Attrition rate for re-slabs

[nochips]

Cleanin' and pressin'! Here's the auction links, and the work done is fairly evident:

 

Mile High Boy Comics #17 CGC 4.0

Mile High Boy Comics #17 CGC 7.5

 

The thing I don't understand in all of this is why CGC would upgrade the comic in a case like this, because it just makes them look really bad either for getting it so wrong in the first place or for signing off on these mystery improvements the second time around. Typically, if the owner broke it out of the slab and submitted it as a "new raw" book, then CGC would have no way of knowing, but given the pedigree and the markings, it's pretty obvious in this case and the case of the other MHs that it's a resub.

TT, I agree with you 100%!!

 

They do not normally check to see if a specific book has been graded once before. They grade them as a new, unlooked at copy. That's what they told me.

[lou_fine]

Whoever that BSD is, he likes to resubmit mile high books: resub.txt

 

 

This is just a fraction of resubmitted books, so far I have only collected complete info (in signature) from the first three signature auctions+selected individual titles. And naturally first auction(s) had less resubmits.

 

Based upon the above resubmits, there is something very very wrong with how CGC is conducting business. For a company which prides itself on their resto check, it is obvious that they are probably no more competent than CGG is with their resto checks. What makes it worse, however, is that in all of these particular cases, CGC should have figured out that work had been done to these books and given their infamous PLOD to these books.

 

CGC's database includes a history of all books which they have graded along with their specific pedigrees. Since Mile High books are unique, it should have been obvious to CGC that resto work was being done to these books in order to get the significantly higher grade. Imagine keying in data for a book and coming across 2 MH copies without setting off any alarm bells. According to Timely, all of these resubmits are coming from one BSD who is well known in the business for doing this. This means that it must also be obvious to CGC who this BSD is. In order to protect the interests of the collectors and the industry, should CGC not be pulling all submissions from this BSD once they come in and do a more careful check and cross-reference against their own data base. This would only be due diligence on the part of CGC.

 

I find it absolutely appalling that CGC would pass out blue labels for books which they should know has undergone enough restoration to bump them up two full increments in a lot of cases all the way to 9.6. Why even bother with the purple labels since they are so incompetent with their resto checks. CGC in a way is being used here to certify UNDISCLOSED RESTORATION since they do know who their submitters are and the pedigrees of particular books. Steve B. has stated often in the past that if Danny D. or if Eastern Colour File Copies are submitted, they are immediately given a PLOD. Why does he not follow the same procedures with the undisclosed restored Mile Highs being submitted by this BSD on the second go round.

 

Timely, since you know who this BSD is, I feel you should let everybody else know as a service to all of the other collectors. He is getting away with undisclosed rerstoration and is no better than Danny D in this case. At least with Danny, his restoration is more obvious and he has already been red flagged. This BSD is even more devious because he knows just how far to push the envelope with CGC and still get away with it. Perform a public service and let's expose this crook for what he is and hopefully put him behind bars with Danny D.

 

[awe4one]

Based upon the above resubmits, there is something very very wrong with how CGC is conducting business. For a company which prides itself on their resto check, it is obvious that they are probably no more competent than CGG is with their resto checks. What makes it worse, however, is that in all of these particular cases, CGC should have figured out that work had been done to these books and given their infamous PLOD to these books.

 

Well said.....nice to see someone agrees wth me......

 

Feigning ignorance when there are this many pedigree comics being reslabbed higher is starting to become a joke.....

 

Jim

[fantastic_four]

Timely, since you know who this BSD is, I feel you should let everybody else know as a service to all of the other collectors. He is getting away with undisclosed rerstoration and is no better than Danny D in this case. At least with Danny, his restoration is more obvious and he has already been red flagged. This BSD is even more devious because he knows just how far to push the envelope with CGC and still get away with it. Perform a public service and let's expose this crook for what he is and hopefully put him behind bars with Danny D.

 

At this point, it might be harder to name dealers and high-end collectors who AREN'T having this kind of work done than it is to name the ones who are, which is what led me to state in another thread on this topic that we've entered a time where apparently it is now almost a required skill for high-end buyers and sellers to learn how to perform cleaning and pressing. If you don't do it...someone else will buy your book and get the extra money FOR you!

 

When we first resurrected this thread a few weeks ago, Chrisco posted some questions over in the coin boards about the history of restoration in their hobby. Based upon the responses the coinees gave, there are two general categories of cleaning--the "right" way which leaves no trace and the "wrong" way which does. It appears to me that CGC is following the same standard that NGC and NCS are--if you do the work right and leave no detectable trace, it's not restoration, otherwise, it is. Based upon Borock's comments in the forums, I'm 80% sure that's their view on the subject. I suspect that even if you call Friesan up on the phone and say "hey Chris, I cleaned and pressed that FN Detective 31 you'll be getting in a few days" that CGC won't give it the PLOD if they're unable to detect the work.

 

I'm still on the fence about minor cleaning and pressing. On the one hand, it seems like people are making hundreds or thousands of dollars for little or no cost and "fleecing" sellers who don't realize how simple this type of work is and how much it could maximize their profits. On the other hand, if you can't detect the work, what's the problem? The way the coin hobby has gone leads me to suspect that in the long run, cleaning, pressing, and restoration removal will become as acceptable as NGC and CGC think it is.

[comicwiz]

I've been trying to decide for months whether it's ethical, but it's so incredibly minor that I can't see much of a problem with it.

 

A few ethical flags might fly wayward should the pressing job revert back to the books original flaws before pressing; begging the owner to ask a few logical questions -- how does a book that originally layed flat, and sat straight in the CGC slab at the time of purchase, now bear warping problems? How about the all-to-real possibility that the book is of a Pedigree designation, and the owner somehow manages to find information on the comics previous grade via the Heritage comic archive? He is now faced with a very serious dilemma -- a book which originally graded a 4.0, and was pressed, re-slabbed, and then later resold to him at a 6.5 price; now arriving at the very sad realization that with the passage of time, his book reverted back to a 4.0 grade. Even scarier -- is the thought of the value disparity between a miniscule .2 increment, and improving a NM- 9.2 to the highly esteemed NM 9.4. We are talking about serious value losses, which ironically, sounds a lot like the same issues facing buyers who purchase books as unrestored, only to later discover they are restored.

 

If you cannot find any ethical problem with this scenario, then in IMO, straight up, whether or not we are talking about a Pedigree, high-premium book, or a $100 comic, this situation just downright sucks. If enough of this happens, over time, you are going to have the same problems which faced the hobby in the heyday where restoration ran rampant WITHOUT a legitimate 3rd-party grading authority running resto checks as a component of their grading service.

 

In relation to the subject of this thread, and as far as drbanners/Mike's comments about the inner-well warping in a similar thread -- well Mike, I tested your theory about the inner-wells warping, and found a few other books with similar warping as these books and can tell you that when I removed the inner wells from the plastic casing, the barex inner-wells themselves were in fact flat/straight, and the only warping evident were on the comics themselves. Bearing also in mind that these were books that were graded between NM- to NM+ ranges, and now with the warping, would probably grade out significantly lower!

[fantastic_four]

If you're right about bad press jobs reverting back to their prior state, it's not guaranteed that future owners have lost all post-pressing value. They might be able to have the book re-pressed to correct the prior bad press job. This needs a bunch of research to determine the reality of presses reversing themselves and the effects of re-pressing an already-pressed comic.

 

However, there's no doubt about it--if you're right about these bad press jobs coming undone later, CGC's reputation--and the high grade comic market as a whole--is gonna take a hit once more people become aware of this. Everyone will be pissed...it's really difficult to forecast how bad the damage will be.

 

 

If you cannot find any ethical problem with this scenario, then in IMO, straight up, whether or not we are talking about a Pedigree, high-premium book, or a $100 comic, this situation just downright sucks. If enough of this happens, over time, you are going to have the same problems which faced the hobby in the heyday where restoration ran rampant WITHOUT a legitimate 3rd-party grading authority running resto checks as a component of their grading service.

 

Very well said! This DOES suck, and the possibility that history is repeating itself regarding undisclosed restoration has been my exact fear since we first pointed out that Marvel Mystery regraded comic last year. I'm still on the fence about whether cleaning/pressing is unethical or not.

[comicwiz]

If you're right about bad press jobs reverting back to their prior state, it's not guaranteed that future owners have lost all post-pressing value. They might be able to have the book re-pressed to correct the prior bad press job. This needs a bunch of research to determine the reality of presses reversing themselves and the effects of re-pressing a reversed press.

 

James

 

What I believe to be the crux of the phenomenon of "bad pressing jobs" is that dealers/collectors are performing this work themselves. Had the brunt of this work been carried out by "pro's", the likes of Susan Ciccone, I don't believe we would be seeing this problem unravel with anywhere near the level of controversy or concern. The dilemma is one where profiteering dealers have decided to become calculating in their method of not only maximizing returns on high-grade slabbed books, but self-indulging on the shrinking pie of undergraded or "improvable" comics via CGC's barcode and graders notes. Because of the cost of having such work performed by professionals, and thus reducing the margins of profit, we are likely running into the problem mainly because most pressing jobs are being performed by amateurs, for the purpose of lasting only as long as the time it takes to slab the book, shipped, and stuck up on eBay for a week-long auction.

[tth2]

Lou, I made a fairly similar point earlier in this thread, and this was Steve Borock's reply:

 

I posted this the last time this came up, I think that was last year, so here it is one more time:

 

CGC does not grade based on who the submitter is, and never has. We have stated this time and time again. We set very high standards for ourselves, much higher than we would expect others to set for themselves. This is the only way we can stay a trusted part of the collecting community. If certain comic books receive a certain grade one day and then a much higher grade months later, it means that in most cases, the book is in better condition the second time we graded it. How can this be? There is an easy answer, which most people who have been in our hobby awhile already know: comic books get pressed.

Before CGC, collectors who purchased a comic book with a slight or moderate spine roll would put the comic book between two dictionaries with a cinder block on top for a few months to remove part or all of the spine roll. If a collector got in a comic book with a light crease that did not break color, he would try and take it out by using light pressure to “press” it out. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it did not. I personally know many dealers and collectors who for many years have been pressing comic books themselves, or sending them to someone else to be pressed on a regular basis.

Since our inception, CGC has never considered “pressing” to be a “bad thing” unless the comic book was taken apart to press it. Comic books should not be taken apart. Unlike restoration, when a comic book cover is pressed CORRECTLY and SAFELY, it will enhance the look of the comic book and most experts can’t even tell it has been pressed if they did not see the comic book before it was pressed.

When CGC receives a re-submitted comic book , we very rarely know it is a re-submission. If in fact we do know it is a re-submission (because it is a high profile comic book or pedigree), we usually have no clue what we graded it the first time around. We grade so many comic books on a daily basis that it is impossible to remember grades from last week, let alone a few months ago.

 

I found the answer unsatisfactory at the time, but didn't respond because I've noticed that it has not been Steve's pattern to get into running debates on these boards, so even if I responded, it would not have led to any further clarification from him. But now that this thread has been resurrected...

 

I don't think either you or I are questioning whether the graders at CGC know who the submitter when they are grading books. I don't buy all the conspiracy theories on this, and believe that CGC's integrity is impeachable on this point. However, it was not an issue that I ever raised in the first place, so the initial part of Steve's response favorably answered a question that was never asked.

 

However, I find the last paragraph of his response to be problematic ("If in fact we do know it is a re-submission (because it is a high profile comic book or pedigree), we usually have no clue what we graded it the first time around"). Again, if they don't know it's a resubmission, then they don't know it's a resubmission, and I personally have no issue with that. As I indicated in my earlier post, I think anyone would be hard pressed to spot resubmissions from pedigrees with no distinguishing marks, or to determine whether a submission from a pedigree with multiple copies, such as the Boston pedigree, was a resub or an original submission.

 

But if CGC DOES know it's a resub, because it's a high profile book or unique pedigree (such as MH), it blows my mind that they can't take the extra minute to pull up the info on their database to check whether they had graded this book before. Then, they could look at this book again and ask themselves: "If we're now considering giving it a grade that is 1 or 2 grades better, are we genuinely certain that there has truly been NO impermissible restoration work done to the book?" Given the large shifts in valuation that can result from small differences in grade, if I were their in-house legal counsel, I would say that permitting a book that they KNOW to be the same book to be given different grades presents CGC with a significant risk management issue.

 

[fantastic_four]

I agree. So what can ANY certification company do to prevent this from getting out of control, whether it be CGC, CGG, or any of the others? The only thing I can think of is to develop a method to detect bad pressing, which may or may not be possible. I would have to think it is possible given the multitude of forensic techniques possible with modern science, but it might be prohibitively difficult...hard to say without doing research first.

[fantastic_four]

Then, they could look at this book again and ask themselves: "If we're now considering giving it a grade that is 1 or 2 grades better, are we genuinely certain that there has truly been NO impermissible restoration work done to the book?"

 

If they don't have a "before" image to compare the book to, then they can't do it. This suggests they might have to start imaging every pedigreed comic.

 

 

Given the large shifts in valuation that can result from small differences in grade, if I were their in-house legal counsel, I would say that permitting a book that they KNOW to be the same book to be given different grades presents CGC with a significant risk management issue.

 

That's definitely possible. The key phrase from the back of the slab is "a good faith effort is made to detect restoration, but CGC does not warrant this process or the results." An attorney could argue that not comparing known copies to previous grading attempts doesn't constitute a "good faith effort." Hard to say whether that would fly or not.

 

The ideal solution from almost every perspective I can envision is to develop a technique to detect bad pressing...who knows if it's possible, though!

[tth2]

If they don't have a "before" image to compare the book to, then they can't do it. This suggests they might have to start imaging every pedigreed comic.

 

I do a lot of work with insurance companies, so I would imagine the response of CGC's insurance company would be: "WTF do you mean you don't KEEP a scan of EVERY book you grade?" I seem to recall being told at one point that CGC scans every raw book when it comes in, to establish a record as to what it looked like when they received it, precisely to defend themselves from lawsuits that they damaged the book while it was in their possession. If CGC in fact does do this, then given the rapid decline in costs of electronic storage, the incremental cost of keeping and storing all of these images would be negligible. Heck, they could just burn them onto CDs.

 

 

[comicwiz]

I agree. So what can ANY certification company do to prevent this from getting out of control, whether it be CGC, CGG, or any of the others? The only thing I can think of is to develop a method to detect bad pressing, which may or may not be possible. I would have to think it is possible given the multitude of forensic techniques possible with modern science, but it might be prohibitively difficult...hard to say without doing research first.

 

From what I've been able to ascertain thus far, CGC seems a solid company. Right down from the corporate governance, to their CSR's -- all of them working very hard, each and every day to maintain the highest level of quality. I should also qualify this statement with the fact that I'm not the kind of person that is easily impressed. However the impression CGC leaves on me, as a collector, is top-notch professionalism.

 

The problems we discuss each and every day on this forum range, despite our quick glances and afterthoughts, present significant complexities in the grading biz, had the company decided to address each and every one.

 

Having come from the software biz, one of the things I learned very quickly is that customers need to be given an outlet to alleviate their frustrations. With all the ingenuity used to develop applications to make our lives easier, and our business more efficient, there are ways that even the most highly developed wares can be streamlined and tweaked. However, if the software vendor/manufacturer turns a blind-eye to its customer base, and develops its version improvements in a closed-door and insular environment, the problems become born out of sheer frustration. One of the things I remembered being very effective were customer satisfaction conventions. These were places where customers, and potential customers could come to vent. An open forum to allow people to not only discuss their frustrations with certain problems they were having, but to use the feedback to develop fixes, and innovative solutions to real-world problems.

 

I believe this forum is a step in that direction. It does remain to be seen whether CGC adopts some of the suggestions offered on these boards -- but to be honest, I don't see much in the way of solutions for issues which are raised here. So it is with this perspective, and a hope that the suggestions put forward could be applied to deal with some of the complexities raised in this thread alone, that the following suggestions can be found:

 

i) CGC ought to photograph/scan every single book that comes in, regardless of whether the customer pays for it or not. It doesn't matter whether that's pre or post slab -- just photograph the comic. Understanding of course that such an initiative does require a costly infrastructure to support it, the approach CGC should use is to index the scans along with the barcodes. Rather than charging a fee for each time the book gets graded, CGC ought to provide an online inquiry service whereby a customer could type in a barcode, and get not only the title and issue number, but the graders notes and a scan/photo of the book. It is not beyond the realm of understanding that such a service would incur a monthly or yearly subscription, just to cover the administration and infrastructure and coordination costs of attempting such an endeavour.

 

The main reasons why I like this suggestion is that it greatly reduces the drain on grading resources, because a good percentage of the inquiries that flood CGC headquarters can now be dealt with online. One might argue that with such a change, the graders can now focus on high-payoff grading activity instead of answering calls to provide graders notes. Moreover, with such a system, we would empower CGC graders with an accessible tool to assist in not only keeping track of pedigrees and their grades, but almost compelling CGC graders by virtue of convenience to do the kinds of checks which would reveal that a Mile High copy, which has already passed through its hands matches (by way of scan/photo) the book they are now holding in there very hands. And if CGC decides to botch such an initiative in the face of "too costly" or "too much of an administration drain", guys, think about the enormous potential such a repository could provide in the way of collectors, who have scheduled their CGC books, and now need some evidence or proof of existence for their insurance adjusters. Not to mention the fact that you can probably cover most of the costs with such an initiative by just tacking on another $20 to your fee for a collector society membership. Finally, you can probably make some minor adjustments to your current census system to allow this kind of functionality.

 

I have a few other suggestions, but I've got to run some errands, and shovel my car out of its parking spot, no thanks to the snow removal goons.

[fantastic_four]

The photographs might cover CGC's butt--if it's even exposed at all--but it will only help identify pressing on pedigreed books. The poorly-done presses on the other 98% of the books out there will still be a problem...

[DiceX]

Sorry, but I have to add my two cents on this.

 

Steve has stated that, if done correctly, it is hard to detect.

If it can't be detected, all CGC can do is grade the book they are given.

CGC didn't press the book.

 

Don't think CGC to be the corrupt one here if they are getting pressed books submitted to them.

The corrupt one would be the people doing the pressing.

 

No different than if someone sneeks a color touch past them.

CGC does their best to catch the problem.

If it's tough to detect, don't blame them for missing it.

 

What's the difference in this and all the people on here cleaning their books with Wonder Bread and raving when it comes back with a blue label?

What happens in 10 years when the light grease from the bread starts to stain the book?

 

The crooked one is the restorer. Not CGC.

All they do is grade the book as it appears when they have it in their hands.

Unless you want the turnaround time changed to 10 years (to filter out the restoration that will return), I'd say the problem is not with CGC.

[fantastic_four]

Don't think CGC to be the corrupt one here if they are getting pressed books submitted to them.

The corrupt one would be the people doing the pressing.

 

No different than if someone sneeks a color touch past them.

CGC does their best to catch the problem.

If it's tough to detect, don't blame them for missing it.

 

I rarely try to assess "blame" to anyone who isn't an egotist or a crook. My pontifications about how to solve the minor cleaning/pressing problem is born out of a desire to improve the situation for everyone, not to nail good people just because they haven't been able to solve a tough problem. Just because CGC is doing their best doesn't mean the hobby shouldn't be searching for newer and better ways to detect undisclosed work which might be causing serious problems.

 

I'm not really sure it's a "serious" problem yet, but I see potential for it becoming one eventually, if this becomes rampant and commonly known...

[comicwiz]

The photographs might cover CGC's butt--if it's even exposed at all--but it will only help identify pressing on pedigreed books. The poorly-done presses on the other 98% of the books out there will still be a problem...

 

You forgot the graders notes... after all, it is a well known fact that certain dealers/collectors are able to determine "press-ability" of a slabbed comic by the graders notes alone.

 

The graders notes coupled with the photo/scan are enough to prompt someone to make the connection between a previously graded book, and a hunch. As well, I think you might be underestimating the resourcefulness of certain people who frequent these boards. Its debatable whether providing such a resource will only weed out the Pedigree's and HTF comics; I would argue that given the amount of time people spend on matching-up scans stolen from dealers sites for fraud auctions, that the factors of "critical mass" (collectors filling gaps, and collectors upgrading their collections) coupled with the inertia of watchdogs on this boards, a resource providing scans/photos along with graders notes might just work to produce scores of examples exposed right here on these boards ranging from a modern 9.8 carwreck, to a full-blown Saddam debunking Mile High GA catastrophe.

[Timely]

CGC's database includes a history of all books which they have graded along with their specific pedigrees. Since Mile High books are unique, it should have been obvious to CGC that resto work was being done to these books in order to get the significantly higher grade. Imagine keying in data for a book and coming across 2 MH copies without setting off any alarm bells. According to Timely, all of these resubmits are coming from one BSD who is well known in the business for doing this. This means that it must also be obvious to CGC who this BSD is. In order to protect the interests of the collectors and the industry, should CGC not be pulling all submissions from this BSD once they come in and do a more careful check and cross-reference against their own data base. This would only be due diligence on the part of CGC.

 

I find it absolutely appalling that CGC would pass out blue labels for books which they should know has undergone enough restoration to bump them up two full increments in a lot of cases all the way to 9.6. Why even bother with the purple labels since they are so incompetent with their resto checks. CGC in a way is being used here to certify UNDISCLOSED RESTORATION since they do know who their submitters are and the pedigrees of particular books. Steve B. has stated often in the past that if Danny D. or if Eastern Colour File Copies are submitted, they are immediately given a PLOD. Why does he not follow the same procedures with the undisclosed restored Mile Highs being submitted by this BSD on the second go round.

 

Timely, since you know who this BSD is, I feel you should let everybody else know as a service to all of the other collectors. He is getting away with undisclosed rerstoration and is no better than Danny D in this case. At least with Danny, his restoration is more obvious and he has already been red flagged. This BSD is even more devious because he knows just how far to push the envelope with CGC and still get away with it. Perform a public service and let's expose this crook for what he is and hopefully put him behind bars with Danny D.

 

I too have struggled with the issue of dry/clean and pressed books. I was one of the first to see this happen, in early 2001! I thought it was wrong then, but I am on the fence now, here's why.

 

First of all it would be unfair for CGC to grade some books as new submits and others based on past grades. Specifically, if CGC went back and saw a MH was previously graded 8.5 and now it looks 9.4 they obviously know it was altered in some way. I think the mentality is, "Don't ask, don't tell." All they can do is grade what they see in front of them, a 9.4 is a 9.4! It would be unfair for CGC to pick on pedigree books alone just becasue they CAN pick on them due to their distinguishing marks.

 

Keep in mind Lou, I personally know of 4 BSD that are doing the clean/press/resub, and I suspect I only know a fraction of them. I caught Metropolis bidding on TWO different dry/press machines last year on ebay, what can ya do?

 

If you bought a CGC 6.5 for $400 and knew it could be enhanced would you do it? What if the book came back as a 9.4 and it' an easy sell at $3,000 would you do it? Every dealer I know of would!

 

Timely

[PUNYHUMAN]

Food for thought!!!!!!!!!!

[THE_BEYONDER]

I caught Metropolis bidding on TWO different dry/press machines last year on ebay, what can ya do?

 

 

THE WHEELS ARE IN MOTION!!!

[Timely]

Well, those wheels new new tires...to be sure.

 

Timely