Guess the grade game!

[Count]

It's just not worth it with this guy. I gave up and moved on. He has his little agenda that he's going to stick to. I already said that if you don't agree with the grade don't buy the book. Now he's embarked on a quest to protect the "not so savy" buyers...where did I hear all this before???

 

 

He's right. He should stick to raw books and let all those "not so savy" buyers get taken by the legitimate sellers on ebay such as Robojo and lexrific just to name a few. (thumbs u

 

Shame on CGC... They are destroying the hobby as we know it

 

 

 

[VintageComics]

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

 

Also, why don't you talk to Bob Overstreet about accurately tracking the prices of books rather than simply making his guide an algorithmic guess?

 

He's obviously out of touch.

[casarachi]

Ah you see! I am not worried about "SAVVY buyers", I'm worried about the AVERAGE, NON savvy buyers.

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

In this case, the GPA would be maniputed. The blind leading those who can see. No wonder why the market can be so "volitile"

 

And again, I don't have a CGC agenda. ANY company who grades and charges money should publish a guide how they determine the grade.

 

 

That's where you're wrong.

 

The buyers that I know that spend their hard earned money on CGC graded books (and I mean when they spend big $) usually do their research.

 

You are assuming that like you, they don't.

 

I would love to hear your opinion on the book in question.

 

[VintageComics]

Ah you see! I am not worried about "SAVVY buyers", I'm worried about the AVERAGE, NON savvy buyers.

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

In this case, the GPA would be maniputed. The blind leading those who can see. No wonder why the market can be so "volitile"

 

And again, I don't have a CGC agenda. ANY company who grades and charges money should publish a guide how they determine the grade.

 

 

That's where you're wrong.

 

The buyers that I know that spend their hard earned money on CGC graded books (and I mean when they spend big $) usually do their research.

 

You are assuming that like you, they don't.

 

I would love to hear your opinion on the book in question.

 

I don't have an opinion on the book because I've never thought about it or studied it.

 

I've seen it in passing through the various discussions. That book has become a poster child for dust shadow grading.

 

Would I grade it a 9.4? I'm leaning towards no.

 

Can I grade a book from a scan? Not accurately.

 

There are some qualities in a comic that do not appear in a scan.

 

Freshness, suppleness, that nice like-new "quiver" the a fresh book like the Church books have, gloss, scent, whiteness of interiors, staple quality, etc etc. None of those qualities appear in a scan and yet are important in grading a book in it's entirety.

 

Grading a book from a scan only takes into account two dimensional qualities on a three dimensional object.

 

 

[casarachi]

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

 

Also, why don't you talk to Bob Overstreet about accurately tracking the prices of books rather than simply making his guide an algorithmic guess?

 

He's obviously out of touch.

 

If your comparing me to Mr. Overstreet, I'll take that as a compliment. Thank you!

[Paratrooper]

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

 

Also, why don't you talk to Bob Overstreet about accurately tracking the prices of books rather than simply making his guide an algorithmic guess?

 

He's obviously out of touch.

 

If your comparing me to Mr. Overstreet, I'll take that as a compliment. Thank you!

 

Lurn 2 reed.

[VintageComics]

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

 

Also, why don't you talk to Bob Overstreet about accurately tracking the prices of books rather than simply making his guide an algorithmic guess?

 

He's obviously out of touch.

 

If your comparing me to Mr. Overstreet, I'll take that as a compliment. Thank you!

 

You imply that non savvy buyers are "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on and yet you assume that CGC are at fault.

 

I wasn't comparing you to Overstreet. You seem to have some connection with him so why don't you use that connection to influence him to better represent what is going on in the marketplace.

 

For years people have accused the OSPG (Overstreet Price Guide) as being manipulated in favor of dealers because it undervalues so many important books.

 

At least GPA tracks actual real time books sales with raw data and does not make an educated guess.

 

 

[casarachi]

Ah you see! I am not worried about "SAVVY buyers", I'm worried about the AVERAGE, NON savvy buyers.

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

In this case, the GPA would be maniputed. The blind leading those who can see. No wonder why the market can be so "volitile"

 

And again, I don't have a CGC agenda. ANY company who grades and charges money should publish a guide how they determine the grade.

 

 

That's where you're wrong.

 

The buyers that I know that spend their hard earned money on CGC graded books (and I mean when they spend big $) usually do their research.

 

You are assuming that like you, they don't.

 

I would love to hear your opinion on the book in question.

 

I don't have an opinion on the book because I've never thought about it or studied it.

 

I've seen it in passing through the various discussions. That book has become a poster child for dust shadow grading.

 

Would I grade it a 9.4? I'm leaning towards no.

 

Can I grade a book from a scan? Not accurately.

 

There are some qualities in a comic that do not appear in a scan.

 

Freshness, suppleness, that nice like-new "quiver" the a fresh book like the Church books have, gloss, scent, whiteness of interiors, staple quality, etc etc. None of those qualities appear in a scan and yet are important in grading a book in it's entirety.

 

Grading a book from a scan only takes into account two dimensional qualities on a three dimensional object.

 

 

 

"""""Would I grade it a 9.4? I'm leaning towards no."""""

That's all I wanted to know.

 

And, I said "imagine everything else about the book is a 10.0"

Even if it is, with this DEFECT, it's not a 9.4. Your right!

We have another

[VintageComics]

 

"""""Would I grade it a 9.4? I'm leaning towards no."""""

That's all I wanted to know.

 

And, I said "imagine everything else about the book is a 10.0"

Even if it is, with this DEFECT, it's not a 9.4. Your right!

We have another

 

You're wrong.

 

I just told you that I can't accurately grade a book from a scan.

 

You need to stop seeing what you want to see and listen to Trooper when he says "lurn to read".

 

Nobody said CGC was perfect.

 

They are relatively consistent to their own grading standards. If anyone doesn't like them they are free to speak with their wallets.

[casarachi]

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

 

Also, why don't you talk to Bob Overstreet about accurately tracking the prices of books rather than simply making his guide an algorithmic guess?

 

He's obviously out of touch.

 

If your comparing me to Mr. Overstreet, I'll take that as a compliment. Thank you!

 

You imply that non savvy buyers are "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on and yet you assume that CGC are at fault.

 

I wasn't comparing you to Overstreet. You seem to have some connection with him so why don't you use that connection to influence him to better represent what is going on in the marketplace.

 

For years people have accused the OSPG (Overstreet Price Guide) as being manipulated in favor of dealers because it undervalues so many important books.

 

At least GPA tracks actual real time books sales with raw data and does not make an educated guess.

 

 

How is tracking the data of mis-graded books of any benefit?

 

Overstreet is keeping the comic book hobby/market safe. IF those prices are true, then eventually, he will catch up. You can't re-write the book based on the sale of one book that was mis-graded.

 

& on a book like this, they need to nail the grade. There's no room for error.

[Count]

I will buy any Keys at overstreet guide. Please send the books my way, ok?

[Count]

Overstreet is keeping the comic book hobby/market safe.

 

:ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

[fantastic_four]

ANY company who grades and charges money should publish a guide how they determine the grade.

 

You may have picked the perfect example with that Sensation book as to why a professional grading company SHOULDN'T publish their standards. That Sensation book was graded many years ago, and I suspect that today, Haspel or Litch would knock more off for it than was done at the time.

 

Grading standards will evolve over time, just as Overstreet's have constantly evolved, but since slabs capture the certification company's standards for that point in time, it tends to invalidate all grades going into the future as the standards evolve, which erodes public confidence in assigned grades. Ideally, people would understand the evolving nature of thought and knowledge and understand that comic book grading standards would be no different than any other esoteric area of knowledge...but unfortunately, people don't tend to take that fair and balanced a view. If you actually ran your own certification company, and you published your standards, you would get absolutely crucified by purists such as yourself once you amended those standards. Published standards would make it tougher for you to stay in business.

[fantastic_four]

How is tracking the data of mis-graded books of any benefit?

 

It's the same benefit as the reported price sales of key books that Overstreet has included in his guide for a few decades now. It's not as if the reported grades of those books were 100% accurate, either, or that Overstreet even believed that they were. He reports those because they're an indicator of what someone will pay for a book they believe to be in a certain grade, which is also true of reported sales of CGC books via GPA.

[fc]

in the end i think cgc will end up ranking comics instead of grading them.. but that is just

me. especially the high end.

 

How is "ranking" not already inherently a part of "grading"? I also don't see how CGC is doing anything different related to "ranking" boooks than collectors in the 1950s and 1960s did when they first came up with the grading terms we're using now.

 

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

naturally some comics will take more time to go the next grade up. it is already happening

and anyone who denies it must think that old label holders are graded to the same standard

as today. that is simply not true. the crack out artists are doing just fine proving the

idea as real. many posts here show this to be the case.

 

"thus its a pyramid shaped escalation and thus the comics are ranked and the best are annointed as such with each movement upward"

 

the grading scale as people understood it 10 years ago does not match reality.

 

funny how your posts above me basically touch on the issue and you do not seem to

think it is ranking.. it is grading.

 

but anyway.

[trmoore54]

Ah you see! I am not worried about "SAVVY buyers", I'm worried about the AVERAGE, NON savvy buyers.

 

perhaps it's the NON Savvy buyers who are the ones "breaking the records" because they don't know what's really going on, that they SHOULDn'T use OVerstreet when deciding what they need to pay for a graded book.

 

In this case, the GPA would be maniputed. The blind leading those who can see. No wonder why the market can be so "volitile"

 

And again, I don't have a CGC agenda. ANY company who grades and charges money should publish a guide how they determine the grade.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OSPG and GPA are just two of MANY, MANY references, or touchstones, for a seller or buyer to determine the value of a book. The internet offers voluminous information for buyers and sellers to determine what the market value of a given book should be. As previously mentioned, not all 9.4s, or 7.0s, or 4.0s, or whatever grades are equal...many additional factors such as the nature of the wear or defects, registration of a book or lack thereof, dust shadows, date stamps, other markings, etc affect one's perception of value one book up against another.

 

Also, as you may not be aware, GPA does not reflect ALL CGC book sales, only the people they have commitments from to report the data. I'm just still quite lost of what you're after and/or the point(s) you're trying to make.

 

Heritage, as well as MANY sellers, myself included, will offer the ranking of a CGC book, as CGC does provide a Census, another very useful and valuable tool. This as well will aid both seller and buyer in trying to arrive at an appropriate value for the book.

 

[fantastic_four]

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

naturally some comics will take more time to go the next grade up. it is already happening

and anyone who denies it must think that old label holders are graded to the same standard

as today. that is simply not true. the crack out artists are doing just fine proving the

idea as real. many posts here show this to be the case.

 

"thus its a pyramid shaped escalation and thus the comics are ranked and the best are annointed as such with each movement upward"

 

the grading scale as people understood it 10 years ago does not match reality.

 

funny how your posts above me basically touch on the issue and you do not seem to

think it is ranking.. it is grading.

 

but anyway.

 

Grading is assigning a numerical score to a comic using a set of grading standards. Grading standards, by nature, rank the set of possible comic book defects against each other. And definitely, grading standards change over time, I certainly agree with you that CGC's have changed over the last decade. So I while I half-agree with your statement that "CGC will end up ranking comics instead of grading them," I don't see how they're not doing that already, or how Overstreet and the rest of us haven't already been doing that for 50+ years.

 

I just found the statement intriguing because I'm a grading geek. Were you implying at all that there's something wrong with ranking books? You may not have been, but I suspected you were.

[mschmidt]

in the end i think cgc will end up ranking comics instead of grading them.. but that is just

me. especially the high end.

 

How is "ranking" not already inherently a part of "grading"? I also don't see how CGC is doing anything different related to "ranking" boooks than collectors in the 1950s and 1960s did when they first came up with the grading terms we're using now.

 

cgc is ranking comics by grade inflation over time.

when cgc first started it was a 9.0

five years later it is a 9.2.

today it is a 9.4.

 

naturally some comics will take more time to go the next grade up. it is already happening

and anyone who denies it must think that old label holders are graded to the same standard

as today. that is simply not true. the crack out artists are doing just fine proving the

idea as real. many posts here show this to be the case.

 

That's total bs.

 

A CGC 9.0 book graded when CGC was first founded is not automatically a CGC 9.4 book today. There will always be books that go up in grade upon resubmission - just like there will always be books that go down - but those are the exceptions, not the rule (and most of the grade bumps we're seeing these days are due to pressing, not a change in CGC's grading).

 

And, unlike you, I'm not just putting forward silly statements with nothing to back them up - I'm actually basing it on the 100s of CGC submissions I've done over the years.

 

So ... if you'd care for a wager, I'd happily pick up 5 older label books on ebay, re-submit them to CGC, and publish the results when they come back. If, on average, they come back with a significant grade bump (like you're postulating), the books are yours to keep & I'll eat all costs incurred.

 

If they don't, you pay for the books, the grading fees, and I get to keep the books.

[fantastic_four]

That's total bs.

 

A CGC 9.0 book graded when CGC was first founded is not automatically a CGC 9.4 book today. There will always be books that go up in grade upon resubmission - just like there will always be books that go down - but those are the exceptions, not the rule.

 

It's not TOTAL bs. Some 9.0s from 2000 are still 9.0s under CGC's current standards, but a bunch aren't. I agree with him that their standard has evolved...and I'd be concerned if it hadn't.

[mschmidt]

That's total bs.

 

A CGC 9.0 book graded when CGC was first founded is not automatically a CGC 9.4 book today. There will always be books that go up in grade upon resubmission - just like there will always be books that go down - but those are the exceptions, not the rule.

 

It's not TOTAL bs. Some 9.0s from 2000 are still 9.0s under CGC's current standards, but a bunch aren't. I agree with him that their standard has evolved...and I'd be concerned if it hadn't.

 

Sure - and a bunch of 9.0's from 2000 are 8.5's today. He made it seem like an old-label 9.0 is automatically a 9.4 book which just isn't the case.

 

CGC's grading has always been cyclical - sometimes they're really strict, sometimes they're looser, but it hasn't been a linear progression from strict to loose over the years like he's postulating.

 

Right now, for instance, they seem really strict on SA - and very, very loose on Moderns. Last year it was the other way around.