Manufactured Gold

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

If you want to view CGC merely as a business, then why in heavens name would you allow it to place itself in a position of authority regarding grading standards, the definition of restoration and the designation of pedigrees?

 

I sure don't anymore.

 

But that's neither here nor there. As long as the collecting community does as a whole, its a moot point.

 

CGC wants the authority to make declarations in the areas above, but it rejects the responsiblity of safeguarding the hobby, ie being a body that polices. I say you can't have it both ways.

 

I concur. Maybe that Forum Oversight committee they've been promising since the Ewert Fiasco is just around the corner.

[Sal]

The point, respectfully, is that no one knows for certain because there is nothing built into the process for ANYONE to regulate it. We have in this thread one person who has no offical capacity whatsoever pouring over "data" pointing out there are books getting through this company that should never have got to market with the tags they did. In the end it means nothing because there is no official means of truly effecting change because people are more than willing to let CGC explain it away.

 

How many examples do we need to effect changes in the process to protect collectors? While many are happy to get angry and rant about raw sellers and their atrocious grading CGC get a relatively free ride because their process allows them to and not many folks are even willing to try and effect changes that are for the better of CGC and the community.

 

There are even folks that say regulation means the loss of protecting trade secrets or security. If certification really worked that way then there would be no ISO or other official certifaction bodies out there. I don't know of many drug companies, at least in Canada, medical facilities and manufacturers that are (ISO) certified that have blamed that certifaction for the loss of trade secrets. That is not what regulation is about it is about protect all aspects of a business and creating an environment that ensures not only the exclusion of greed but betters the success of scientific discovery.

 

People think I rant about CGC because I don't like it or I am some sort of elitist but that just isn't true. I want CGC and any other company that wants to try and protect the industry in some way to succeed without question. If CGC was set up better few people would be able to complain and they would probably make a hell of alot more cashin the process. I know I would use them if I could believe they were following a model free of error and prejudice.

 

CGC should not be a mystery if it is supposed to be a benefit to the community. To many unanswered question and secrecy breeds contempt and mistrust.

 

I feel that with some changes and a bit more money spent CGC could be an even better business and one that is even more accessible to more collectors.

 

:shrugs:

 

i don't disagree with any of this. in fact i think you are spot on with most of it, if not all.

 

i still think we can't establish any sort of trend with the available data. it's possible we will be able to in the future, but right now all we have is a growing pool of examples that alarm a good number of us collector types

[codfish]

Let me ask you this question....

 

If you want to view CGC merely as a business, then why in heavens name would you allow it to place itself in a position of authority regarding grading standards, the definition of restoration and the designation of pedigrees?

 

It would seem to me that to allow a profit driven enterprise (nothing wrong with that, mind you) to take the initiative in the areas mentioned above, (which are sensitve areas that go beyond mere grading, but enter into aestheics and the history of the hobby) is ludicrous and a bit dangerous.

 

CGC (the company) seems to want to be much more than an independent third party grading company. It wants decision making power within the hobby too. Grading standards, the definition of restoration and the recognition of new pedigrees should be left to separate entities...whether that be Overstreet or some kind of general consensus of dealers and collectors. I see a conflict of interest here.

 

CGC wants the authority to make declarations in the areas above, but it rejects the responsiblity of safeguarding the hobby, ie being a body that polices. I say you can't have it both ways.

 

Red

 

I absolutely agree with all of this Brad. Good post.

[codfish]

i still think we can establish any sort of trend with the available data. it's possible we will be able to in the future, but right now all we have is a growing pool of examples that alarm a good number of us collector types

 

Agreed.

[Flaming_Telepath]

The point, respectfully, is that no one knows for certain because there is nothing built into the process for ANYONE to regulate it. We have in this thread one person who has no offical capacity whatsoever pouring over "data" pointing out there are books getting through this company that should never have got to market with the tags they did. In the end it means nothing because there is no official means of truly effecting change because people are more than willing to let CGC explain it away.

 

How many examples do we need to effect changes in the process to protect collectors? While many are happy to get angry and rant about raw sellers and their atrocious grading CGC get a relatively free ride because their process allows them to and not many folks are even willing to try and effect changes that are for the better of CGC and the community.

 

There are even folks that say regulation means the loss of protecting trade secrets or security. If certification really worked that way then there would be no ISO or other official certifaction bodies out there. I don't know of many drug companies, at least in Canada, medical facilities and manufacturers that are (ISO) certified that have blamed that certifaction for the loss of trade secrets. That is not what regulation is about it is about protect all aspects of a business and creating an environment that ensures not only the exclusion of greed but betters the success of scientific discovery.

 

People think I rant about CGC because I don't like it or I am some sort of elitist but that just isn't true. I want CGC and any other company that wants to try and protect the industry in some way to succeed without question. If CGC was set up better few people would be able to complain and they would probably make a hell of alot more cashin the process. I know I would use them if I could believe they were following a model free of error and prejudice.

 

CGC should not be a mystery if it is supposed to be a benefit to the community. To many unanswered question and secrecy breeds contempt and mistrust.

 

I feel that with some changes and a bit more money spent CGC could be an even better business and one that is even more accessible to more collectors.

 

:shrugs:

 

This is coming from someone who anonomously posts. If you want true transparency, then start by putting your info in your profile

 

 

I'm assuming you couldn't find any other fault with the post?

[Bullet123]

 

This is coming from someone who anonomously posts. If you want true transparency, then start by putting your info in your profile

 

Cod is a well known poster on this and other chatboards. His anonymity or lack of it have nothing to do with the topic under discussion.

 

If he is well known, then why not post the info?

[Red Hook]

[mica]

 

This is coming from someone who anonomously posts. If you want true transparency, then start by putting your info in your profile

 

Cod is a well known poster on this and other chatboards. His anonymity or lack of it have nothing to do with the topic under discussion.

 

If he is well known, then why not post the info?

Did you like his sentence structure and puncuation?

[Sal]

 

This is coming from someone who anonomously posts. If you want true transparency, then start by putting your info in your profile

 

Cod is a well known poster on this and other chatboards. His anonymity or lack of it have nothing to do with the topic under discussion.

 

If he is well known, then why not post the info?

 

intentional irony here, or no?

[Bullet123]

The point, respectfully, is that no one knows for certain because there is nothing built into the process for ANYONE to regulate it. We have in this thread one person who has no offical capacity whatsoever pouring over "data" pointing out there are books getting through this company that should never have got to market with the tags they did. In the end it means nothing because there is no official means of truly effecting change because people are more than willing to let CGC explain it away.

 

How many examples do we need to effect changes in the process to protect collectors?

 

You can post all the examples you like. The only reason for CGC to even listen to you is if you are part of their business model (either submitting books for grading or buying graded books from the people who get them graded. Why should they listen to any of you anonymous posters who rant and rave yet have seem to have very little skin in the game when it comes to CGC graded books) If the people who actually buy and sell the books are happy with CGC' s product, why should they give a spoon about it?

 

In one breath you say that you want CGC to police the collecting community and protect your ideals as to what the public should want as far as funny books. I think the public is speaking as CGC seems to be doing OK (something like 700,000+ submissions so far) Just because it disagrees with your ideals does not mean that everybody else agrees with you. For the record, I do agree with some of your bones of contention. I just can't simply agree with everything you or anyone else says because you think that is what I or anyone else should be doing. It is simply not that black and white as you try to portray.

 

While many are happy to get angry and rant about raw sellers and their atrocious grading CGC get a relatively free ride because their process allows them to and not many folks are even willing to try and effect changes that are for the better of CGC and the community.

 

There are even folks that say regulation means the loss of protecting trade secrets or security. If certification really worked that way then there would be no ISO or other official certifaction bodies out there. I don't know of many drug companies, at least in Canada, medical facilities and manufacturers that are (ISO) certified that have blamed that certifaction for the loss of trade secrets. That is not what regulation is about it is about protect all aspects of a business and creating an environment that ensures not only the exclusion of greed but betters the success of scientific discovery.

 

People think I rant about CGC because I don't like it or I am some sort of elitist but that just isn't true. I want CGC and any other company that wants to try and protect the industry in some way to succeed without question. If CGC was set up better few people would be able to complain and they would probably make a hell of alot more cashin the process. I know I would use them if I could believe they were following a model free of error and prejudice.

 

CGC should not be a mystery if it is supposed to be a benefit to the community. To many unanswered question and secrecy breeds contempt and mistrust.

 

I feel that with some changes and a bit more money spent CGC could be an even better business and one that is even more accessible to more collectors.

 

:shrugs:

 

This is coming from someone who anonomously posts. If you want true transparency, then start by putting your info in your profile

 

 

I'm assuming you couldn't find any other fault with the post?

[codfish]

Uh. did you even read my response to your post?

 

Since you are still ranting on then I guess not.

 

For the the record I had, at one time, a client number with which I could have submitted directly to CGC. I never did because it was too pricey and I would not have been submitting books for resale. that and I was just far too busy with other things.

 

I have not purchased many CGC graded books because they were/are too costly for the grade given or I ended out finding an acceptable copy "raw". I have zero problems in buying a slabbed book should I need it, I think it is properly graded, and the price is acceptable. I just bought a graded book off Ebay a week or so ago actually (check out userid turtletwelve on eBay or do a search for x-23 CGC). I intend to buy more too.

 

Knowing my name probably would not give you all this but to please you read my first response to you.

[Bullet123]

Uh. did you even read my response to your post?

 

Since you are still ranting on then I guess not.

 

For the the record I had, at one time, a client number with which I could have submitted directly to CGC. I never did because it was too pricey and I would not have been submitting books for resale. that and I was just far too busy with other things.

 

I have not purchased many CGC graded books because they were/are too costly for the grade given or I ended out finding an acceptable copy "raw". I have zero problems in buying a slabbed book should I need it, I think it is properly graded, and the price is acceptable. I just bought a graded book off Ebay a week or so ago actually (check out userid turtletwelve on eBay or do a search for x-23 CGC). I intend to buy more too.

 

Knowing my name probably would not give you all this but to please you read my first response to you.

 

If you read my last post, then you would see that you are exactly the type of person I am speaking of. You have admitted that you have never submitted a book for grading and have purchased a total of one book off of Ebay. Like it or not, the way profitable businesses work is to cater to the clientele that partake in your product and do all you can to please them. You are not it. Nothing personal, simply a fact of business. If you do not like the way the game is played, then convince all your anonymous friends to stop buying and selling CGC slabs, if they ever were in the first place, and then CGC might take notice and change their business model. Or better yet, convince me, or several just like me, who do buy a lot of CGC graded books to stop. Then you might accomplish your objective.

[Harvey Dude]

How many examples do we need to effect changes in the process to protect collectors? ...

I feel that with some changes and a bit more money spent CGC could be an even better

business and one that is even more accessible to more collectors.

 

:shrugs:

 

[Bullet123]

It has been mentioned that the treatment of books is not just confined to high-end material and that books on the low-end of the grading scale receive their share of exploitation too. I believe that to be the case as well, as I have documented many low-grade copies that have gone through the manipulation process.

 

Taking it one step further, one can safely conclude based on available data that nothing is off-limits when it comes to treatment intent. There are no sacred cows or holy untouchables. Any and all publishers, genres, pedigrees, collections, titles, keys, and rarities have and continue to be fair game.

 

Take for example this next case.

 

Here we have a very desirable Timely Golden Age key. One that is identified as being scarce on the Gerber Scarcity Index and assigned a rating of “7” as only 21 to 50 copies are estimated to exist. Time and again the copy ranks within the top 100 of Overstreet’s most valuable Golden Age books. It is a first appearance origin issue which pre-dates Captain America and Sub-Mariner comics, and is the premier issue forefather to the Human Torch comic book series. Moreover, it is the first time a budding artistic legend would mark his work with his real name. That name being: Jack Kirby.

 

***************

 

Red Raven Comics #1

 

Auctioned in the winter of 2002, this well read 62 year-old Timely classic listed as a certified Very Good - (3.5) with a clearly identifiable progressive spine roll and loose upper staple. Lauded within its description for its historical importance and “rarity”, the copy sold to one aggressive bidder for $2415.

 

The Timely auctioned again in the summer of 2004. This time, it listed as a certified Very Good (4.0) with a Universal label that carried a unique grading text notation of “four small pieces of tape on centerfold”. No longer presenting the spine defect which marred its original appearance, and advertised with an emphasis on its “unrestored” and “affordable condition”, the copy realized a price 43% greater than its original take.

 

The manufactured version of Red Raven Comics #1 (0079219008) was graded on April 20, 2004. It currently ranks second to last on the CGC census. The original version is not searchable in the certification database. 

 

To date, 20 copies of Red Raven #1 have been graded and encapsulated by CGC. Of that number, 13 books (65% of the graded population) are restored copies.

 

In my opinion the piece has seen cleaning and pressing treatments. Light dry cleaning to the rear and perhaps front cover, and dissembled pressing to recapture the original bindery spine fold. The elimination of the progressive spine roll – with its distinctive vertical and horizontal page fanning – and the visibly tighter and flatter staples, with an application of tape of at the centerfold to hold it all together, suggests the disassembled technique.

 

Certification/Resale Provenance:

 

 

Resource Links:

 

Red Raven Comics #1 (3.5)

Red Raven Comics #1 (4.0)

 

Images:

 

 

 

 

 

Lets use this book as an example. It is not a perfect example for me because I generally buy higher graded items, but here is where I stand on this particular example.

 

I would never have bought this book as it was presented in the first slab as it is fugly, at least IMO. I do not have a problem with someone pressing it so that it presents 100% better , again IMO, in the second example. Would I want to pay %40 more for it for a .5 bump. No, but I think the %40 is more reflective of its presentation than the higher grade.

 

I hope that explains where I fall on this particular book.

[mica]

then convince all your anonymous friends to stop buying and selling CGC slabs, if they ever were in the first place,

Your friends must be comatose.

And I doubt they'd come forward and claim they know you.

 

Why are you insulting him like this?

 

Something tells me that if he'd have said he owned 12 thousand slabs you would have told him that until he has 12,001 he shouldn't be able to talk about anything.

The always moving benchmark...

[Harvey Dude]

... Or better yet, convince me, or several just like me, who do buy a lot of CGC

graded books to stop. Then you might accomplish your objective.

 

Having both submitted to CGC and as an owner of over 200 slabbed books, I have seen

enough to change my buying habits. I decided to speak with my dollars and until there

are changes for the better, I am reallocating a significant portion of funds that I used to spend

on comic books.

[Bullet123]

then convince all your anonymous friends to stop buying and selling CGC slabs, if they ever were in the first place,

Your friends must be comatose.

And I doubt they'd come forward and claim they know you. I never said I had any friends

 

Why are you insulting him like this?

If you read my post I said nothing personal, strictly business

 

Something tells me that if he'd have said he owned 12 thousand slabs you would have told him that until he has 12,001 he shouldn't be able to talk about anything.

The always moving benchmark... Yes I will admit that my benchmark would probably have started to move at at least 2 slabs

[mica]

I never said I had any friends

[mica]

[jkrk]

It has been mentioned that the treatment of books is not just confined to high-end material and that books on the low-end of the grading scale receive their share of exploitation too. I believe that to be the case as well, as I have documented many low-grade copies that have gone through the manipulation process.

 

Taking it one step further, one can safely conclude based on available data that nothing is off-limits when it comes to treatment intent. There are no sacred cows or holy untouchables. Any and all publishers, genres, pedigrees, collections, titles, keys, and rarities have and continue to be fair game.

 

 

I suspect the criteria for working on a book is a judgement regarding the time that needs to be spent versus the potential upgrade. Would work be performed on a copy of Action 1 graded Good if the mechanic believes that after his magic is applied the copy might grade a G+ or GVG? Looking at the before and after Red Raven I believe that the magician largely failed in achieving his goal. The newer copy lost the spine roll and appears to be claener. However, the notes should have offset the slight pickup in grade. I look at the price appreciation and relate this more to market factors (Prices dipped in 2002 and as you say the buyer was more aggressive in 2004) than a great restoration job.

 

My question is whether anyone will/can check whether there is a common thread

involving the restorations MC has picked up? Meaning, a common restorer, or more importantly a common submitter?