Adventure Comics #40 CGC 9.2

[aardvark88]

It's too much of a bargain for the buyer. That is why many PLOD comics that were say vf before the resto to vfnm won't be sold at auction without a reserve else they would hammer at vg Overstreet. Sellers don't want to loose $$ on a comic that they bought over 10 years ago when clean/press was not as frowned upon.

[AllTop8Me]

Theres one cleaner solution: CGC should just give ALL comics with even the slightest "restoration" the purple label. That way, there will be many more PLOD comics around and bargain hunters and collectors who wont or cant pay for UNrestored copies will have plenty to choose from, all equally labeled. Also, since some of the questionable (and charitable) calls CGC has made for those lucky few Blue-labelled books with work will also now be Purple, buyers will know that there are a few minimally restored gems to seek out in the Purple Pile making it worthwhile looking at these formerly "leper colony" comics.

 

Then why stick with the PLOD, rather than go for the three grade (overall, page quality, restoration) system? The PLOD serves to emphasize the baneful essence of any sort of restoration or conservation, as if, even fully disclosed, it was something nefarious like forgery. People who wish to keep the PLOD tend to be those who believe restoration and conservation are in fact the worst evils that can befall a comic and wish CGC to graphically display that. The PLOD reinforces that viewpoint. In such an environment, it is unlikely that moving the relatively few blue label "minor glue" books into PLODland will change feelings, and improve prices. It CGC's mission is to provide maximum information without taking money out of the market, the three grade system proposed by Lou (overall, page quality and resto) is best. If CGC's mission is to depress the prices for restored books so that true collectors can afford them, the PLOD is not bad, though Timely's suggestion about putting a big "X" across the cover is probably better.

[Aman619]

you seem to want a system which differentiates between 'good' restoration and 'bad' restoration. Avtually, I would too. But the distinction sounds a lot like defining pornography: "I know it when I see it" and each of us have different standards.

 

So why not simply throw them ALL into the same category and let the 'good' ones, whatever each of us deem them to be, rise to the top.

Its that, or everyone agree on standards, which, letsface it, just aint gonna happen.

 

I agree with al here who say that CGC has taken a cavalier approach sofar in allowing "restored" books to go BLUE at their whim while shunning others as PLOD. It seem sthe unhappiest collectors right now are thsose who paid for restored books who hacve seen the values plummet. Two answers: 1) remember that you bought them to enjoy them, not to invest. and 2) sit tight, the market will come back around in your favor. If it doesnt, see answer #1.

[AllTop8Me]

you seem to want a system which differentiates between 'good' restoration and 'bad' restoration. Avtually, I would too. But the distinction sounds a lot like defining pornography: "I know it when I see it" and each of us have different standards.

 

So why not simply throw them ALL into the same category and let the 'good' ones, whatever each of us deem them to be, rise to the top.

Its that, or everyone agree on standards, which, letsface it, just aint gonna happen.

 

I don't see why grading restoration is different than grading the overall condition of a book. As noted further up this thread, professional restorers have come up with detailed systems for scoring restoration. CGC can, if it wants to, grade a book on a range of R-0 to R-9 based on such systems or a method of its own. Such a grading system would be no more subjective that a system that grades overall condition on a scale from 0.5 to 10.0. So what's the point of the PLOD? To stigmatize books because they are different from other books in some fundamental way? If so, as Lou Fine noted above, CGC should have one label for 9.4 and above and one for everything below, distinguishing the perfect from the rest. Surely there is no greater distinction that needs be highlighted than that between perfection and everything else! Or, as Timely suggests, they could just put an "X" across the holder and be done with it.

[lou_fine]

you seem to want a system which differentiates between 'good' restoration and 'bad' restoration. Avtually, I would too. But the distinction sounds a lot like defining pornography: "I know it when I see it" and each of us have different standards.

 

So why not simply throw them ALL into the same category and let the 'good' ones, whatever each of us deem them to be, rise to the top.

Its that, or everyone agree on standards, which, letsface it, just aint gonna happen.

 

Aman;

 

I have to warn you. You better be real real careful with what you say here since these boards still belong to CGC. I am absolutely shocked that you would have the nerve to accuse Steve B. and the rest of the CGC gang as "defining pornography". I also believe that fellow forum members such as Darth would have an absolute heart attack if CGC deceided to take your advice and simply divided all the books into two categories: near mint books and defective books.

 

By throwing all the books into the same category and letting everybody decide on their own as to what is good or bad will put CGC and fellow forum members such as Darth right out of business. Why are you proposing that we go back to the pre-CGC days when there were no independent grading. Actually, come to think of it, this might not be such a bad idea after all. I'll be able to afford to buy those former high grade books as they plummet down in price. Aman, are you sure that you are not really JC in disguise trying to make your forecast of a market crash in 2004 come true.

 

I have an idea! Why don't we all take a vote to see if we should accept Aman's proposal and lump all books into one category and let everybody decide on their own grade. Ah, the days of nostalgia as we go back to pre-CGC times and those wonderful Wild West days of grading and wheeling and dealing.

[Aman619]

gee - - I know you were being sarcastic, but for the life of me, I cant figure out which side youre on after reading that!

 

anyway, I wouldnt have a problem with the suggestion that all books 9.4 and above get a different color label. Why should that be so bad? If you buy a 9.2 today you are already aware that it is an "inferior" book to the first-class HG books! But so what? Im not going to suddenly start only buying 9.4s as a result: some of them are just too dam expensive right now. (122K!!!)

 

That argument sounds damning until you think about it.

9.4s compared to 9.2s Is just NOT the same as restored books versus unrestored books.

Its just a label! As I (and others) have said earlier the real problem is the inconsistency of CGC's choices on who gets Blue and Purple.