Manufactured Gold

[Viscosity-migration]

This thread WAS a great thread where images of doctored books could be viewed all in one place but it is getting sidetracked.

 

Although I like the conversation (and encourage it on some level) I wish it was in another thread.

 

True Mica...i'm sorry.

 

I take responsibility for being an active part of that distraction

 

[Red Hook]

I am pretty sure the graders in Florida were collectors first. So with that thought, I am guessing that they know other collectors in the hobby, that they are friends with or hang out with. Now are they suppose to stop socializing with these friends because they submit books for grading

 

I dont really see a problem with them getting together with other collectors at functions and still remain professional at what they do.

 

 

As I recall, whenever CGC has picked up the tab or contributed to any of the forum dinners, it's been for everyone, big collectors, little collectors and total non-customers.

[Apotheosis]

Uhhhhhhhhhh, dude...IN A BUSINESS TRANSACTION, OR CAPACITY

 

Obviously, you'll still eat turkey with your cousin at Thanksgiving.

 

Ok... so what are we talking about then? You state above that they can have dinner, but at the same time they shouldn't?

 

Or are you saying that they shouldn't talk about work while eating? What if the meal is a "business lunch"? What if the whole purpose of going to said meal is to hash out some pricing on submissions?

 

And is there any reason to believe that the CGC people even talk shop when they're having said meal? Do we just believe that any meal involving them and someone else from the industry must include slab talk?

 

If they order sandwich's into the boardroom where they're having a meeting is this bad too?

 

 

Basically... where do you draw the line? You don't know what they are talking about so you can't know if it's improper or not. Maybe people should be given the benefit of the doubt in what could be a personal situation. Then again this is America and we love to be in other peoples business.

[Viscosity-migration]

Uhhhhhhhhhh, dude...IN A BUSINESS TRANSACTION, OR CAPACITY

 

Obviously, you'll still eat turkey with your cousin at Thanksgiving.

 

Ok... so what are we talking about then? You state above that they can have dinner, but at the same time they shouldn't?

 

Or are you saying that they shouldn't talk about work while eating? What if the meal is a "business lunch"? What if the whole purpose of going to said meal is to hash out some pricing on submissions?

 

And is there any reason to believe that the CGC people even talk shop when they're having said meal? Do we just believe that any meal involving them and someone else from the industry must include slab talk?

 

If they order sandwich's into the boardroom where they're having a meeting is this bad too?

 

 

Basically... where do you draw the line? You don't know what they are talking about so you can't know if it's improper or not. Maybe people should be given the benefit of the doubt in what could be a personal situation. Then again this is America and we love to be in other peoples business.

 

 

Wait...uhhhhhhhhhhhh...its a CGC COMICS FORUM DINNER...correct??? So, there is NO discussion of, say....comic books?

 

 

this is laborious.

 

[esquirecomics]

Also, simply for the sake of controversy am I the only one that always thought a third party ANYTHING...should NOT socialize, nor drink wine, and have steak dinners...with your largest submitters? I mean, WOW...talk about a bad principle, business decision. Regardless of its actual intent, or innocent nature...the perception ALONE that it gives, is akin to this:

 

bad choice guys

 

consorting with clients outside of a business arena, is a 180' from the definition of "3rd party"

 

You may not be the only one that feels this way, but it doesn't make you right.

 

Why in the world should they not have dinner with people? Remember... most of the staff at CGC were big time collector's before they worked there. Many of them had contacts with these people before they went into business. Should the say "Hey... I know I've known you for 20 years and were all buddy buddy, but now that I work at CGC I can't consort with you any more"? These are people within the business. It's only natural for them to talk and eat with others from the business. I can't think of another industry on the planet where the people in it can't socialize with the people they do business with.

 

Does it make them less impartial? Maybe, but there's no way to ever know that for sure. Theoretically the people grading the comics don't know who submitted them so there shouldn't be any preferential treatment, but again you never know.

 

Speculating that there is something sinister about Steve B. having dinner with Vincent from metro is a waste of time. Now if you have proof that Vincent slipped an envelope filled with cash to Steve at dinner... well then we have something to talk about. If not then let it go and let's talk about the problems that we KNOW are happening.

 

I agree. I have no problems with CGC staff maintaining friendships with anyone so long as it doesn't cross the line into inappropriate conduct.

 

Geez, at most forum dinners it is typically for Steve B and I to sit together, and certainly buy each other drinks. Our personal friendship does not impact our professional relationship.

 

 

Mark..

here is where you and I part ways my man. I don't have "proof" of any "inappropriate" conduct (although, that word in of itself, is vague) nor did I "accuse" anyone either of ANYTHING either.

 

However, what I DID say, and stand by, is this:

 

A third party ANYTHING should not have outside social conduct with their clients, PERIOD!!!! It could all be completely innocent, who cares? the perception it gives to the industry/community is dangerous. ESPECIALLY once evidence arises, that "some" of those social clients, have practiced "disputed behavior" lets say.(as a lawyer, you should know that dude)

 

and YES, I don't really care if the guy is your cousin, once that association compromises the INTEGRITY of the business model, you're damn right you should NOT consort socially, especially, in public. Human beings are an emotion based species, hence, "[embarrassing lack of self control] happens" and favoritism "could" be inacted, sometimes even on a subliminal plane.

 

Again, it really matters none if impropriety is evident (this is not a court), because the perception it creates does the damage all by itself.

 

I'm sorry, opinions are aplenty, and mine on this issue stands clear

 

Not a problem. It is a very noble opinion and perspective. It would be nice if this type of perception were reality but, alas, it is not. My world would not exist here in Washington, D.C. if this perception were implemented into practice (which some could argue would be a good thing!). Indeed, this country could not run under such a climate given the current system.

 

Of course, your comments beg the question as to what constitutes "disputed behavior" and who determines the definition. I don't think you will see Jason Ewert at any forum dinners for quite some time. The same thing cannot be said for many other people whose practices have been called into question by those on the boards but are viewed by CGC as in line with its philosphy.

[Apotheosis]

Do you also find it comical that there are many people being robbed of THOUSANDS of their hard earned $$$ because of the [embarrassing lack of self control] going on? Does that invoke laughs for you as well

 

Absolutely... I love it when people get jacked out of their cash...

 

I made one joke. I appolagize. It won't happen again.

 

Oh yeah... and show me where people are being robbed of THOUSANDS of their hard earned $$$ because CGC employees have dinner with someone in the industry. All I've commented on was the meals. The other stuff (i.e. re-subs, pressing, etc.) I have made no remarks about because I don't have the knowledge to make remarks one way or the other.

[esquirecomics]

It's the appearance of impropriety that's important. Regardless of it's effect on their grading, CGC employees having dinner and boozing it up with large scale submitters simply looks bad. It's especially unprofessional when they hold themselves out as a impartial third party. Remember the Scalia/Cheney hunting trip? Same kind of thing. Nothing may have happened to influence someone's decision one way or the other, but it certainly doesn't do a whole lot for people's confidence.

 

You wouldn't like Washington, D.C. then.

 

I am sure I wouldn't. Politicians are the second lowest form of life on earth.

 

We're the first aren't we?

 

Don't forget lobbyists! For those interested, check out this week's cover story in USNWR about the MZM - Cong Cunningham scandal. The story came about largely due to one of my clients (and I am quoted! ).

[Apotheosis]

Wait...uhhhhhhhhhhhh...its a CGC COMICS FORUM DINNER...correct??? So, there is NO discussion of, say....comic books?

 

So no talks of Comics period. Got it They can't talk about the industry they love with anyone involved with it. Sad.

[esquirecomics]

 

Geez, at most forum dinners it is typically for Steve B and I to sit together, and certainly buy each other drinks. Our personal friendship does not impact our professional relationship.

 

 

 

Awesome picture!!! BTW, the day after that picture was taken, Mark listed hundreds of "Highest-graded" books of his site!

 

Kidding, Mark. And no, I still won't sell you my book.

 

 

[october]

We're the first aren't we?

 

You got it.

[infinite_comics-migration]

Maybe the problem some people have is that CGC (as a company) sponsors/organizes the dinners?

[Red Hook]

Maybe the problem some people have is that CGC (as a company) sponsors/organizes the dinners?

 

Well, they're more of a gathering of the CGC Boardmembers.....it's not like we have to wear CGC baseball caps or sit under a big banner with Steve's picture on it...............

 

Many times it's been a boardmember who organizes the thing and collects the money. We do pay, you know.

[Apotheosis]

Maybe the problem some people have is that CGC (as a company) sponsors/organizes the dinners?

 

Maybe, but we'll talk about it in the other thread and stop hijacking this one.

 

My appolagies for pulling this one off course.

[Red Hook]

Ooops. Sorry.

[infinite_comics-migration]

Sorry too

[sacentaur]

I recently returned an expensive Fiction House early GA book to Heritage because the scan showed it to be much whiter than it actually was.

 

Intentional?

 

When I complained, I was informed that, 'we scan 2,500 books a month, we're too busy, blah blah'.

 

Poor quality control?

 

My money was cheerfully refunded and the book will soon be back on the auction block - indeed the current preview displays the exact same bright scan.

 

So is it deliberate manipulation or is it just indifferent incompetence? Either way, as collectors it is YOUR money at stake. Heritage seems to have forgotten that (or they really just don't care).

 

Oh, hell yeah it's affected my buying habits - I've now cut back my purchases of expensive books by 90% because of distrust and an increasing lack of collector confidence.

 

I'm sorry if this thread bothers a few people who would prefer to be an ostrich rather than try to learn more about the growing belief that our beloved hobby is ruled by disreputable characters who engage in shady business practices.

 

Can any of us honestly state that we don't mind paying hundreds (or thousands) of extra dollars for certain raw books to be doctored in order to get a higher CGC grade?

 

There's no reason for the Greed Merchants to change as long as collectors continue to eagerly toss bags and bags of money at them.

 

Mitch (nice work BTW), I'm sure you know this already but you've only just started to scratch the surface...

 

STEVE

 

Got Larson?

[FFB]

Displaying white pages and a distinctive black "S" grease pencil mark in the book's logo area, this Very Fine copy of Thrilling Comics #1 sold just under its pre-auction estimate.

 

Seven-months later the book resurfaced, this time without the unique "S" and re-graded as a Near Mint -. Also missing from the copy was a light "25.00" pencil mark which was unobtrusively located in the upper left-hand corner of the original back cover surface.

 

how is it that you know it is the same book? i'm not questioning you, just wondering.

second how could cgc remove the 8.0 from the records? what could they possibly say?

cgc....what do you have to say?

 

Any time someone sends the label back to CGC, CGC removes the book from the census. It happens all the time and it isn't really controversial.

 

Of course you mean to say "it isn't really controversial to CGC."

 

I agree. They are simply implementing their business model. It is exactly what they envisioned and quietly promoted at their start-up meetings in 1999.

 

The more important question is "is it controversial" or "does anyone care" within the community that this is being done.

 

No, I mean to say it isn't controversial to remove a book from the census if the label isn't in the slab anymore.

 

Now, if you want to talk about whether the newly upgraded 9.4 book should have a "formerly 8.0" notation its graders' notes, that's a separate issue and one that is definitely controversial.

[MasterChief]

Thanks, Steve. Appreciate the assist with the "S" book.

 

I'll have another example up shortly ...

 

--Mitch

[esquirecomics]

Displaying white pages and a distinctive black "S" grease pencil mark in the book's logo area, this Very Fine copy of Thrilling Comics #1 sold just under its pre-auction estimate.

 

Seven-months later the book resurfaced, this time without the unique "S" and re-graded as a Near Mint -. Also missing from the copy was a light "25.00" pencil mark which was unobtrusively located in the upper left-hand corner of the original back cover surface.

 

how is it that you know it is the same book? i'm not questioning you, just wondering.

second how could cgc remove the 8.0 from the records? what could they possibly say?

cgc....what do you have to say?

 

Any time someone sends the label back to CGC, CGC removes the book from the census. It happens all the time and it isn't really controversial.

 

Of course you mean to say "it isn't really controversial to CGC."

 

I agree. They are simply implementing their business model. It is exactly what they envisioned and quietly promoted at their start-up meetings in 1999.

 

The more important question is "is it controversial" or "does anyone care" within the community that this is being done.

 

No, I mean to say it isn't controversial to remove a book from the census if the label isn't in the slab anymore.

 

Now, if you want to talk about whether the newly upgraded 9.4 book should have a "formerly 8.0" notation its graders' notes, that's a separate issue and one that is definitely controversial.

 

Understood and basically agree with you on both fronts, although I could easily see how controversy could be created regarding the census removal given why it occurs. Not entirely as black or white, but does make sense from an indexing purpose and I would prefer to see it done so that the census remains accurate as far as the existence of graded books goes.

[FFB]

Displaying white pages and a distinctive black "S" grease pencil mark in the book's logo area, this Very Fine copy of Thrilling Comics #1 sold just under its pre-auction estimate.

 

Seven-months later the book resurfaced, this time without the unique "S" and re-graded as a Near Mint -. Also missing from the copy was a light "25.00" pencil mark which was unobtrusively located in the upper left-hand corner of the original back cover surface.

 

how is it that you know it is the same book? i'm not questioning you, just wondering.

second how could cgc remove the 8.0 from the records? what could they possibly say?

cgc....what do you have to say?

 

Any time someone sends the label back to CGC, CGC removes the book from the census. It happens all the time and it isn't really controversial.

 

Of course you mean to say "it isn't really controversial to CGC."

 

I agree. They are simply implementing their business model. It is exactly what they envisioned and quietly promoted at their start-up meetings in 1999.

 

The more important question is "is it controversial" or "does anyone care" within the community that this is being done.

 

No, I mean to say it isn't controversial to remove a book from the census if the label isn't in the slab anymore.

 

Now, if you want to talk about whether the newly upgraded 9.4 book should have a "formerly 8.0" notation its graders' notes, that's a separate issue and one that is definitely controversial.

 

Understood and basically agree with you on both fronts, although I could easily see how controversy could be created regarding the census removal given why it occurs. Not entirely as black or white, but does make sense from an indexing purpose and I would prefer to see it done so that the census remains accurate as far as the existence of graded books goes.

 

Right. I think removal of the old label is a good thing, because otherwise people could be misled into thinking that there are more existing copies of scarce books than there are. This is a problem that already exists to some extent, but to the extent it could be lessened, I think it should be.