CGCs ethical stance on slabbed wraps?

[Mr. 10%]

 

Ought CGC to take an ethical stance on disassembled keys offered as slabbed wraps?

 

Recently individual wraps stemming from Action1 and Tec27 copies have appeared in the marketplace. The presumption has been voiced that these wraps *could* reach a critical point pricewise, where it would become financially attractive to disassemble certain (low grade) big books (to offer them as slabbed wraps).

 

The risk being that the total sum of all individualized wraps in a book cold be sold off individually for more than the collected book would go for.itself. Now I dont know how real this scenario is. Thats why I ask for the opinion of the boards

 

In regard of CGC: could / should they take an ethical stance on this?

Could the accelleration of individual wraps surfacing in the market reach a level down the road, where it could become necessary to slow it down. For instance by CGC refusing to slab individual wraps? In that way cgc could choose to protect the comic book as A book. In stead of the book being considered as 24 individual wraps held together by staples ... just my (thumbs u

 

 

 

 

 

[G.A.tor]

cgc is an independent, unbiased 3rd party grading company...they should take NO stance on the resale or valuation of comics (thumbs u

[mysterio]

cgc is an independent, unbiased 3rd party grading company...they should take NO stance on the resale or valuation of comics (thumbs u

+1

[Mr. 10%]

cgc is an independent, unbiased 3rd party grading company...they should take NO stance on the resale or valuation of comics (thumbs u

 

Even 3rd partys cannot avoid to take a stance that will directly or indirectly influence ... something. Every move you make is a stance. That goes for us all I think. For instance deciding to have a purple label - into which some select books wil have to go. Its hard not to consider that a stance - since it was never written in flamefire on the skys since the beginning of time that it was supposed to be like that - ? It is exactly ... a stance

 

 

 

 

 

 

[G.A.tor]

we can't confuse "procedure/parameter" with "stance"...

cgc established the parameter of distinquishing between restored and unrestored books...hence the label color... that said, they are taking "no" stance on restored or unrestored books (good, bad, value, etc)... they simply "grade" what is presented to them...

 

for them to discourage folks submitting wraps or claim it to be "unethical", would be unwise, and quite frankly not their call... we pay them to give an opinion of the grade, not for their moral stance (thumbs u

 

the market will determine how to "handle" wraps,etc

[silverweb]

I like wraps but I don't want them slabbed!

 

Seriously, does CGC refuse them currently or give them a 0?

 

[Mr. 10%]

I like wraps but I don't want them slabbed!

 

Seriously, does CGC refuse them currently or give them a 0?

 

 

 

 

 

Yum ...

[cheetah]

I agree. Their stance should be no stance.

 

And aren't all the wraps labeled 'NG?' All they do is slab is and verify it as unrestored.

[Mac Man]

I agree. Their stance should be no stance.

 

And aren't all the wraps labeled 'NG?' All they do is slab is and verify it as unrestored.

 

This sounds right to me. Heck, even fully intact but coverless books now get graded NG (which I'm not sure I agree with but whatever).

 

And it's an interesting point though--are books more valuable in part than as a whole?

[Mr. 10%]

we can't confuse "procedure/parameter" with "stance"...

cgc established the parameter of distinquishing between restored and unrestored books...hence the label color... that said, they are taking "no" stance on restored or unrestored books (good, bad, value, etc)... they simply "grade" what is presented to them...

 

for them to discourage folks submitting wraps or claim it to be "unethical", would be unwise, and quite frankly not their call... we pay them to give an opinion of the grade, not for their moral stance (thumbs u

 

the market will determine how to "handle" wraps,etc

 

Admitted: my question is strictly hypothetical -

An ethical stance should off course be of cgcs own makin, - and should be a reaction to market and community tendencies.

Imagine a guy sitting on a low grade Action1 beater. He discovers at some point in time that the prices paid for wraps makes for a good deal if he dissolves the Action copy into 24 individual slabs and sells them off.

If cgc decides to slab all 24 wraps - there might be some old school collectors out there going over something like that Thats all I am suggesting.

 

I know its just an example and it might never happen. But - then again it might.

All I am raising here is the question of this hypothetical 'perhaps'

[Mr. 10%]

I agree. Their stance should be no stance.

 

And aren't all the wraps labeled 'NG?' All they do is slab is and verify it as unrestored.

 

This sounds right to me. Heck, even fully intact but coverless books now get graded NG (which I'm not sure I agree with but whatever).

 

And it's an interesting point though--are books more valuable in part than as a whole?

 

Thats what I thought also Mac Man (thumbs u

[Mr. 10%]

I agree. Their stance should be no stance.

 

And aren't all the wraps labeled 'NG?' All they do is slab is and verify it as unrestored.

 

But slabbing anyway is putting cgcs trademark as an invisible 'OK' over the book (which is then not a book anymore, - but a wrap).

 

What if you slab a non-Batman wrap from Tec27. The label is still going to say: 'first app. of batman' in the holder notes. Even though theres no Bats in the paper you buy.

[cheetah]

I agree. Their stance should be no stance.

 

And aren't all the wraps labeled 'NG?' All they do is slab is and verify it as unrestored.

 

But slabbing anyway is putting cgcs trademark as an invisible 'OK' over the book (which is then not a book anymore, - but a wrap).

 

What if you slab a non-Batman wrap from Tec27. The label is still going to say: 'first app. of batman' in the holder notes. Even though theres no Bats in the paper you buy.

 

Is it going to say that? I don't see anything that demands that it would.

 

Verifying that the wrap is authentic and not a copy or restored has some degree of value. Personally, it's not something I'd ever consider buying and it's pretty high up on my list of things in the hobby that are blatantly silly, but to each his own. I can't really see a high-value market continuing to such a degree that numerous copies of dismantled just to be sold as individual wraps.

[Mac Man]

I agree. Their stance should be no stance.

 

And aren't all the wraps labeled 'NG?' All they do is slab is and verify it as unrestored.

 

But slabbing anyway is putting cgcs trademark as an invisible 'OK' over the book (which is then not a book anymore, - but a wrap).

 

What if you slab a non-Batman wrap from Tec27. The label is still going to say: 'first app. of batman' in the holder notes. Even though theres no Bats in the paper you buy.

 

The reverse side of this is that by deliberately choosing not to accept wraps for slabification (totally made up word, but I like it anyhow), CGC would clearly be coming down on one side of an ethical debate... and I'm not sure that this is something an unbiased party wants to do--as Rick previously mentioned.

 

Perhaps one could interpret their willingness to slab and conduct a resto check on wraps as a passive form of acceptance; however, I see it, quite frankly, as a simple means of their broadening their base of profits by authenticating, checking, and protecting more paper-based collectibles of the comic variety. Further, it is the buyer and not the grader who really creates the market for these so it seems that people who are going to buy wraps will do so regardless of whether they in plastic or not (as it seems more often they will be cracked anyhow to be married to a more complete copy).

 

[Ze-man]

The risk being that the total sum of all individualized wraps in a book cold be sold off individually for more than the collected book would go for.itself. Now I dont know how real this scenario is. Thats why I ask for the opinion of the boards

 

 

 

imho I don't think it's a very real scenario.

 

Sure there will be a few who test the waters and slab some loose key wraps they otherwise might have sold raw. It might even become a trendy way for people looking for pages to find them safely if sale prices offset slabbing fees.

 

But to take apart complete interiors of key books to sell off individually?..even low grade copies. I just can't see it .

 

All I see crossing my desk are people sending in partial copies of key books with the missing wraps they found to marry them together, not the other way around.

 

 

[Mr. 10%]

 

Good posts by Zeman, Rick and Macman!

I hope Zeman you are right. It'll probably never come to that. (thumbs u

[Wayne-Tec]

I've talked about this a number of times in the past and while I realize my opinion may be "unpopular", I'll try to share to offer some perspective for the other side of the debate.

 

A) I feel that one of the reasons why the Action #1 wraps have sold so well at auctions is because of how rare the "slabbed wraps" are to begin with. It very much broadens the bidding pool because in this instance, collectors with budgets too limited to ever even consider a complete copy now have the opportunity to bring a piece home (for lack of a better phrase).

 

So for instance, there may be a number of collectors out there who could never afford any book in the five-figure range but CAN afford a wrap that might sell for 3-6K. Given that Action Comics #1 is considered by many to be the crown jewel of our entire hobby and considering that there are a ton of Superman collectors out there, it is not at all inconceivable that they might pursure bidding on one of these wraps with all of their might.

 

Why would they do this? Beyond the overwhelming desire that is likely to drive collectors to wanting any piece of an Action #1 they could get their hands on, the fact that we've only seen 5 such examples of Superman Action #1 wraps (that is, to the best of my knowledge, others are welcome to chime in if they've seen more) creates an aura around the wraps as rarity plays a big-time factor.

 

Bidders know that this (the time of auction) may be their only opportunity to ever own any part of an Action Comics #1. That kind of thinking, I imagine, is likely to effect the final realized prices.

 

B) If more and more Action #1 wraps were to be made available, there would no longer be that same aura surrounding them; or at the very least, not to the same extent. Now, the demand would continue to remain strong nevertheless because lets face it, it's still Action #1. But the increase in supply might effect that aura of rarity and take away that "last opportunity I'll ever have" kind of feeling that may have influenced collectors in the past.

 

Obviously if the realized prices began to take a dip, it might not prove profitable enough to continue. At that point, collectors who are against slabbing wraps might not have as much of a reason to be concerned.

 

C) One really has to ask themselves: what exactly is unethical about slabbing wraps and selling them off individually?

 

It almost seems like disassembling complete (or complete-ish) books for the purpose of financial profit is one of the stigmas surrounding this issue. At the same time, it almost seems as though some collectors feel it to be immoral to disassemble a complete copy of a book the magnitude of Action #1.

 

While we may all have an appreciation for seeing an original copy that came off the newsstands back in 1938, preserved and kept in-tact. That is so much of what we appreciate as collectors anyway.

 

But what about the collectors who would appreciate one lone Action #1 wrap as much as a more wealthy collector (and I don't mean anything offensive by this and apologize in advance if it comes across the wrong way) may appreciate a complete copy?

 

If they're willing to pay a price that satisfies the owner selling the piece(s), why would it be unethical for CGC to provide the same service that they do for complete books?

 

Personally, I feel that once a comic is paid for in-full...it is the new owners' right to do whatever he'd like with his purchase. That could mean enjoying it him/herself, passing it down to a family member, re-selling it, or even dare I say...disassembling it to sell off piece by piece.

[aardvark88]

Cgc is a retail business that will slab anything to grow there market. Don't know if they have a slab to fit the thickness of TV guides yet (e.g. sig series TV actor, hero artist covers), as they would love to generate revenue from Levine's warehouse full of TV guides that, I believe, is also in FL. Not an ethics question to slab key comic or origin wraps.