More CGC Grading Fun

[Rip]

I consider pressing to be cheating, whether it occurs with disassembly or not. But if neither I nor anyone else can tell that a book has been pressed without disassembly, I have to wonder whether it's worth worrying about whether an old book has been pressed or not.

How about lower grade books vs high grade books. Or, while many feel "well done" professional press jobs fall under the category of disclosure, where do these lower grade "put some heavy books on it" jobs fall under?

 

I agree, the best way to handle the current situation is to point out these examples and handle accordingly as you feel fit. I do believe that because these books fall under the approval of the CGC label plus combining that with the added large dollar value ,...these type of questionable activities are going to occur more often.

[OldGuy]

Wow. With you guys posting all these words and stuff this thread has become someplace I don't think I want to be. Can't we just call each other names or something?

[FFB]

I think that you and I both agree and are saying the same thing about the specific issue you're talking about here, but that you're taking a comment of mine out of context and thinking that I disagree with you when I don't. As I mentioned in a different part of either the same post of my prior one, I would definitely pay less for a book that I knew had been dry cleaned and PWOD'ed, and if I had a Heritage "before" scan to prove it, then I definitely would be pissed if I got such a book. I also think it is a good thing and a boon to the public to have people posting the suspicious before and after photos, especially for the high end golden age books that appear to me to be most susceptible to the clean/press/resub phenomenon. But I've only ever bought a handful of books from Heritage, none of which were resto candidates (all were moderns like DD #168), and most of the books I buy don't have available "before" photos. Those are the books about which I say, "Is it worth it to fret about whether they might have been PWOD'ed at some point in the past?"

 

I consider pressing to be cheating, whether it occurs with disassembly or not. But if neither I nor anyone else can tell that a book has been pressed without disassembly, I have to wonder whether it's worth worrying about whether an old book has been pressed or not.

 

Well, first of all we CAN tell that a book has been pressed - just access the "Heritage Before-And-After" picture gallery... it's like a Jenny Craig testimonial site for comics. Agreed, this method requires "before" pics, but to me that's substantial. If you buy a book today, and three months from now you try to sell it and someone says "what about THIS scan of the same book, when it was 1.5 grades lower?" how will you feel? Flim-flammed? Conned? Or just fine with it?

 

Secondly, who's to say that a year or two down the road, a new method of discerning pressed books might not be found, and even adopted by CGC, such that this becomes a huge issue? And if you say "well, if you've already purchased the book and it's in a Blue-labeled slab, why worry? I'd respond by saying "what happens when you send the book in for micro-chamber paper replacement, or to fix a cracked slab?"

[jbud73]

Jbud, I am not going to copy the entirety of your post, but I wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed it. Great analogy to the NHL's "trap" problem -- that's one that bothers me as well about the current NHL, and I have to admit that the clean/press/resub analogy fits well with it.

 

I agree that the clean/press/resubmit practice is troublesome and I don't like it. But I don't think CGC has "caused" the problem. I think people would be doing this whether CGC existed or not. It is unfortunate that CGC does not consider dry cleaning and PWOD (pressing without disassembly, just to add another acronym to the mix) to be resto, and I think this should be changed, such that these books get the PLOD when detected. I agree 100%, as I've said before, that it is cheating to do ANYTHING to a book to take it from an 8.0 to a 9.0. If anything, the only "problem" that CGC is causing is that by giving the BLU to books with dry cleaning and PWOD, they are giving the impression (though not a "guarantee") that the book is 100% unmodified -- and that's the part I don't like. But I don't think that CGC's existence makes doing this any more or less likely. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that there was plenty of this going on before CGC existed. It's just that less of it was being detected because restoration wasn't on as many people's radar screens.

 

No, I think I will concede that this is not CGC's fault. But is it their problem? Would you concede that they are part of the equation that has a dubious impact on the hobby? IE: Unscrupulous ppl who see $$$ opportunity to alter comic books, curently in CGC blue slabs + consumer confidence in the entity that is CGC = a trend to clean and press GA/SA comics that have been slabbed and resub them to attain higher grades and then sell for more money.

[FFB]

I wouldn't differentiate between high grade and low grade books that have been PWOD'ed. If someone took a book that was in VG shape, put it on the bottom of the stack of books for a month until it looked like a FN, and if it is provable, then I would pay less for such a book, though probably not much less.

 

But I'm not concrete about this. For example, if I pull a book from the bottom of an Edgar-Church-type stack after 60 years, I am not going to sit and wonder about whether the book had a non-color-breaking corner bend back in the 40s that has been eliminated through pressure and the passage of time. There is probably a logical inconsistency in my thinking on the latter issue, but at some point, to me the hobby has to be more about the beauty of the book I'm holding in my hands and less about whether a small non-color-breaking crease once existed on an otherwise near-perfect book.

 

I consider pressing to be cheating, whether it occurs with disassembly or not. But if neither I nor anyone else can tell that a book has been pressed without disassembly, I have to wonder whether it's worth worrying about whether an old book has been pressed or not.

How about lower grade books vs high grade books. Or, while many feel "well done" professional press jobs fall under the category of disclosure, where do these lower grade "put some heavy books on it" jobs fall under?

 

I agree, the best way to handle the current situation is to point out these examples and handle accordingly as you feel fit. I do believe that because these books fall under the approval of the CGC label plus combining that with the added large dollar value ,...these type of questionable activities are going to occur more often.

[FFB]

I agree that they are part of the equation, but I do not agree that they deserve the assignation of blame for it. I think that it is a bad choice not to consider dry cleaning and PWOD (when detectable) to be restoration, and if enough people agree and speak up, CGC will have to change, because ultimately, CGC's grading standards are supposed to be based on the industry standard. My understanding of CGC's position on the dry cleaning/PWOD issue is that CGC's stance is based on the CGC graders' perceptions that the industry standard is for such things not to be considered restoration. This is obviously not a standard that everyone agrees with, but rather, is a manifestation of the beliefs held by the majority of collectors and dealers in the hobby. CGC obviously can't stay neutral on the issue. It has to make a judgment call whenever there is a "split of opinion" among collectors on something like this, and I believe that they made a reasonable decision (though I disagree with it) that was probably also influenced by the relative practical difficulty that exists in consistently detecting dry cleaning and PWOD.

 

Of course, if it turns out that CGC is wrong about this being the industry standard (or if the industry standard changes) and if people speak up about it, then CGC will have to change its policy eventually or risk losing the confidence of the marketplace. But until then, all we can do is assert our own views on the matter and be counted among the many opinions in the hobby about the topic.

 

Jbud, I am not going to copy the entirety of your post, but I wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed it. Great analogy to the NHL's "trap" problem -- that's one that bothers me as well about the current NHL, and I have to admit that the clean/press/resub analogy fits well with it.

 

I agree that the clean/press/resubmit practice is troublesome and I don't like it. But I don't think CGC has "caused" the problem. I think people would be doing this whether CGC existed or not. It is unfortunate that CGC does not consider dry cleaning and PWOD (pressing without disassembly, just to add another acronym to the mix) to be resto, and I think this should be changed, such that these books get the PLOD when detected. I agree 100%, as I've said before, that it is cheating to do ANYTHING to a book to take it from an 8.0 to a 9.0. If anything, the only "problem" that CGC is causing is that by giving the BLU to books with dry cleaning and PWOD, they are giving the impression (though not a "guarantee") that the book is 100% unmodified -- and that's the part I don't like. But I don't think that CGC's existence makes doing this any more or less likely. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that there was plenty of this going on before CGC existed. It's just that less of it was being detected because restoration wasn't on as many people's radar screens.

 

No, I think I will concede that this is not CGC's fault. But is it their problem? Would you concede that they are part of the equation that has a dubious impact on the hobby? IE: Unscrupulous ppl who see $$$ opportunity to alter comic books, curently in CGC blue slabs + consumer confidence in the entity that is CGC = a trend to clean and press GA/SA comics that have been slabbed and resub them to attain higher grades and then sell for more money.

[jbud73]

Well, I for one cant wait until the CGC forum dinner for the San Fran WonderCon - as all the SF/bay area forumites have posted extremely well thought out and articulate stuff on the forums, it should make for great conversations. And besides 'House will be there to add his more than 2 cents I hear.

[FFB]

Sweet! I wouldn't miss it.

 

Well, I for one cant wait until the CGC forum dinner for the San Fran WonderCon - as all the SF/bay area forumites have posted extremely well thought out and articulate stuff on the forums, it should make for great conversations. And besides 'House will be there to add his more than 2 cents I hear.

[garthgantu]

Here I am.

I have been swamped, we have more books to grade then ever! This is the first time in over a year I have been behind on Standard's and don't even talk to me about how late we are on Economy's!

 

I did not think it was that important to get back on this thread because Bruce correctly relayed everything I told him. I will be at the CGC board dinner tomorrow night and if anyone has questions they would like answered, maybe you can PM them to some of the folks going to the dinner. I will be happy, as always, to answer all questions asked of me there.

 

That said, I feel worse than you can imagine about not catching onto this guy sooner, but we are human and eventually something is going to slip through. The difference here is that we (CGC) stand by our certification and will always do the right thing if a mistake occurs. Don't forget, as long as there are greedy people out there, there will always be creeps like Dupcek trying new techniques to screw up the books to get them by dealers, collectors, and CGC. We are confident that when these new techniques are developed CGC will recognize them earlier than anyone else.

 

Oh, and I did not run any of this past the lawyers

 

Okay, it's been a week since the CGC board dinner that Steve mentions in his post. Did anyone on the boards here ask any tough questions re: the subject at hand?

Just based on Steve's comments above, I'd like to know:

- why Steve makes it sound as though one person is behind the "clean, press, maybe trim, and resub" trend

- and if Steve's only referencing the Bats 11 trim job with his comment ("...not catching on to this guy sooner"), what does this statement mean - that other trim jobs "got through" the CGC scrutiny without getting PLODs ?

- Was the Bats 11 a Danny D. special, as is implied in Steve's post?

- Does CGC have any new procedures or mechanisms in place to thwart such activity in future, and if so, do those procedures/mechanisms only cover new methods of detecting trimming?

[Darthdiesel]

Here I am.

I have been swamped, we have more books to grade then ever! This is the first time in over a year I have been behind on Standard's and don't even talk to me about how late we are on Economy's!

 

I did not think it was that important to get back on this thread because Bruce correctly relayed everything I told him. I will be at the CGC board dinner tomorrow night and if anyone has questions they would like answered, maybe you can PM them to some of the folks going to the dinner. I will be happy, as always, to answer all questions asked of me there.

 

That said, I feel worse than you can imagine about not catching onto this guy sooner, but we are human and eventually something is going to slip through. The difference here is that we (CGC) stand by our certification and will always do the right thing if a mistake occurs. Don't forget, as long as there are greedy people out there, there will always be creeps like Dupcek trying new techniques to screw up the books to get them by dealers, collectors, and CGC. We are confident that when these new techniques are developed CGC will recognize them earlier than anyone else.

 

Oh, and I did not run any of this past the lawyers

 

Okay, it's been a week since the CGC board dinner that Steve mentions in his post. Did anyone on the boards here ask any tough questions re: the subject at hand?

Just based on Steve's comments above, I'd like to know:

- why Steve makes it sound as though one person is behind the "clean, press, maybe trim, and resub" trend

- and if Steve's only referencing the Bats 11 trim job with his comment ("...not catching on to this guy sooner"), what does this statement mean - that other trim jobs "got through" the CGC scrutiny without getting PLODs ?

- Was the Bats 11 a Danny D. special, as is implied in Steve's post?

- Does CGC have any new procedures or mechanisms in place to thwart such activity in future, and if so, do those procedures/mechanisms only cover new methods of detecting trimming?

 

And when wouldhave been the best time to sneak this interrogation in? Between the hors d'ouvres and the soup?

 

You saw the thread...why didn't you send this list to one of the attendees to ask these questions for you. I would love to see that response...

 

Valid questions Garth...I just question the tact...

[caltenator-migration]

I guess I don't know why there is such a controversy surrounding this issue. The CGC has repeatedly said that pressing, IF DONE THE CORRECT WAY, is NOT considered restoration. By them saying this is the policy, we are all acknowledging that every time we buy a book graded by the CGC in a blue label that we understand that the book may have been professionally pressed. If you don't agree with the policy, why are you even beginning to invest your hard earned money into CGC books? Incorrect pressing WHICH CAN BE DETECTED by the CGC has and will continue to receive a purple label. I know nothing about professional restoration, but I would venture to say that the folks at CGC can detect restoration or tampering with books 99.9 percent of the time. PROPER pressing is defined as that which can simply not be detected, which it means it may have been done, but done so well that even the most astute experts can't tell it has been done. If the CGC can tell a book has been pressed, they give it a purple label because it is DETECTABLE. If collectors are disturbed by instances books have been professionally pressed where the pressing cannot be detected, then don't buy CGC graded books, because we are all aware of the policy. And I really don't understand why there is anger. I guess it makes most of us uncomfortable when someone is able to do something we all didn't think of initially. We call them names, we call them greedy, we call them market destroyers, we call out conspiracy theories. I call them smart, and tip my hat to them. Now, how do I figure out a way to do the same so I can get the financial return instead of someone else.

[joe_collector]

We call them names, we call them greedy, we call them market destroyers, we call out conspiracy theories. I call them smart, and tip my hat to them.

 

... tip my hat to MYSELF (or US), is the proper usage.

 

P.S. If a book you sold with "professional pressing" starting warping in the years to come, would you take responsibility for that unprofessional job?

 

P.P.S. Do you have any examples of comics that CGC has given the PLOD to, for PRESSING only? I've never seen one, but you state that CGC has done this if the pressing is detectable.

[joe_collector]

The CGC has repeatedly said that pressing, IF DONE THE CORRECT WAY, is NOT considered restoration. By them saying this is the policy, we are all acknowledging that every time we buy a book graded by the CGC in a blue label that we understand that the book may have been professionally pressed. If you don't agree with the policy, why are you even beginning to invest your hard earned money into CGC books?

 

 

You make some great points, and I'd love to subscribe to your "Why You Should Not Buy CGC" newsletter.

[jbud73]

Now JC leave the shill alone - won't be here long enough to argue back

[FFB]

You are wrong. CGC gives PLODs to books that were pressed if the cover was removed from the book to press it. If the cover is not removed, it gets the BLU even if they know the book has been pressed.

 

Also, we can spend our money on whatever we want. We can also discuss CGC's policy regarding "proper" versus "improper" pressing and whether we think it's ok for them to call one "restoration" and the other "non-restoration." If you don't like it, don't read the thread.

 

As for your statement about wanting to press books and get into the action, please post your ebay ID so that I know never to bid on your auctions.

 

I guess I don't know why there is such a controversy surrounding this issue. The CGC has repeatedly said that pressing, IF DONE THE CORRECT WAY, is NOT considered restoration. By them saying this is the policy, we are all acknowledging that every time we buy a book graded by the CGC in a blue label that we understand that the book may have been professionally pressed. If you don't agree with the policy, why are you even beginning to invest your hard earned money into CGC books? Incorrect pressing WHICH CAN BE DETECTED by the CGC has and will continue to receive a purple label. I know nothing about professional restoration, but I would venture to say that the folks at CGC can detect restoration or tampering with books 99.9 percent of the time. PROPER pressing is defined as that which can simply not be detected, which it means it may have been done, but done so well that even the most astute experts can't tell it has been done. If the CGC can tell a book has been pressed, they give it a purple label because it is DETECTABLE. If collectors are disturbed by instances books have been professionally pressed where the pressing cannot be detected, then don't buy CGC graded books, because we are all aware of the policy. And I really don't understand why there is anger. I guess it makes most of us uncomfortable when someone is able to do something we all didn't think of initially. We call them names, we call them greedy, we call them market destroyers, we call out conspiracy theories. I call them smart, and tip my hat to them. Now, how do I figure out a way to do the same so I can get the financial return instead of someone else.

[garthgantu]

Okay, it's been a week since the CGC board dinner that Steve mentions in his post. Did anyone on the boards here ask any tough questions re: the subject at hand?

Just based on Steve's comments above, I'd like to know:

- why Steve makes it sound as though one person is behind the "clean, press, maybe trim, and resub" trend

- and if Steve's only referencing the Bats 11 trim job with his comment ("...not catching on to this guy sooner"), what does this statement mean - that other trim jobs "got through" the CGC scrutiny without getting PLODs ?

- Was the Bats 11 a Danny D. special, as is implied in Steve's post?

- Does CGC have any new procedures or mechanisms in place to thwart such activity in future, and if so, do those procedures/mechanisms only cover new methods of detecting trimming?

 

And when wouldhave been the best time to sneak this interrogation in? Between the hors d'ouvres and the soup?

 

You saw the thread...why didn't you send this list to one of the attendees to ask these questions for you. I would love to see that response...

 

Valid questions Garth...I just question the tact...

 

Hey, at least you've stopped urging me to hold my breath 'til I keeled over!

And believe me, I knew when I posted those questions originally that the 'tact score' for that post would be rather low... but that doesn't invalidate the questions.

And to your point, I also realized that the likelihood of my, or any other 'tough' questions, being asked of Steve or other CGC reps at the board dinner, was slim to none. It's kinda sad, actually, the lack of backbone that many board members exhibit when it comes to really posing the tough questions that need to be asked.

 

I didn't think that many of us could be bought off with hors d'ouvres and some soup.

 

Had I known which board members would be at the dinner, I would have sent the questions directly to one or more of 'us.' But I also thought that posing the questions in this thread, at a time when this thread was very high on the boards, would accomplish the same thing? Seems like an excuse to say "well, you didn't send them to ME or I would have asked them!" (Not YOU per se, Darth, but anyone on the boards who saw them.)

 

And you know what? [!@#%^&^] tact. What does tact have to do with this? Since when do only the tactful questions get answered? Do you really think that ratcheting up the tact on my post would have resulted in answers to those questions? Get real.

 

BTW, I'll be at the CGC forum dinner at WonderCon, and I will be asking tough questions. No amount of clam chowder can buy my silence

 

Frankly, I'm really tired of the "hey, CGC's been good to this hobby, and therefore good to all of us - show some damned respect!" That's just bull!$#*%.

[drbanner]

And to your point, I also realized that the likelihood of my, or any other 'tough' questions, being asked of Steve or other CGC reps at the board dinner, was slim to none. It's kinda sad, actually, the lack of backbone that many board members exhibit when it comes to really posing the tough questions that need to be asked.

 

Well, I did send a question to a member, but alas, they were unable to make it to the dinner. However, since it wasn't that big a deal I'm not going to take the time to call Steve and ask him directly, like Bruce did regarding the subject at hand.

[garthgantu]

Apologies if I'm being dense... are you suggesting I call Steve with these questions? Would anyone believe the answers I conveyed to this board if in fact I got answers? Should any one of us have to be the liaison between CGC and these boards?

 

Or are my questions bad questions that no one else wants answers to ? You can't hurt my feelings - I'm a comic book collector

[drbanner]

Apologies if I'm being dense...are you suggesting I call Steve with these questions? Would anyone believe the answers I conveyed to this board if in fact I got answers?

 

Yes, and yes. Instead of questioning the backbone of board members, wouldn't it be quicker, easier, and more productive to call Steve directly and ask him the questions "that need to be asked"? Didn't he in fact invite you to do just that? Based on your post above, you seem to be on the verge of having an aneurisym if you don't get answers to these questions...and fast!

 

You want answers, Steve has answers!!

 

You want the truth, Steve has the truth!!

 

Or if it's not really that big a deal to you personally, you can just wait a month and a half and ask him when you see him at Wondercon...

[RS]

You want the Truth You can't handle the Truth. .