CGC's mysterious "Grading Standards"...

[VintageComics]

As a real world example look at that "photocopy cover" thread. Toward the end a second-hand 'official answer' was posted: there was an unknown change to an unknown policy four years ago.

How can uncommunicated criteria, standards, policies, or policy changes serve either a seller or a buyer?

 

I think it can serve the seller, Dav...if they are 'in the know'.

There probably was/is a small group of insiders privy to policy. Lucky them. But some very knowlegable sellers have posted their garding criteria confusion right along side consumers. Reading them you could feel their frustation.

 

I think the encapsualtion experiment was a long slow evolution that is now fully realized. Don't you? Maybe a tweak here and there, but done for the most part.

 

It turned out to be a system that can differentiate a 9.9 book from a 10.0 book, but finds no difference between altered and unaltered books (unless glues, paints, or chemicals were used in the altering). I personally wish that could've been stated on day-one of the experiment.

You are like an echo pedal.

 

More like an echo with a little wah-wah.

 

Man I love that sound.

 

I really didn't mean to catch the attention of board Clerics. You are correct to rush in whenever a stray independent thought appears. Stupid purist and their stupid passions are relentless and irritating. They should be dispatched. It is safer. And I did take the Prosium, I swear.

 

Finally, light dawns on Marblehead.

 

Aw Dav, I'm just teasing. I like a good discussion as long as it's not based on emotion...I just found the echo pedal reference quaint as I happen to play guitar.

 

(thumbs u

[Dale Roberts]

Is that how Steve ended up with just gums and why he doesn't smile for the camera? Another great educational point.

 

Steve "Gummy" Borock did lay some great groundwork though for a company that was an industry game-changer.

 

Indeed he did and, whilst a critic of how they've gone about certain things, I am a great believer in the need for an organisation of this nature within the hobby. (thumbs u

 

In these specific circumstances, my problem stems from the fact that there was (and probably still is ) a group of insiders who had greater knowledge of the CGC thought process, as well as access to 'underground' services like PCS.

 

This was not in the interests of the wider collecting populace.

 

But sure helped certain playas make plenty of $$$

 

I don't believe this ever happened. I don't think there was ever a sit-down with certain people to discuss grades and what should and should not be accepted. I don't think there is anyone who knows what will be accepted and what won't be accepted except for CGC. The people that do know, have submitted all sorts of books, studied the results, and applied that knowledge. I have a pretty idea at this point as to what a 9.4 is, what a 9.6 is. Is this because I am privy to insider information? NO! It is because I have submitted literally thousands of books. I am not certain I would be as good at discerning between a 3.5 and a 4.0, simply because I don't submit those books very often. I also have not submitted a ton of Golden Age books, and rarely do I ever submit a restored book, because I just don't really carry much, with the exception of the occasional GA book.

 

Now don't take this to mean that Borrock didn't discuss grading standards with anyone. I don't know if he did, or if he didn't. I would think it would have been in the best interest of the hobby if he did talk to some of the respected old timers who had tons of experience, such as Marnin and Joe V etc. But to imply that there is a secret society who planned out the future of comics, with insider knowledge of the workings of CGC, is just a tad cynical in my opinion.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Is that how Steve ended up with just gums and why he doesn't smile for the camera? Another great educational point.

 

Steve "Gummy" Borock did lay some great groundwork though for a company that was an industry game-changer.

 

Indeed he did and, whilst a critic of how they've gone about certain things, I am a great believer in the need for an organisation of this nature within the hobby. (thumbs u

 

In these specific circumstances, my problem stems from the fact that there was (and probably still is ) a group of insiders who had greater knowledge of the CGC thought process, as well as access to 'underground' services like PCS.

 

This was not in the interests of the wider collecting populace.

 

But sure helped certain playas make plenty of $$$

 

I don't believe this ever happened. I don't think there was ever a sit-down with certain people to discuss grades and what should and should not be accepted. I don't think there is anyone who knows what will be accepted and what won't be accepted except for CGC. The people that do know, have submitted all sorts of books, studied the results, and applied that knowledge. I have a pretty idea at this point as to what a 9.4 is, what a 9.6 is. Is this because I am privy to insider information? NO! It is because I have submitted literally thousands of books. I am not certain I would be as good at discerning between a 3.5 and a 4.0, simply because I don't submit those books very often. I also have not submitted a ton of Golden Age books, and rarely do I ever submit a restored book, because I just don't really carry much, with the exception of the occasional GA book.

 

Now don't take this to mean that Borrock didn't discuss grading standards with anyone. I don't know if he did, or if he didn't. I would think it would have been in the best interest of the hobby if he did talk to some of the respected old timers who had tons of experience, such as Marnin and Joe V etc. But to imply that there is a secret society who planned out the future of comics, with insider knowledge of the workings of CGC, is just a tad cynical in my opinion.

 

Cynical? Perhaps.

 

Impossible? Not at all.

 

The fact is that PCS was running long before CGC attempted to make its services public. Their services were invitation only and disclaimers had to be signed to use them.

 

This alone suggests some sort of two-tier operation...'inner circle' if you will.

[kc120us]

Do I think CGC should publish their grading crieteria? Honestly, don't care. Do I think, if they did, it would improve the situation and end a lot of the questions here? Not at all, it might only lead to more questions. Let's face it. We are a nitpicking bunch. We'd use jewlers loops' to inspect the spine of a given book for a any near invisible defect. If they published their grading criteria, we would nit pick it to death. "How can this book get this grade, when your criteria states differently?" And so on ad infinitum. Who are we kidding if we think publishing their grading criteria would help anything? Another reason they shouldn't publish them is because the criteria is always evolving, just as it has been evolving since Overstreet published it's first price guide. And, I also believe the Overstreet criteria is meant to be a guide not an inflexible, "set-in-stone" doctrine. Each book has to be judged on it's own merits thus mandating the need for some subjectivity.

 

As for who created CGC's criteria, well I ask who created Overstreet's criteria? Who was involved in shaping it's guidelines? And who was involved in changing those guidelines for all those years? As a collector, I never received any memo asking if I approve of the changes. They were just there in the new addition of the OPG. Where is the indignation for this? Why do we so readily accept this?

 

 

[VintageComics]

As for who created CGC's criteria, well I ask who created Overstreet's criteria? Who was involved in shaping it's guidelines? And who was involved in changing those guidelines for all those years? As a collector, I never received any memo asking if I approve of the changes. They were just there in the new addition of the OPG. Where is the indignation for this? Why do we so readily accept this?

 

 

[DrWatson]

As for who created CGC's criteria, well I ask who created Overstreet's criteria? Who was involved in shaping it's guidelines? And who was involved in changing those guidelines for all those years?

Overstrteet advisers a.k.a. dealers.

[kc120us]

As for who created CGC's criteria, well I ask who created Overstreet's criteria? Who was involved in shaping it's guidelines? And who was involved in changing those guidelines for all those years?

Overstrteet advisers a.k.a. dealers.

 

Shocking!

[Comicsarefun]

Grading will always be part science and part art. There is just no way you could publish accurate grading standards that could cover all possibilities.

 

When you submit a book to CGC, all you are really doing is paying them for their interpretation of the comic's condition. You are asking an expert for their opinion, almost like submitting a piece of art to a critic, but with some obejective rules applied.

 

If they become too inconsistent, they will lose the public's trust. Clearly they are good at what they do, and have become the intustry standard. Still, grading is a consensus among experts and collectors...just an artful interpretation with an agreed upon set of basic guidelines.

 

 

[Ze-man]

I think it can serve the seller, Dav...if they are 'in the know'

There probably was/is a small group of insiders privy to policy. Lucky them. But some very knowlegable sellers have posted their grading criteria confusion right along side consumers. Reading them you could feel their frustation.

 

I think the encapsualtion experiment was a long slow evolution that is now fully realized. Don't you? Maybe a tweak here and there, but done for the most part.

 

It turned out to be a system that can differentiate a 9.9 book from a 10.0 book, but finds no difference between altered and unaltered books (unless glues, paints, or chemicals were used in the altering). I personally wish that could've been stated on day-one of the experiment.

 

 

Well then it would not have been a long slow evoloution experiment now would it!

 

And If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride.

 

*disclaimer* I have nothing against wishes, horses,or beggars, they just come to mind everytime I hear somebody say "I wish"

 

 

[joe_collector]

Grading will always be part science and part art. There is just no way you could publish accurate grading standards that could cover all possibilities.

 

Not to mention that CGC has never had a strict set of guidelines, as these have admittedly changed over the years. We bring up example after example of Book X with this flaw, or Book Y being graded a certain way, and often CGC states they "no longer do that".

 

Look at what recently happened with the CGC 4.0 Restored with the photocopied cover - same thing, that was an "old guideline" that has since been changed.

 

That's the main reason to never publish guidelines - it makes it easier to change them.

[conditionfreak]

I guess in a nutshell, it boils down to these factors.

 

CGC is accepted as the standard.

 

CGC has a standard that is not explainable.

 

CGC states that their grading is subjective opinion.

 

CGC gets it in the "ball park" 99% of the time.

 

The ball park is an accepted commonality amongst "most" collectors, but not definable exactly.

 

Any CGC graded books' present grade, "could" be different if graded the month before or the month after, the actual date it was graded.

 

Overstreet and others have attempted to stipulate what grading criteria is/are, but because there are an infinite number of combinations of factors that could be strung together, it is near impossible to actually put in writing what leads to what grade exactly. It is a judgement of the whole book taken into account and arriving at an acceptable judgement, according to the final grader of that particular day (people get sick, go on vacations, take different jobs, die, etc).

 

Golden Age books and Modern Age books are supposed to be graded using the same standards, but apparently they are not.

 

There is an infamous Action Comics #1 that is WAY overgraded by CGC, and was discussed on this forum recently, that illustrates some of the above statements very well. If this same Action Comics #1 were graded again today, I suspect it would be two and one half or even three grades lower that its' current slabbed grade.

 

I suspect that if many of the current 10.0's are submitted in a few years for reslabbing (per CGC's recommendations), half will not be recertified as 10.0's. But they will be 9.8's for sure and probably 9.9's.

 

I have stated here before that "grading is subjective" and was attacked by many for my stance on that. But, it is. Like it or not.

 

If I purchase a book from you, or sell you a book, and we do not agree with the grade stipulated prior to the sale. It is my firm belief that there is no legal recourse because grading is subjective. But, honest and well intentioned people can disagree about such things and still conduct business honorably.

 

It is all about "ball parks". There are disagreements between different CGC graders and between different comic book collectors.

 

One of my main questions concerning this whole process of Professional Grading is this: do "they" use the naked eye for their grading (assuming 20-20 vision whether naturally or corrected), or do they use 10x magnification (which I believe is the case), which then makes our (collectors and dealers) naked eye assessments (assuming again, 20-20 vision) faulty from the CGC method of operation, from the starting line.

 

I love CGC, but I hate them also. I long for the past days of Good, G/VG, Very Good, VG/F, Fine, F/VF, Very Fine, VF/NM, Near Mint, Near Mint +.

 

But alas, they are gone forever.

 

Really. What is the difference between a Near Mint and a 9.8? A couple of stress lines at one staple? Big freaking deal. Yes, I was known as "conditionfreak", but I was called that before Professional Grading companies existed. It was not a name I "took", but was "given" to me by a LCS owner back then. Today, I am not near some of ya'll out there, in that regard.

 

Just get it in the ball park and check for restoration please, and I will be happy CGC. I like the restoration and slabbing a heck of a lot more than the grading part of your business. I need you to do the slabbing and restoration checks but I do not need you to tell me if the condition of a given book is what I want in regard to grading. I can ascertain that for myself.

 

But then again, with the internet, your grading is very helpful, as long as it is in the "ball park".

 

I remember years ago, taking a couple of books now and then, to my local comic shop and asking the owner what he graded them as. The usual answer (after about fifteen seconds of looking at the book) was something like Very Fine ish.

 

That was what I thought also, and was all I needed to know then.

 

Now.............geeesh.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Grading will always be part science and part art. There is just no way you could publish accurate grading standards that could cover all possibilities.

 

Not to mention that CGC has never had a strict set of guidelines, as these have admittedly changed over the years. We bring up example after example of Book X with this flaw, or Book Y being graded a certain way, and often CGC states they "no longer do that".

 

Look at what recently happened with the CGC 4.0 Restored with the photocopied cover - same thing, that was an "old guideline" that has since been changed.

 

That's the main reason to never publish guidelines - it makes it easier to change them.

 

I think the reason is rooted in the fact that there is more to grading than just a mathematical equation of defects. Eye appeal, color strike, page quality, inks, production defects, age or era of the book and many more factors would just put an infinite amount of variables into the equation.

 

A given grade is not so much a quantifiable number of the book's techincal grade as it is an index or an opinion of the quality of the book's appearance and state of preservation.

 

I'm not even sure that makes sense myself.

 

 

[Silver Surfer]

I read lots of threads where people complain about CGC not publishing their grading standards. I was bored for a minute, and thought about this. Why should they? Do certain restaurants disclose their secret sauce? Wouldn't a published set of standards mean the majority of the encapsulated books be held under intense scrutiny, thus only adding lots of "manpower" aka company resources to put out fires? We've seen their own grading standards become fine tuned over the years (the other thread about the AF #15 with the color copy front cover graded as an apparent 4.5 got me thinking about this).

 

If you personally became president of CGC today, would YOU make an effort to publish your "official" January 2009 standards based on 9 years of collective grading "evolution?" I don't think I would, and I certainly understand why CGC doesn't.

 

 

How about to support the integrity of their work? Shield no disrespect but like others have pointed out CGC is not offering a "special sauce" or protecting the Colonel's secret receipe. Comic grading has been around long before CGC ever opened their doors. They should at the very least come out say that they use OS as a base but the combined defects on any one book can vary the grade and these will have to be treated on a case by case basis. Or did they make up their own standards and criteria? No one knows for sure as its all speculation at this point because there has never been an official annoucement. If I became president I would want to at the very least publish the basic grading criteria. This notion that they are protecting some kind of trade secret is just crazy.

[seanfingh]

This notion that they are protecting some kind of trade secret is just crazy.

 

Is it crazy? Or has CGC created the only semi-universally accepted grading system? If you were inspecting homes or cars or anything else and had created a successful brand, would you publish your standards so knock-off artists could get a leg up? They don't care whether you or anyone else can grade to their standards. Why should they? They are in business to get people to send their books to them, not to teach people how to grade.

[VintageComics]

Another solid post from the closet of firehair!

 

 

[Silver Surfer]

This notion that they are protecting some kind of trade secret is just crazy.

 

Is it crazy? Or has CGC created the only semi-universally accepted grading system? If you were inspecting homes or cars or anything else and had created a successful brand, would you publish your standards so knock-off artists could get a leg up? They don't care whether you or anyone else can grade to their standards. Why should they? They are in business to get people to send their books to them, not to teach people how to grade.

 

More bad examples, home inspection? Its called a building code and its either up to snuff or its not. Gee do you really think these inspectors are running around with secret techniques. From a consumers perspective not knowing how they come to a grade is a bad thing but I guess if they don't tell us then no one can hold them accountable for funky grades, its "discretionary" as some say. Pass the secret sauce, its almost lunch time.

[Ze-man]

This notion that they are protecting some kind of trade secret is just crazy.

 

Is it crazy? Or has CGC created the only semi-universally accepted grading system? If you were inspecting homes or cars or anything else and had created a successful brand, would you publish your standards so knock-off artists could get a leg up? They don't care whether you or anyone else can grade to their standards. Why should they? They are in business to get people to send their books to them, not to teach people how to grade.

 

More bad examples, home inspection? Its called a building code and its either up to snuff or its not. Gee do you really think these inspectors are running around with secret techniques. From a consumers perspective not knowing how they come to a grade is a bad thing but I guess if they don't tell us then no one can hold them accountable for funky grades, its "discretionary" as some say. Pass the secret sauce, its almost lunch time.

 

How is that a bad thing? Frustrating perhaps..but a bad thing? As Sean said they are in the business of grading books for other people, not teaching them how they do it. People can still hold CGC accountable for funky grades,it's called disagreeing with them and selling the book raw.

 

Honestly, CGC created a grading methodology that for the most part can be deciphered by looking closely at what books have received what grades. Are these published standards?..no. But overall there is a pattern to how they grade that is right in front of us. And while I would of course like to know how they arrived at certain grades compared to what I understand to be accepted grading guidelines, I understand that it is not an option right now so I work around it.

 

In many instances CGC has changed how I grade books because I know what it will probably get if I submit it to CGC, but that does not mean it is how I would personally grade it. And I suppose that is what frustrates many people, having someone else dictate grading standards to them

 

 

 

[Silver Surfer]

Well maybe "bad" might be overstating my point but it would just be nice to see consistent grading based on generally know standards.

[Ze-man]

Well maybe "bad" might be overstating my point but it would just be nice to see consistent grading based on generally know standards.

 

I hear ya, and don't really disagree with you. It just isn't a reality right now no matter how much we might complain about it.

 

later

 

 

[joe_collector]

And just a side note that CGC seems to stand alone in not posting Grading Standards like all the other major players do:

 

PSA Sportscard Grading Standards:

 

http://www.psacard.com/grading/grading_standards.chtml

 

PCGS Coin Grading Standards:

 

http://www.pcgs.com/grades.chtml

 

AFA Toy Grading Standards:

 

http://www.toygrader.com/gradingscale.aspx

 

VGA Video Game Grading Standards:

 

http://www.vggrader.com/gradingscale.aspx

 

Do the math.