• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Why do you think.........

Started by Flemmings,

27 posts in this topic

Flemmings

Flemmings

Posted
Posted

Why do you think that PGX will accept signed comics and grade them as they are, even if you have an authorized witness or not? They will also include COA or pics if you like. CGC will also accept them also, but you have a choice between GLOD or a dramaticly lower grade.

 

They also have a signature witness program, just like CGC. Maybe not as many people, but they still have one. They have a signature series label and everything. Of course you will not receive the label unless there is a witness, just like CGC.

 

 

 

 

FROM PGX website:

 

Loose Items

 

If you would like to have loose items such as 3-D Glasses or Certificates of Authenticity encased with your comic book, please include written authorization and note where in the holder you would like them placed (e.g. in front of or behind the book, inside the front or back cover, etc.), or call us before submitting the book. We are happy to include loose items with your books whenever possible. When sending books with Certificates of Authenticity, please include any bags or stickers that were originally with the book. Also note that we do not verify that any included Certificates of Authenticity are authentic, but as an added measure we will not include any suspicious Certificates of Authenticity with any book.

 

 

Creator Signatures

 

If there is a signature on a book we will make a note of the signature and where the signature is. We do not guarantee the signature on any book is authentic.

 

 

http://www.pgxcomics.com/services.cfm

 

 

 

FROM CGC website:

 

What if I get the book signed before submitting the book to CGC?

 

Unfortunately, if the signing is not witnessed by someone authorized by CGC, then the signature cannot be authenticated for the Signature Series label. Testimonials, photographs, and video recordings are not accepted.

 

 

http://www.cgccomics.com/grading/SignatureSeries.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
CGC didn't always hammer signed books... their current policy seems to coincide with the introduction of CGC Signature Series.

 

Coincidence?

 

hm

 

 

An unverified signature on the cover will drop the grade of a book by 2 full points from my experience. I'm not sure how much of a deduction an interior signature garners.

 

What makes you think CGC hammers signed books more now than before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
He11blazer

He11blazer

Posted
Posted
Why do you think that PGX will accept signed comics and grade them as they are, even if you have an authorized witness or not? They will also include COA or pics if you like. CGC will also accept them also, but you have a choice between GLOD or a dramaticly lower grade.

 

I think it's because CGC intend to maintain a professional standard of grading and authentication, whereas PGX provide a wrapping service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flemmings

Flemmings

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Why do you think that PGX will accept signed comics and grade them as they are, even if you have an authorized witness or not? They will also include COA or pics if you like. CGC will also accept them also, but you have a choice between GLOD or a dramaticly lower grade.

 

I think it's because CGC intend to maintain a professional standard of grading and authentication, whereas PGX provide a wrapping service.

 

:signfunny: I thought people considered PGX and CGC almost equal. Also I think I need to move to Eugene, OR hm

 

 

 

:baiting:

 

 

 

 

:jokealert:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
He11blazer

He11blazer

Posted
Posted
CGC is just protecting their SS business model, which is turning out to be quite lucrative.

 

Whilst that may be true, it's still the right decision. Joe Shuster's name is no more acceptable in grade than Archie Random's name if it's an unconfirmed sig, and I don't trust any form of signature verification.

 

The SS program is a separate product, and clearly demarcated. CGC take responsibility for guaranteeing authenticity on those, and the yellow label means the sig won't affect the grade.

 

Makes sense to me :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mio

Mio

Posted
Posted

What happens if you crack and SS slab to actually read your comic? Is the yellow label lost forever if you try to re-sub?

 

I'm personally not a big fan of SS books. Most of the ones I have seen have brutal signatures in the most awkward spot of the cover. Signatures on the inside front cover/1st page are ok with me... but then again, like most of the comic it's locked up in a slab to be seen seldom again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Zipper

Mr. Zipper

Posted
Posted
CGC is just protecting their SS business model, which is turning out to be quite lucrative.

 

Whilst that may be true, it's still the right decision. Joe Shuster's name is no more acceptable in grade than Archie Random's name if it's an unconfirmed sig, and I don't trust any form of signature verification.

 

The SS program is a separate product, and clearly demarcated. CGC take responsibility for guaranteeing authenticity on those, and the yellow label means the sig won't affect the grade.

 

Makes sense to me :)

 

The point is that under the current rules, writing that says "Joe Shuster" gets dinged HARDER than the same amount of writing that may say Joe Blow, or ACME Newsstand, or June 2, 1946.

 

In effect, CGC is punishing signatures more heavily than similar amounts of writing that is not a signature. Is this because a signature is a "worse flaw" or because they are driving signatures through CGC SS? Should they be in the business of defining the severity of flaws based upon what drives the most business to their other product lines?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
He11blazer

He11blazer

Posted
Posted
CGC is just protecting their SS business model, which is turning out to be quite lucrative.

 

Whilst that may be true, it's still the right decision. Joe Shuster's name is no more acceptable in grade than Archie Random's name if it's an unconfirmed sig, and I don't trust any form of signature verification.

 

The SS program is a separate product, and clearly demarcated. CGC take responsibility for guaranteeing authenticity on those, and the yellow label means the sig won't affect the grade.

 

Makes sense to me :)

 

The point is that under the current rules, writing that says "Joe Shuster" gets dinged HARDER than the same amount of writing that may say Joe Blow, or ACME Newsstand, or June 2, 1946.

 

In effect, CGC is punishing signatures more heavily than similar amounts of writing that is not a signature. Is this because a signature is a "worse flaw" or because they are driving signatures through CGC SS? Should they be in the business of defining the severity of flaws based upon what drives the most business to their other product lines?

 

Really? It gets a worse hit if it's a creator's name and therefore liable to be confused with an authentic sig? I don't know if that's true, but that would be a mistake. It's just "writing on the cover" as far as grading is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flemmings

Flemmings

Posted
  • Author
Posted
CGC is just protecting their SS business model, which is turning out to be quite lucrative.

 

Whilst that may be true, it's still the right decision. Joe Shuster's name is no more acceptable in grade than Archie Random's name if it's an unconfirmed sig, and I don't trust any form of signature verification.

 

The SS program is a separate product, and clearly demarcated. CGC take responsibility for guaranteeing authenticity on those, and the yellow label means the sig won't affect the grade.

 

Makes sense to me :)

 

 

PGX isn't saying that the signature verified. They just aren't punishing you for it. If you have a pic or a COA or whatever, they will put it in the slab for you. CGC will either ding you dramaticly for it or give you a GLOD, with the books proper grade. No matter how you put it, GLOD has a nasty stigma.

 

 

I mean in all honesty which one is a person more likely to buy? A raw book with a COA, a slabbed book with a COA, or a GLOD? The GLOD is the one that will least likely get purchased.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sborock

sborock

Posted
Posted
What makes you think CGC hammers signed books more now than before?

 

If graded today, this would be GLOD or a lower grade.

 

Superman11Blog.jpg

 

WRONG.

 

Please show me an example of a GLOD with a name on a book that is not modern and 8.0 or lower.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sborock

sborock

Posted
Posted
CGC didn't always hammer signed books... their current policy seems to coincide with the introduction of CGC Signature Series.

 

Coincidence?

 

hm

 

:screwy:

 

No change in policy, please show EXACT examples or don't spread mis-information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sborock

sborock

Posted
Posted
CGC is just protecting their SS business model, which is turning out to be quite lucrative.

 

Whilst that may be true, it's still the right decision. Joe Shuster's name is no more acceptable in grade than Archie Random's name if it's an unconfirmed sig, and I don't trust any form of signature verification.

 

The SS program is a separate product, and clearly demarcated. CGC take responsibility for guaranteeing authenticity on those, and the yellow label means the sig won't affect the grade.

 

Makes sense to me :)

 

 

PGX isn't saying that the signature verified. They just aren't punishing you for it. If you have a pic or a COA or whatever, they will put it in the slab for you. CGC will either ding you dramaticly for it or give you a GLOD, with the books proper grade. No matter how you put it, GLOD has a nasty stigma.

 

 

I mean in all honesty which one is a person more likely to buy? A raw book with a COA, a slabbed book with a COA, or a GLOD? The GLOD is the one that will least likely get purchased.

 

 

 

 

pgx/cgg/pga/daniel would put his mother in a holder if ya asked him too.

 

Just kidding.....um....not really........it's just that I doubt a person could fit in a slab.

 

Anyway, How would he know if someone switched the COA or not?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flemmings

Flemmings

Posted
  • Author
Posted
CGC is just protecting their SS business model, which is turning out to be quite lucrative.

 

Whilst that may be true, it's still the right decision. Joe Shuster's name is no more acceptable in grade than Archie Random's name if it's an unconfirmed sig, and I don't trust any form of signature verification.

 

The SS program is a separate product, and clearly demarcated. CGC take responsibility for guaranteeing authenticity on those, and the yellow label means the sig won't affect the grade.

 

Makes sense to me :)

 

 

PGX isn't saying that the signature verified. They just aren't punishing you for it. If you have a pic or a COA or whatever, they will put it in the slab for you. CGC will either ding you dramaticly for it or give you a GLOD, with the books proper grade. No matter how you put it, GLOD has a nasty stigma.

 

 

I mean in all honesty which one is a person more likely to buy? A raw book with a COA, a slabbed book with a COA, or a GLOD? The GLOD is the one that will least likely get purchased.

 

 

 

 

pgx/cgg/pga/daniel would put his mother in a holder if ya asked him too.

 

Just kidding.....um....not really........it's just that I doubt a person could fit in a slab.

 

Anyway, How would he know if someone switched the COA or not?

 

 

Thats why they don't give it the signature series label. Your post had me dying laughing by the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing