Manufactured Gold

[MrBedrock]

What is your issue with Zaid? I've never even seen the two of you exchange any words on these boards before, and you've never struck me as a troublemaker board member. So why are you suddenly going out of your way to antagonize him?

What do you mean "not a trouble maker". Parker does nothing but instigate and antagonize! Otherwise no one but his large group of friends would talk to him.

[Red Hook]

Richard, you should put a link to your store in your signature.

[MrBedrock]

Richard, you should put a link to your store in your signature.

Thanks. I plan on it but I'm still feeling my way around. If I say something that offends (which seems to happen without me realizing it around here) I may not want it to come back on the store! Would that be Non-Disclosure?

[esquirecomics]

Richard, you should put a link to your store in your signature.

Thanks. I plan on it but I'm still feeling my way around. If I say something that offends (which seems to happen without me realizing it around here) I may not want it to come back on the store! Would that be Non-Disclosure?

 

Wow, Richard is now a forumite!!!

 

Now I am going to be forced to come back and continually check what is actually going on here!

 

Welcome Richard! We still need to catch up from NYC.

[Red Hook]

Richard, you should put a link to your store in your signature.

Thanks. I plan on it but I'm still feeling my way around. If I say something that offends (which seems to happen without me realizing it around here) I may not want it to come back on the store! Would that be Non-Disclosure?

 

Can I get back to you on that?

 

[MrBedrock]

I got a little story to tell and I am wondering how you are going to deal with it. When CGC first started grading books I was an avid slab cracker. I thought the idea of grading was great to help me know what I was getting but the darn holders were too bulky. They didn't fit in my bank boxes. And frankly, I enjoyed thumbing up the books. Well due to many different factors I now am in the process of getting my entire collection slabbed. (No, one of the factors isn't that I need to sell) I recently sent in 18 books that were previously slabbed. All of these were bought through known sites (ebay, Heritage, etc.) 2-5 years ago. I just wanted to get them reholdered. I sent them in with the labels in the back of each mylar with each book. All but one of the books graded originally between 7.5 and 9.2. All were golden age. One was 8.5 restored.

In the spirit of disclosure I have and do occasionally have books pressed. None of these, however were pressed. I was happy with the grades and just wanted them back in slabs.

I got them back from CGC last week. Eight stayed the same grade. Of these two were 7.5, four were 8.0, one 8.5 Restored, and one was 9.2. Three went down in grade. One from 9.0 to 8.5, two from 8.5 to 8.0. And (Yahoo!) seven went up in grade. Five 8.5s are now 9.0, one 7.0 to 7.5, and one 6.5 to 7.5. Again - no pressing!

So my question. When and if you guys see these for sale down the road, and you go through your crazy Sherlock Holmes detective work to find them in their original holders, will you assume they have been tinkered with? Some of these are pedigrees, some are Timelys, all are cool Golden Age books. On the ones that went down in grade will you assume that I unpressed them?

Alright, I've thrown the ball out. Ya'll have fun playing with it!

[tth2]

I just wanted to get them reholdered. I sent them in with the labels in the back of each mylar with each book. All but one of the books graded originally between 7.5 and 9.2. All were golden age. One was 8.5 restored.

In the spirit of disclosure I have and do occasionally have books pressed. None of these, however were pressed. I was happy with the grades and just wanted them back in slabs.

I got them back from CGC last week. Eight stayed the same grade. Of these two were 7.5, four were 8.0, one 8.5 Restored, and one was 9.2. Three went down in grade. One from 9.0 to 8.5, two from 8.5 to 8.0. And (Yahoo!) seven went up in grade. Five 8.5s are now 9.0, one 7.0 to 7.5, and one 6.5 to 7.5. Again - no pressing!

So my question. When and if you guys see these for sale down the road, and you go through your crazy Sherlock Holmes detective work to find them in their original holders, will you assume they have been tinkered with? Some of these are pedigrees, some are Timelys, all are cool Golden Age books. On the ones that went down in grade will you assume that I unpressed them?

Alright, I've thrown the ball out. Ya'll have fun playing with it!

In the absence of any express disclosure from you, people will be free to speculate and draw their own conclusions. Therefore, the simplest solution, should you sell your books at some point, is to state in the listing description that the book used to be X grade, and now is Y grade, but that they were not pressed or otherwise manipulated by you.

 

I have to say that something like this looks just TERRIBLE for CGC, on the books going up as well as down. I mean, talk about their grading being a total k.rap shoot!

 

At least none of the changes were by more than one grade increment!

[garthgantu]

If I say something that offends (which seems to happen without me realizing it around here) I may not want it to come back on the store! Would that be Non-Disclosure?

 

We'll just PRESSure you to come CLEAN...

[esquirecomics]

I got a little story to tell and I am wondering how you are going to deal with it. When CGC first started grading books I was an avid slab cracker. I thought the idea of grading was great to help me know what I was getting but the darn holders were too bulky. They didn't fit in my bank boxes. And frankly, I enjoyed thumbing up the books. Well due to many different factors I now am in the process of getting my entire collection slabbed. (No, one of the factors isn't that I need to sell) I recently sent in 18 books that were previously slabbed. All of these were bought through known sites (ebay, Heritage, etc.) 2-5 years ago. I just wanted to get them reholdered. I sent them in with the labels in the back of each mylar with each book. All but one of the books graded originally between 7.5 and 9.2. All were golden age. One was 8.5 restored.

In the spirit of disclosure I have and do occasionally have books pressed. None of these, however were pressed. I was happy with the grades and just wanted them back in slabs.

I got them back from CGC last week. Eight stayed the same grade. Of these two were 7.5, four were 8.0, one 8.5 Restored, and one was 9.2. Three went down in grade. One from 9.0 to 8.5, two from 8.5 to 8.0. And (Yahoo!) seven went up in grade. Five 8.5s are now 9.0, one 7.0 to 7.5, and one 6.5 to 7.5. Again - no pressing!

So my question. When and if you guys see these for sale down the road, and you go through your crazy Sherlock Holmes detective work to find them in their original holders, will you assume they have been tinkered with? Some of these are pedigrees, some are Timelys, all are cool Golden Age books. On the ones that went down in grade will you assume that I unpressed them?

Alright, I've thrown the ball out. Ya'll have fun playing with it!

 

First, have you persuaded CGC to slap on a collection designation - "The Bedrock City Collection" perhaps?

 

But seriously, fair questions Richard. We've (i.e., the boards) had countless discussions on the issue of resubbing. No shock - many different opinions. Personally, I totally understand the shifting of one grade up or down from one day to the next. We're all human, and frankly there is sometimes only minute subjective differences from a 7.0 to 7.5 or even a 9.0 to 9.2. I always hold out hope that CGC, given that three or more people, review the books would stay more consistent but that is no doubt a pipe dream as once a human always a human.

 

From a NOD perspective, and this is my personal opinion, a one grade change should receive the most careful scrutiny of any simply because it is strictly possible that absolutely no external work was performed and it is nothing other than a straight resub. Most likely if a book has been identified as identical to one that had a previous grade assigned but only moved one grade and nothing truly obvious was noticeable (or some history, such as the seller or previous owner, was not known), it would be far safer and appropriate to merely note the grade change without opining what caused it.

 

Of course, given your honesty and increasing affirmative trend towards disclosure , the best way to ensure the true facts behind each of your upgrades would be to reveal the specific books. I am sure the NOD would be happy to include the books in the Gallery.

 

BTW, I would not hesitate to do the same, and I have done so when I was aware of a grade change for a book. It is not our responsibility to justify CGC grades. That is why collectors pay for a third party, independent, grading service.

[esquirecomics]

I just wanted to get them reholdered. I sent them in with the labels in the back of each mylar with each book. All but one of the books graded originally between 7.5 and 9.2. All were golden age. One was 8.5 restored.

In the spirit of disclosure I have and do occasionally have books pressed. None of these, however were pressed. I was happy with the grades and just wanted them back in slabs.

I got them back from CGC last week. Eight stayed the same grade. Of these two were 7.5, four were 8.0, one 8.5 Restored, and one was 9.2. Three went down in grade. One from 9.0 to 8.5, two from 8.5 to 8.0. And (Yahoo!) seven went up in grade. Five 8.5s are now 9.0, one 7.0 to 7.5, and one 6.5 to 7.5. Again - no pressing!

So my question. When and if you guys see these for sale down the road, and you go through your crazy Sherlock Holmes detective work to find them in their original holders, will you assume they have been tinkered with? Some of these are pedigrees, some are Timelys, all are cool Golden Age books. On the ones that went down in grade will you assume that I unpressed them?

Alright, I've thrown the ball out. Ya'll have fun playing with it!

In the absence of any express disclosure from you, people will be free to speculate and draw their own conclusions. Therefore, the simplest solution, should you sell your books at some point, is to state in the listing description that the book used to be X grade, and now is Y grade, but that they were not pressed or otherwise manipulated by you.

 

I have to say that something like this looks just TERRIBLE for CGC, on the books going up as well as down. I mean, talk about their grading being a total k.rap shoot!

 

At least none of the changes were by more than one grade increment!

 

Geez Tim, you're coming around to my way of thinking more and more every day!!!

 

BTW, look again at the numbers. In bold

[garthgantu]

I got them back from CGC last week. Eight stayed the same grade. Of these two were 7.5, four were 8.0, one 8.5 Restored, and one was 9.2. Three went down in grade. One from 9.0 to 8.5, two from 8.5 to 8.0. And (Yahoo!) seven went up in grade. Five 8.5s are now 9.0, one 7.0 to 7.5, and one 6.5 to 7.5. Again - no pressing!

So my question. When and if you guys see these for sale down the road, and you go through your crazy Sherlock Holmes detective work to find them in their original holders, will you assume they have been tinkered with? Some of these are pedigrees, some are Timelys, all are cool Golden Age books. On the ones that went down in grade will you assume that I unpressed them?

Alright, I've thrown the ball out. Ya'll have fun playing with it!

 

This is the kind of information I can no longer take at face value on these boards. Nothing personal, Richard - I don't believe we've ever met. But sooo many people tell tales like this on the boards that I've been forced to conclude that a portion of them are red herrings of one kind or another.

 

Please post some "before and after" scans of the books in original and current slabs if possible.

 

Again, I feel bad picking you out of the group - but at some point, these kinds of 'urban legends' have to be supported with some sort of visual evidence, even if that evidence is less than 'foolproof' (anyone can manipulate a scan these days).

 

I'd like to give CGC the benefit of the doubt and believe their grading is more consistent than your story would indicate.

[Foolkiller]

Richard Evans is one of the stalwarts of the hobby -- and frankly one of the most honest guys I've ever met.

[ciorac]

Richard Evans is one of the stalwarts of the hobby -- and frankly one of the most honest guys I've ever met.

 

True enough. If he says it, then it is so. No need for pictures for me.

[Foolkiller]

Richard Evans is one of the stalwarts of the hobby -- and frankly one of the most honest guys I've ever met.

 

And by the way, there's about six dealers that I know or know of that I would go out on a limb and vouch for. Richard is one of them.

[garthgantu]

I believe you - and the folks on these boards who recognize him as a knowledgeable and upstanding member of the community certainly cast him in a very positive light from my perspective.

 

But I wanna tear my hair out when I hear stuff like this and see zero visual evidence to support it.

 

Again, I realize it would be easy enough to create fraudulent scans to support a fraudulent story... I believe Richard's story is true, and would simply like to see visuals that correspond. I think this would be helpful in discerning between "lucky resubs" and "clean-and-press-resubs" in future.

 

I mean, it's like your neighbors all keep claiming to have seen Bigfoot... yet only one of them seems to own a camera, and he keeps forgetting to take the lens cap off...

 

Visuals, pleez!

[codfish]

 

This is the kind of information I can no longer take at face value on these boards. Nothing personal, Richard - I don't believe we've ever met. But sooo many people tell tales like this on the boards that I've been forced to conclude that a portion of them are red herrings of one kind or another.

 

Please post some "before and after" scans of the books in original and current slabs if possible.

 

Again, I feel bad picking you out of the group - but at some point, these kinds of 'urban legends' have to be supported with some sort of visual evidence, even if that evidence is less than 'foolproof' (anyone can manipulate a scan these days).

 

I'd like to give CGC the benefit of the doubt and believe their grading is more consistent than your story would indicate.

 

I don't know Richard but I have no reason to doubt his claim. We are talking about a grading company that has given grades to books that have clearly had work done to them to stay in blue labeled holders with no disclosure of the work done.

 

People have graphically illustrated jumps with no work done as well so anything is possible.

[Foolkiller]

I believe you - and the folks on these boards who recognize him as a knowledgeable and upstanding member of the community certainly cast him in a very positive light from my perspective.

 

But I wanna tear my hair out when I hear stuff like this and see zero visual evidence to support it.

 

Again, I realize it would be easy enough to create fraudulent scans to support a fraudulent story... I believe Richard's story is true, and would simply like to see visuals that correspond. I think this would be helpful in discerning between "lucky resubs" and "clean-and-press-resubs" in future.

 

I mean, it's like your neighbors all keep claiming to have seen Bigfoot... yet only one of them seems to own a camera, and he keeps forgetting to take the lens cap off...

 

Visuals, pleez!

 

The problem with this whole line is that all of it is detective work. While there's "some" visual evidence on the NOD site, a lot of that is supposition and guess work -- so are the guesses about which books have been played with, what's "just" scan manipulation etc., etc.

 

Garth -- the whole thing we're talking about here doesn't really have any hard core evidence.

 

Now I understand you're saying that you'd like to see physical proof (not that it would dispositively prove anything, but at least would bolster the claim in your eyes) -- but how could he prove he didn't "press" the books -- you'd still have to take his word at some point.

 

And that's my whole point to the NOD -- disclosure or no disclosure -- you still have to take the dealer's word he didn't have it pressed or didn't know. So to me, if you're willing to take someone's word they didn't have a book pressed -- why isn't Rich's word good enough on this example?

 

For me -- the hobby is in a total state of emergency if I can't take the word of one of the few dealers who's recognized as almost universally honest.

[Straw-Man]

Please post some "before and after" scans of the books in original and current slabs if possible.

 

Again, I feel bad picking you out of the group - but at some point, these kinds of 'urban legends' have to be supported with some sort of visual evidence, even if that evidence is less than 'foolproof' (anyone can manipulate a scan these days).

 

I'd like to give CGC the benefit of the doubt and believe their grading is more consistent than your story would indicate.

 

ricky, you remember that line at the end of pulp fiction--"jules, if you give this nimrod your wallet..." that travolta said to sam in the diner? well, i'm saying it to you now. do not give an iota of your time to finding old scans for this cynic. if your word isn't enough for him, in light of who you are in the hobby, he's not one of the guys you should be interested in influencing.

[garthgantu]

Setting aside the purpose and/or efficacy of the NoD, I'd still argue that *more information is better* and that seeing 'false positives' in the "grade bump survey" might help discern between false positives and actual clean-and-press resubs going forward. It can't it can only help.

 

It's not about taking Richard's word...it's about gathering enough evidence - tenuous as some of it is bound to be - to eventually make more and more 'educated guesses' or 'informed determinations.'

 

To some extent, CGC makes guesses and assumptions every day in the course of grading books...

 

They guess or assume that one drop of glue was purposely placed in a given location in an attempt to restore a book's appearance or structure.

 

They assume that a particular type of hairline non-color breaking crease is always a production defect when it's not outside the realm of possibility that such a crease could be created post-production.

 

They guess that a submission of nearly pristine books are not trimmed - but they don't know with absolute certainty, as the Ewert situation painfully illustrated.

 

So even if the NoD is making assumptions and conjectures, I don't see the problem with that... At least the NoD is acknowledging that this is what it is doing.

[esquirecomics]

I'd like to give CGC the benefit of the doubt and believe their grading is more consistent than your story would indicate.

 

Oh to be so young.

 

I'll have to go find some of the old threads about resubbing and my arguments as to how the inconsistencies hurt CGC's reputation.