Supes #61 CGC 9.0 in CLink a resub?

[clarkkentdds]

I think we have another crack and press/ resub...

 

Looks like this book was originally sold May of this year as the "Williamsport" Supes #61 CGC 8.5

 

 

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7007&Lot_No=91228&src=pr

 

 

Now at auction through CLink as highest graded 9.0

 

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2FAuctions%2Fsearch%2Easp%3Fwhere%3Dauctions%26title%3Dsuperman%26ItemType%3DCB%26x%3D15%26y%3D9%23Item%5F805490&id=805490

 

This is so frusterating and infuriating. Does anyone knows who consigned this book to Clink? Was it a straight resub or pressed??? I feel bad for the original seller and the potential new buyer (who is now not going to be me...)

 

 

 

 

 

[1962]

Definitely the same book. That dust shadow on the right hand side is a complete giveaway.

[nearmint]

Always difficult to see details in scans, but I don't see any pressable defects in the 8.5 scan. Maybe a straight re-sub? It does look awful pretty for an 8.5.

[nearmint]

Book took a hit on page quality on the re-sub.

[G.A.tor]

I think we have another crack and press/ resub...

 

Looks like this book was originally sold May of this year as the "Williamsport" Supes #61 CGC 8.5

 

 

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7007&Lot_No=91228&src=pr

 

 

Now at auction through CLink as highest graded 9.0

 

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2FAuctions%2Fsearch%2Easp%3Fwhere%3Dauctions%26title%3Dsuperman%26ItemType%3DCB%26x%3D15%26y%3D9%23Item%5F805490&id=805490

 

This is so frusterating and infuriating. Does anyone knows who consigned this book to Clink? Was it a straight resub or pressed??? I feel bad for the original seller and the potential new buyer (who is now not going to be me...)

 

 

 

 

jack kula was the original seller of the williamsport (post cgc)... PM him and ask (I forget is board name, but a search should reveal)

[50YrsCollctngCmcs]

I am not a CGC collector, but this sort of thing really makes me think twice about dumping big money into books certified by them. That dust shadow is as good as a fingerprint and you would think that CGC would take that into account when grading again. Seems like greater consistency would only be good for their business.

 

I have looked at a lot of their graded golden age books and have noted enough inconsistency to not take their grade that seriously. I let my eyes do the judging.

[clarkkentdds]

I know Jack very well. He and I feel the same about this very unfortunate state of affairs.

 

How in the world can this be fair to Jack or the new buyer of this book? It went from a 1K sale to probably 2-4X...

 

That shadow is a fingerprint. If a hobbyist can see this, why can't CGC pick up on this? CGC needs to do a better job at detecting alterations.

 

 

 

 

[nearmint]

How do we know that the book was altered? We're talking about a .5 difference. Entirely possible that this book was merely resubbed.

 

I think it's unfair to the current owner to "scarlet letter" the book without knowing for sure that some manipulation has occurred.

[comicdonna]

How do we know that the book was altered? We're talking about a .5 difference. Entirely possible that this book was merely resubbed.

 

I think it's unfair to the current owner to "scarlet letter" the book without knowing for sure that some manipulation has occurred.

I agree!

[VintageComics]

How do we know that the book was altered? We're talking about a .5 difference. Entirely possible that this book was merely resubbed.

 

I think it's unfair to the current owner to "scarlet letter" the book without knowing for sure that some manipulation has occurred.

 

True enough. I have seen enough books go up or down by one point on a straight resub to know that it can happen.

[G.A.tor]

and in cgc's defense...if the if the book has been pressed/altered...if that results in less defects for them to discount on, then the grade, naturally, will be higher...

 

but I know what you are saying about the book, going from 1k to 2k...that is big...and it would be nice, in a perfect world if the playing field was leveled...but, it is not, so you have to take the good with the not so good

[tth2]

That shadow is a fingerprint. If a hobbyist can see this, why can't CGC pick up on this? CGC needs to do a better job at detecting alterations.

Of course CGC can pick up resubmissions in a lot of cases. There've been a ton of cracked and resubbed pedigree books with distinguishing features, where the CGC guys probably knew they'd seen the book before, even without checking back into their archives.

 

But their business model is that they don't care and will treat every new submission as a new submission, even if it makes a mockery of the sanctity of the whole grading and certification process.

 

What's really sad is that the slimebags playing the crack and resub game will sometimes hide the pedigreed nature of a book, so when CGC reslabs the book, the pedigree won't be noted anymore. I guess the slimebags are worried that CGC will not give the book a higher grade if they know they previously gave it a lower grade, even though all the evidence indicates that CGC don't care and will give a higher grade even when they definitely know they've graded it before.

[esquirecomics]

That shadow is a fingerprint. If a hobbyist can see this, why can't CGC pick up on this? CGC needs to do a better job at detecting alterations.

Of course CGC can pick up resubmissions in a lot of cases. There've been a ton of cracked and resubbed pedigree books with distinguishing features, where the CGC guys probably knew they'd seen the book before, even without checking back into their archives.

 

But their business model is that they don't care and will treat every new submission as a new submission, even if it makes a mockery of the sanctity of the whole grading and certification process.

 

What's really sad is that the slimebags playing the crack and resub game will sometimes hide the pedigreed nature of a book, so when CGC reslabs the book, the pedigree won't be noted anymore. I guess the slimebags are worried that CGC will not give the book a higher grade if they know they previously gave it a lower grade, even though all the evidence indicates that CGC don't care and will give a higher grade even when they definitely know they've graded it before.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with Tim. (thumbs u

 

And it allows me to remind everyone of a previous example of exactly what Tim is referring to.

 

I own the Rockford copy of More Fun #52 CGC 5.5. I purchased it from Steve Lauterbach. The book I purchased did not note on the label that it was the Rockford pedigree copy (and also from Nicholas Cage's collection). The reason it didn't is that the book had just previously been a purple label CGC 6.5 (slight glue) which had not met reserve at Heritage. The glue (or tape residue according to Mark Wilson who discovered the Rockford collection) was removed and the book was resubmitted to CGC without any evidence of the pedigree nature of the book to purposefully hide the manipulation of removed restoration (I should note I have no problems with the removal of restoration so long as disclosed).

 

Lauterbach conveniently did not tell me of what had transpired before the purchase but fortunately ComicKeys, of all people, exposed the alteration and at least I ultimately did purchase the book knowing what had occurred, no thanks to Mr. Lauterbach. I subsequently had the book resubmitted so that the pedigree designation could be "restored".

 

A more recent example is the Kansas City copy of Tough Kid Squad (Timely, 1942). It was a CGC 8.5 and failed to meet reserve at Heritage earlier this year. NOW it is a CGC 8.0 and I purchased it last week for under guide. At least in this case the "slimebag", as Tim described the person who partakes in the resub practice, suffered a nice loss. I'd love to know who the person was who risked resubmitting a pedigree book (I have no idea if it was pressed).

 

Yet another example is the All American #1 CGC 8.0 Larson copy I own. It was previously a CGC 8.5. Again, at least I can take pleasure in knowing that the resubmitter hopefully took a hit by the gamble.

 

It is unfortunate that CGC's business model supports, if not encourages, this type of resub practice. I really view it as Tim does that the practice hurts the integrity of CGC's grading skills and in the long term may come back to haunt them as collectors view the inconsistencies.

[mikephoen]

The biggest disgrace in my mind is that a 9.0 can have a big ugly dust shadow like that.

[icouldbe]

The reason it didn't is that the book had just previously been a purple label CGC 6.5 (slight glue) which had not met reserve at Heritage. The glue (or tape residue according to Mark Wilson who discovered the Rockford collection) was removed and the book was resubmitted to CGC without any evidence of the pedigree nature of the book to purposefully hide the manipulation of removed restoration (I should note I have no problems with the removal of restoration so long as disclosed).

 

Thanks, Mark. I always wondered what was meant by slight glue but I never connected it to tape residue on the comic.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

That shadow is a fingerprint. If a hobbyist can see this, why can't CGC pick up on this? CGC needs to do a better job at detecting alterations.

Of course CGC can pick up resubmissions in a lot of cases. There've been a ton of cracked and resubbed pedigree books with distinguishing features, where the CGC guys probably knew they'd seen the book before, even without checking back into their archives.

 

But their business model is that they don't care and will treat every new submission as a new submission, even if it makes a mockery of the sanctity of the whole grading and certification process.

 

What's really sad is that the slimebags playing the crack and resub game will sometimes hide the pedigreed nature of a book, so when CGC reslabs the book, the pedigree won't be noted anymore. I guess the slimebags are worried that CGC will not give the book a higher grade if they know they previously gave it a lower grade, even though all the evidence indicates that CGC don't care and will give a higher grade even when they definitely know they've graded it before.

 

Just to clarify, but is anyone who cracks and resubs a slimebag?

[nearmint]

That shadow is a fingerprint. If a hobbyist can see this, why can't CGC pick up on this? CGC needs to do a better job at detecting alterations.

Of course CGC can pick up resubmissions in a lot of cases. There've been a ton of cracked and resubbed pedigree books with distinguishing features, where the CGC guys probably knew they'd seen the book before, even without checking back into their archives.

 

But their business model is that they don't care and will treat every new submission as a new submission, even if it makes a mockery of the sanctity of the whole grading and certification process.

 

What's really sad is that the slimebags playing the crack and resub game will sometimes hide the pedigreed nature of a book, so when CGC reslabs the book, the pedigree won't be noted anymore. I guess the slimebags are worried that CGC will not give the book a higher grade if they know they previously gave it a lower grade, even though all the evidence indicates that CGC don't care and will give a higher grade even when they definitely know they've graded it before.

 

Just to clarify, but is anyone who cracks and resubs a slimebag?

 

We could have T-shirts made. Maybe build a club house?

[G.A.tor]

t shirts, I am in for one!

[VintageComics]

That shadow is a fingerprint. If a hobbyist can see this, why can't CGC pick up on this? CGC needs to do a better job at detecting alterations.

Of course CGC can pick up resubmissions in a lot of cases. There've been a ton of cracked and resubbed pedigree books with distinguishing features, where the CGC guys probably knew they'd seen the book before, even without checking back into their archives.

 

But their business model is that they don't care and will treat every new submission as a new submission, even if it makes a mockery of the sanctity of the whole grading and certification process.

 

What's really sad is that the slimebags playing the crack and resub game will sometimes hide the pedigreed nature of a book, so when CGC reslabs the book, the pedigree won't be noted anymore. I guess the slimebags are worried that CGC will not give the book a higher grade if they know they previously gave it a lower grade, even though all the evidence indicates that CGC don't care and will give a higher grade even when they definitely know they've graded it before.

 

Just to clarify, but is anyone who cracks and resubs a slimebag?

 

We could have T-shirts made. Maybe build a club house?

 

Just neuter yourself so that you don't procreate.

 

 

[buttock]

That shadow is a fingerprint. If a hobbyist can see this, why can't CGC pick up on this? CGC needs to do a better job at detecting alterations.

Of course CGC can pick up resubmissions in a lot of cases. There've been a ton of cracked and resubbed pedigree books with distinguishing features, where the CGC guys probably knew they'd seen the book before, even without checking back into their archives.

 

But their business model is that they don't care and will treat every new submission as a new submission, even if it makes a mockery of the sanctity of the whole grading and certification process.

 

What's really sad is that the slimebags playing the crack and resub game will sometimes hide the pedigreed nature of a book, so when CGC reslabs the book, the pedigree won't be noted anymore. I guess the slimebags are worried that CGC will not give the book a higher grade if they know they previously gave it a lower grade, even though all the evidence indicates that CGC don't care and will give a higher grade even when they definitely know they've graded it before.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with Tim. (thumbs u

 

And it allows me to remind everyone of a previous example of exactly what Tim is referring to.

 

I own the Rockford copy of More Fun #52 CGC 5.5. I purchased it from Steve Lauterbach. The book I purchased did not note on the label that it was the Rockford pedigree copy (and also from Nicholas Cage's collection). The reason it didn't is that the book had just previously been a purple label CGC 6.5 (slight glue) which had not met reserve at Heritage. The glue (or tape residue according to Mark Wilson who discovered the Rockford collection) was removed and the book was resubmitted to CGC without any evidence of the pedigree nature of the book to purposefully hide the manipulation of removed restoration (I should note I have no problems with the removal of restoration so long as disclosed).

 

Lauterbach conveniently did not tell me of what had transpired before the purchase but fortunately ComicKeys, of all people, exposed the alteration and at least I ultimately did purchase the book knowing what had occurred, no thanks to Mr. Lauterbach. I subsequently had the book resubmitted so that the pedigree designation could be "restored".

 

A more recent example is the Kansas City copy of Tough Kid Squad (Timely, 1942). It was a CGC 8.5 and failed to meet reserve at Heritage earlier this year. NOW it is a CGC 8.0 and I purchased it last week for under guide. At least in this case the "slimebag", as Tim described the person who partakes in the resub practice, suffered a nice loss. I'd love to know who the person was who risked resubmitting a pedigree book (I have no idea if it was pressed).

 

Yet another example is the All American #1 CGC 8.0 Larson copy I own. It was previously a CGC 8.5. Again, at least I can take pleasure in knowing that the resubmitter hopefully took a hit by the gamble.

 

It is unfortunate that CGC's business model supports, if not encourages, this type of resub practice. I really view it as Tim does that the practice hurts the integrity of CGC's grading skills and in the long term may come back to haunt them as collectors view the inconsistencies.

 

Mark, do you really feel this way?

 

People are taking a chance at making a profit on a book. There's no proof that anything was done to the books (and if there was, it's likely of no consequence). And you see something wrong with this? You take delight in seeing this go awry?

 

This is a basic principle of capitalism. You yourself have a business where you buy and sell comic books at a profit. By your rationale, should we all hope to see you fail and lose money?