If you could change one thing about CGC's grading or policies....

[The Question?]

 

 

Where to start?

[Zonker]

They really, REALLY need to stop giving foxing a break. There is absolutely zero reason that foxing should be all but ignored and staining should be hammered. That's where they are now and it's beyond stupid.

 

I wonder if this is a consequence of CGC claiming to "follow the Overstreet grading standards." In many cases they can do so because the Overstreet Grading Guide (at least version 2.0) is non-specific and imprecise. Among the exceptions though are the length of spine split allowed in each grade (measured in inches-- no ambiguity there), and the allowability of foxing stains in high grades, although qualified by non-specific adjectives like "minor," from what I recall. The original Overstreet standards were created in a more lenient age, when I'm guessing several of the big-name collections were structurally high grade but exhibited foxing. Maybe Bob's own beloved ECs picked up some foxing from all those years of storage in Cleveland Tennessee?

 

Now though unless Overstreet revises its standards, CGC is pretty much locked in to accepting foxing. And if I'm right about the big-name collections / big-name collectors sitting on otherwise high-grade Golden Age books with foxing, then there are some vested interests who would oppose either CGC or Overstreet tightening this up.

[Flaming_Telepath]

If you can't see it with the naked eye, not including CT, then it isn't a defect.

 

A bit like if you can't see a disease with the naked eye, it's not harmful?

 

 

 

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

Put more notes on the label, put the alphabetical grade on the label, get a new design for the slab, differentiate between conservation and restoration with a new coloured label for the former and a bunch of other stuff that's escaping me at the moment

 

If it can be determined that a book is a resub, give it the exact grade that it received the first time (or lower), no matter what "improvements" have been made on the book since then.

 

Be harder on PQ. White pages should mean something.

 

Tighten up on grading. 9.4 should mean something. 9.6 should be almost unobtainable. 9.8 should be a myth.

 

In my opinion CGC has done a poor job in maintaining the top end of the grading curve. It still bothers me that a book with Cream pages can be a 9.8...or that there can be writing or date stamps on these books. That doesn't compute with me. Not to mention regsistration issues on 9.6 let alone 9.8 books. A 9.8 book should be a damn near perfect specimen...not what CGC is churning out.

 

But at the end of the day it's important to realize that they're running a business first and acting as a partner in the hobby second. Once again adds to the buy the book thinking not the slab!

 

They really, REALLY need to stop giving foxing a break. There is absolutely zero reason that foxing should be all but ignored and staining should be hammered. That's where they are now and it's beyond stupid.

 

 

(worship) to all of you! (thumbs u

[MCMiles]

They really, REALLY need to stop giving foxing a break. There is absolutely zero reason that foxing should be all but ignored and staining should be hammered. That's where they are now and it's beyond stupid.

(thumbs u

[seanfingh]

If it can be determined that a book is a resub, give it the exact grade that it received the first time (or lower), no matter what "improvements" have been made on the book since then.

 

This would insure that no one ever sent a label back in and would really f up the census even more than the amount of "anonymous" resubs already does. Plus it would insure that tons of Pedigree designations are lost to the ages.

[comicalgems]

I would like for them to start including items sold with the book. For Example if they are going to slab a GRR then they should include a grade for the Record if the record is available and encase it in the slab.

 

Or if some 3-D glasses originally came with the book and are submitted with the book then the glasses should be encased with the book.

 

Or a trading card/bagged scenario as seen in the X-Cutioner's Song cross-over.

 

Does anyone know what the grading process/policy is for books that are still factory sealed inside a bag?

 

[Theagenes]

They really, REALLY need to stop giving foxing a break. There is absolutely zero reason that foxing should be all but ignored and staining should be hammered. That's where they are now and it's beyond stupid.

 

Totally agree. The leniency on foxing drives me crazy.

[DrWatson]

If you can't see it with the naked eye, not including CT, then it isn't a defect.

 

A bit like if you can't see a disease with the naked eye, it's not harmful?

 

 

 

 

 

That is not what I meant. Seriously, have many infectious books have you ran across?

[Theagenes]

If you can't see it with the naked eye, not including CT, then it isn't a defect.

 

A bit like if you can't see a disease with the naked eye, it's not harmful?

 

 

 

 

 

That is not what I meant. Seriously, have many infectious books have you ran across?

 

See the above comments re:foxing. Of course foxing is visible.

[whisp]

I would like for them to start including items sold with the book. For Example if they are going to slab a GRR then they should include a grade for the Record if the record is available and encase it in the slab.

 

Or if some 3-D glasses originally came with the book and are submitted with the book then the glasses should be encased with the book.

 

Or a trading card/bagged scenario as seen in the X-Cutioner's Song cross-over.

 

Does anyone know what the grading process/policy is for books that are still factory sealed inside a bag?

 

 

Book needs to be pulled out of the bag to be graded.

[DrWatson]

If you can't see it with the naked eye, not including CT, then it isn't a defect.

 

A bit like if you can't see a disease with the naked eye, it's not harmful?

That is not what I meant. Seriously, have many infectious books have you ran across?

 

See the above comments re:foxing. Of course foxing is visible.

I read the above comments. Foxing really gripes my rear end as well. I hate it. Did they ever determine if it was a mold or a bacteria? I also can't remember if it can spread or not.

 

My point was if it takes a microscope to ascertain a defect, well that's just nuts.

[october]

They really, REALLY need to stop giving foxing a break. There is absolutely zero reason that foxing should be all but ignored and staining should be hammered. That's where they are now and it's beyond stupid.

 

I wonder if this is a consequence of CGC claiming to "follow the Overstreet grading standards." In many cases they can do so because the Overstreet Grading Guide (at least version 2.0) is non-specific and imprecise. Among the exceptions though are the length of spine split allowed in each grade (measured in inches-- no ambiguity there), and the allowability of foxing stains in high grades, although qualified by non-specific adjectives like "minor," from what I recall. The original Overstreet standards were created in a more lenient age, when I'm guessing several of the big-name collections were structurally high grade but exhibited foxing. Maybe Bob's own beloved ECs picked up some foxing from all those years of storage in Cleveland Tennessee?

 

Now though unless Overstreet revises its standards, CGC is pretty much locked in to accepting foxing. And if I'm right about the big-name collections / big-name collectors sitting on otherwise high-grade Golden Age books with foxing, then there are some vested interests who would oppose either CGC or Overstreet tightening this up.

 

I think you are correct, and I am familiar with the reasons behind the standard, but it's still stupid. A stain is a stain is a stain. Why would anyone care if it comes from water, mold or otherwise?

 

Dust shadows are another glaring example of how a defect is all but ignored because certain otherwise pristine pedigree copies exhibit that defect. In my mind, a dark dust shadow on the front is about as major a defect as can be. It's right up there with a sub-crease, as it absolutely kills the eye appeal.

[joeypost]

They really, REALLY need to stop giving foxing a break. There is absolutely zero reason that foxing should be all but ignored and staining should be hammered. That's where they are now and it's beyond stupid.

 

Totally agree. The leniency on foxing drives me crazy.

 

I believe that is changing. I submitted some books with foxing last month. All of them came back at least a full grade lower than expected.

[Theagenes]

As far as I know it's still an open question as to whether or not it's caused by a fungus or whether it's iron oxide from the paper itself. Kenny could proably give a better answer. But, as long as there's a possible of it being a fungus that could spread to other books, I don't want it in collection.

 

And I tend to agree with your original point, though there are exceptions - micro-trimming for example. If you were specifically alluding to pressing, well I don't consider that a defect.

[DrWatson]

As far as I know it's still an open question as to whether or not it's caused by a fungus or whether it's iron oxide from the paper itself. Kenny could proably give a better answer. But, as long as there's a possible of it being a fungus that could spread to other books, I don't want it in collection.

 

And I tend to agree with your original point, though there are exceptions - micro-trimming for example. If you were specifically alluding to pressing, well I don't consider that a defect.

I wasn't alluding to pressing or trimming. I didn't even think about trimming or I would have listed as an exception along with CT.

 

I wonder if foxing can spread to other parts of the book while stored in a Mylar or a slab?

[mschmidt]

I would like for them to start including items sold with the book. For Example if they are going to slab a GRR then they should include a grade for the Record if the record is available and encase it in the slab.

 

Or if some 3-D glasses originally came with the book and are submitted with the book then the glasses should be encased with the book.

 

Or a trading card/bagged scenario as seen in the X-Cutioner's Song cross-over.

 

Does anyone know what the grading process/policy is for books that are still factory sealed inside a bag?

 

 

Having loose items inside the slab that could potentially move around & damage the book is insane.

 

For polybagged books, CGC removes the book from the bag before grading - this ain't PGX, CGC actually wants to see the book in question before assigning it a grade.

[rodan57]

Have graders' notes on the Internet site. It's as important as GPA data and any other research necessary for informed purchasing.

[comicalgems]

I would like for them to start including items sold with the book. For Example if they are going to slab a GRR then they should include a grade for the Record if the record is available and encase it in the slab.

 

Or if some 3-D glasses originally came with the book and are submitted with the book then the glasses should be encased with the book.

 

Or a trading card/bagged scenario as seen in the X-Cutioner's Song cross-over.

 

Does anyone know what the grading process/policy is for books that are still factory sealed inside a bag?

 

 

Having loose items inside the slab that could potentially move around & damage the book is insane.

 

For polybagged books, CGC removes the book from the bag before grading - this ain't PGX, CGC actually wants to see the book in question before assigning it a grade.

 

Inside the slab, but outside the inner well?

[chrisco37]

Apart from the label change with MORE INFO, I'd like to see downgrading for mis-wraps in the HG range (although that will never happen).