low weight they assign to defects that impact ink reflectivity, color retention and "freshness." While a pedigree may have the same structural defects as any other copy, they may well have much less deterioration of ink, color, and freshness and CGC has chosen to alter the algorithm to round the book up on tweener grades. A 9.3 pedigree copy, for example, might be rounded up to a 9.4. This approach is consistent with at least a portion of the marketplace prior to CGC's arrival and one that they seem to apply consistently. CGC had to choose one approach and given the variety of collector preference about the weighting of defects they were bound, as they have in this case, to tick off some portion of the hobby regardless of the approach they took.

[adamstrange]

...foxing and tanning get ignored in favor of structural quality

 

This may simply speak to CGCs focus on structural quality when assigning a grade.

 

These would be my vote for the explanation of the grades given to certain copies of certain pedigrees.