I recently purchased a CGG graded comic....and guess what?

[Smokinghawk]

[i didn't write a word of this. I'm just posting it for discussion. -Smokinghawk]

 

This will not be a long post. I am sorry to say I don’t have the time to put together a extremely well thought-out, or well written post..

 

Disclaimer: smokinghawk is not affiliated with us, but is simply willing to post our responses to people's questions.

 

I am happy to see the ASM #122 come back clean. We never had a doubt it was clean but it is still a good feeling after the long thread I read about the book. Thanks to all the forum members that gave intelligent, well thought-out posts.

 

On to the two books that came back from CGC "RESTORED" I personally remember these two books well. After going through the grading process, we spent some extra time discussing the ASM #68 and the possibility of this book receiving a 9.6, consensus was the book fell a little short and was given the grade of 9.4. We commonly take scans of books that come through, and most are scanned after the book is sealed inside the inner holder. We have the scan of the ASM #68 and have compared it to the book when we received it from the person who currently owns the two books. There is an obvious 1/16" more cover on the bottom edge (which is the edge CGC said was trimmed) on the scan of the book that was taken by us after the book was encapsulated in our inner holder, than is on the book now.

 

Our conclusion is a simple one: This book had to have been trimmed after it was graded and encapsulated by us.

 

Although we had not located the scan of the Marvel Team-Up #1 we can conclude the same for this book from simple logic and our knowledge of how we grade books. On the MTU #1, CGC said the book was trimmed on the top and bottom, which is readily apparent looking at the book. The bottom edge is especially poorly trimmed, leaving some of the original cover and pages along the last inch of the right edge. Also the front cover and 1st page on the side edge is also trimmed. For one of us, let alone all 3 of us to miss the very amateur trimming on this book is very highly unlikely, especially considering the time that was spent with this book, and being accompanied by another book we can prove was not trimmed when it came through our offices.

 

Note: we always spend a little extra time with books (BA or later) after they have been graded if they are going to receive a grade of 9.4 or higher to re-confirm we are putting the correct grade on the book.

 

I would hope this will relieve fears people may have about our restoration detection skills, and we will continue to address any issues as they arise in a straightforward way.

 

Thank you for taking the time to read this post.

Daniel

[Fan4Fan]

... when the two people in question both have fairly solid credentials ...

 

 

 

Ok 'lock I'll engage you why is my statement so funny / naughty.

 

What are CGG graders solid credentials? Are they OS advisors?

 

Hey, if Darth can be an OS advisor then I don't put much weight on that as being some kind of qualifier.

 

It's slightly better than grabbing someone off the street to grade your books.

 

Interesting take that may be more true than we'd like to believe.

 

When my wife was heavily into dog shows, I would occasionally go around to different breeds and see if I could pick the winner. About 100% of the time, I'd pick the top three and about 70% of the time I'd pick the top 1.

 

Somewhat mystified by this apparent (and unnatural... for me) success, I talked to some of the more experienced breeders and found that they had heard this before. Most people will pick the same dog to win most of the time.

 

The "professional" judge/grader is most important in those relatively few cases where the general public couldn't distinguish between two likely candidates. However, at this point it gets really subjective since some judges are known to favor one attribute over another.

 

So, to me, this argues for having a fairly extensive and standardized checklist with no room for opinion. Of course, if we did that, then there'd not really be a need for any 3rd-party grading companies.

 

Thanks,

Fan4Fan

[OldGuy]

There are several points that I'd like to address, but I'm going to hold my comments in favor of just one.

 

I like Flyingdonut's idea about auctioning the comic and donating the money to charity. I already mentioned that in a PM to someone and I think that's probably what I'll do.

 

This is by far the best result that could come from this thread. I commend you for being able to see beyond the $$$ and the controversy to a higher purpose. Please post a link here when the auction goes up. I (and I'm sure many others) will happily bid on this book.

[wrcomics]

I second that e-motion!

[THE_BEYONDER]

. We have the scan of the ASM #68 and have compared it to the book when we received it from the person who currently owns the two books. There is an obvious 1/16" more cover on the bottom edge (which is the edge CGC said was trimmed) on the scan of the book that was taken by us after the book was encapsulated in our inner holder, than is on the book now.

 

[BassGMan]

My own comments:

 

It's very significant that we still regard CGC as the argument-ending authority on this controversy. That says a lot about CGC's reputation, and I uphold them as the default standard in the industry, too. CGC does not have "egg on its face" precisely BECAUSE they had one this test before the results even came back: the fact that we agreed that CGC would be the final arbitor reinforces their credibility, which I think is well-deserved.

 

 

SmokingHawk. First off I wanted to say that I enjoy your posts as I believe you are one of the few other people trying to be fair here to both companies. I also just wanted to explain my "egg on their face" comment about CGC. The only thing I meant by that is that almost everyone on this thread accused CGG of overgrading this book as a 9.4. Many different comments were made about this slamming CGG. THEN, CGC came out with a 9.6 for the same book. I would then believe that people would be more than shocked at CGC's grade putting their own reputation to an even harsher judgment. Yes, CGC is the standard of the industry and the most respected. So you guys must just be shocked at the grade they gave this book. You guys must now look at them like they are blatant overgraders, at least in this case, right? I love CGC don't get me wrong, but if CGG overgraded the book, then CGC WAY overgraded the book. Thus, in this case, CGC has egg on their face as viewed upon by the general public. ------Sid

[DiceX]

My own comments:

 

It's very significant that we still regard CGC as the argument-ending authority on this controversy. That says a lot about CGC's reputation, and I uphold them as the default standard in the industry, too. CGC does not have "egg on its face" precisely BECAUSE they had one this test before the results even came back: the fact that we agreed that CGC would be the final arbitor reinforces their credibility, which I think is well-deserved.

 

 

SmokingHawk. First off I wanted to say that I enjoy your posts as I believe you are one of the few other people trying to be fair here to both companies. I also just wanted to explain my "egg on their face" comment about CGC. The only thing I meant by that is that almost everyone on this thread accused CGG of overgrading this book as a 9.4. Many different comments were made about this slamming CGG. THEN, CGC came out with a 9.6 for the same book. I would then believe that people would be more than shocked at CGC's grade putting their own reputation to an even harsher judgment. Yes, CGC is the standard of the industry and the most respected. So you guys must just be shocked at the grade they gave this book. You guys must now look at them like they are blatant overgraders, at least in this case, right? I love CGC don't get me wrong, but if CGG overgraded the book, then CGC WAY overgraded the book. Thus, in this case, CGC has egg on their face as viewed upon by the general public. ------Sid

 

Why would anyone get in an uproar over a .2 difference in grading?

I'm sure even you, BassGMan, can vary more than .2 in your grading.

That doesn't make anyone right or wrong. It just means that the grades were close.

I don't see this as being egg on anyone's face.

One grade was CGG's opinion, the other grade was CGC's opinion.

Now if the grades were 9.2 and 9.8, then it would raise an eyebrow.

 

However, this situation with the book being trimmed 1/16" from when CGG had it the first time is going to be a big egg.

But I wonder who's face it's going to land on.

[THE_BEYONDER]

But I wonder who's face it's going to land on.

 

 

[BassGMan]

But I wonder who's face it's going to land on.

 

 

 

Where do you guys get all these little symbols? I love this sh...t hittin' the fan guy. Cute.

[MW1]

The real thing we learned from this is that the original seller was a insufficiently_thoughtful_person for sending the book to CGG in the first place!!!!

 

That seller left over $1000 on the table because he picked the wrong grading company to send his book to for grading. MW1 makes out like a bandit for being willing to buy the book, but the seller comes out looking like a grade-A insufficiently_thoughtful_person for sending his book to Eugene in the first place.

Lighthouse,

 

I emailed the seller earlier this evening and put this question to him (without the insufficiently_thoughtful_person part). He agreed that he would likely do better with CGC but that he had a large number of books to grade. He mentioned that he called CGC for bulk and pre-screen but got no response...so he sent some to CGG which was less expensive and had faster service. There was also an indication that some of his more expensive books got sent to CGC.

 

And that got me to thinking....perhaps the comic business is much like the baseball card business. That is, it pays to know the source of the submission and the reputation of the seller, regardless of the grading company.

[RS]

And that got me to thinking....perhaps the comic business is much like the baseball card business. That is, it pays to know the source of the submission and the reputation of the seller, regardless of the grading company.

Great point

[Captain Tripps]

Guys,

 

I just thought I would check in on this CGC vs CGG debate. Look, I don't know much about CGG or their grader(s), but I do know a lot about CGC and especially about Steve Borock and Mark Haspel. I've known both these guys for years (as dealers as well as collectors) and realize the amount of experience and knowledge both possess in our hobby. They are both comic book lifers who truly love this hooby and who have taken great strides to become accurate graders. I put a lot of trust in these guys when I submit books for encapsulation and grading because I know they have a lot of practice grading books as well as knowledge in detecting restoration!! Can you say the same thing about CGG??? Who are we putting our trust with??

 

Look, I think competition is a great thing and it would be shallow to think there should only be one grading company for all time, but you need to know who you're dealing with and what kind of experience and know-how this other, competing company has. CGC was not a fly by night operation that just happened to decide it wanted to make money grading comic books. It's a subsidiary of a larger company, the Certified Collectibles Group, that has expertise in the grading of coins/currency, sportscards, non-sports cards, etc. It took years of experimentation and work to get CGC rolling ( trial and error with different holders, grading tiers, grading standards, etc.). What kind of history and background does CGG have?? Did they do the type of work and design that CGC did to perfect their holder or did they simply copy CGC's???

 

I think we should demand answers to these questions and much more info before giving our acceptance to this new company. Sure they could grade quicker at this point and charge you less, but so could I!! But neither CGG or I can provide dependable, experienced & trained accurate grading & restoration detection services. Right now, only CGC can.

 

So until another company comes along that can at least match CGC's professionalism, experience & restoration knowledge, with the kind of trained, respected and well-known graders who will actually be handling your books, I will continue to send my books to CGC and not have to pray or hope or hold my breath that it gets properly handled and graded.

[lighthouse]

The day another comic grading company gets business from you (and guys like you) is the day CGC has true competition.

 

Thanks for sharing your opinion!

 

And thanks for making the rest of us feel humble by posting your collections on the registry.

[uclapeterg]

I think you mean "rest of us feel HORRIBLE..." don't you?

 

The day another comic grading company gets business from you (and guys like you) is the day CGC has true competition.

 

Thanks for sharing your opinion!

 

And thanks for making the rest of us feel humble by posting your collections on the registry.

[RS]

I think CGC could learn from CGG

 

1 E-mail you when they get the books like CGG

 

2 E-mail you the grading notes for books 9.2 and under

 

3 E-mail you when the books are being shipped with tracking number.

 

If Mile High can e-mail you when they ship your comics so can CGC. This is called Good Customer service. But CGC is so flooded with books now they can't do anything until they get up to date.

 

Grading

Service Now Shipping

Books Received on† Estimated

 

Economy 12/1/03 40 business days up to $250 n/a $29.00

 

Standard 2/16/04 15 business days up to $1000 n/a $49.00

 

Express On-Time 5 business days up to $4000 n/a $79.00

 

Walkthru Same-Day Same day no limit n/a 2.5% F.M.V.††

 

Modern* 1/26/04 20 business days up to $200 2 $16.00 per book. $15.00 per book for submissions of 10 or more books.

 

Reholder** 10 Days 10 business days no limit n/a $11.00

 

Recert. *** n/a Service

selected Service

selected Service

selected ***

 

I send to both CGC and CGG and I am happy with the grades I get from both.

[garthgantu]

The real thing we learned from this is that the original seller was a insufficiently_thoughtful_person for sending the book to CGG in the first place!!!!

 

That seller left over $1000 on the table because he picked the wrong grading company to send his book to for grading. MW1 makes out like a bandit for being willing to buy the book, but the seller comes out looking like a grade-A insufficiently_thoughtful_person for sending his book to Eugene in the first place.

 

I'm not following.....if anything this provides an example that CGG grading is stricter than CGC and helps towards squashing the perception that CGG isn't worthy of being in the grading arena.

 

So if I was a disinterested collector knowing this information and looking at identical comics, which one would I rather spend $100 bucks on? A CGC or CGG 9.4? That's the matter that has to be asked here. Not trying to slam the original seller.

 

Jim

 

If you are talking about buying books that have already been graded, there is a case to be made...

 

But the only way those books get graded is if sellers think that putting their books in a CGG slab is the way to go. Most guys won't leave $1000 on the table by sending a book to CGG, but this guy did! And I don't see anything out of this story that suggests it is a good idea to submit high dollar books to CGG...

 

Gee, I have a real nice copy of Tomb of Dracula 1... I can put it in a CGG holder and sell it for $220, or I can put it in a CGC holder and sell it for $625.... Hmmm... Whatever shall I do...

 

Hey, 'House? Haven't you, and I, and almost everyone on these boards at one time or another, pointed out that "one example doesn't make a trend" or words to that effect? Aren't we reading an awful lot into one slabbed comic, to make sweeping statements re: either CGC or CGG? If there's a sizable list of examples of CGGed books that were subsequently submitted to CGC and came back w/higher grades, that would be very informative...but until such a list, or a fair number of additional examples in the form of scans, is forthcoming, I don't see the point in trying to characterize either grading company based on this one instance?

[lighthouse]

The real thing we learned from this is that the original seller was a insufficiently_thoughtful_person for sending the book to CGG in the first place!!!!

 

That seller left over $1000 on the table because he picked the wrong grading company to send his book to for grading. MW1 makes out like a bandit for being willing to buy the book, but the seller comes out looking like a grade-A insufficiently_thoughtful_person for sending his book to Eugene in the first place.

 

I'm not following.....if anything this provides an example that CGG grading is stricter than CGC and helps towards squashing the perception that CGG isn't worthy of being in the grading arena.

 

So if I was a disinterested collector knowing this information and looking at identical comics, which one would I rather spend $100 bucks on? A CGC or CGG 9.4? That's the matter that has to be asked here. Not trying to slam the original seller.

 

Jim

 

If you are talking about buying books that have already been graded, there is a case to be made...

 

But the only way those books get graded is if sellers think that putting their books in a CGG slab is the way to go. Most guys won't leave $1000 on the table by sending a book to CGG, but this guy did! And I don't see anything out of this story that suggests it is a good idea to submit high dollar books to CGG...

 

Gee, I have a real nice copy of Tomb of Dracula 1... I can put it in a CGG holder and sell it for $220, or I can put it in a CGC holder and sell it for $625.... Hmmm... Whatever shall I do...

 

Hey, 'House? Haven't you, and I, and almost everyone on these boards at one time or another, pointed out that "one example doesn't make a trend" or words to that effect? Aren't we reading an awful lot into one slabbed comic, to make sweeping statements re: either CGC or CGG? If there's a sizable list of examples of CGGed books that were subsequently submitted to CGC and came back w/higher grades, that would be very informative...but until such a list, or a fair number of additional examples in the form of scans, is forthcoming, I don't see the point in trying to characterize either grading company based on this one instance?

 

Agreed. And I didn't say that I thought every seller who sends their books to CGG for grading winds up looking like a insufficiently_thoughtful_person. But this one did. Greggy looked like a genius for sending that Morbius book to CGC, that doesn't mean everyone who sends their Morbius books to CGC will fare as well...

 

All I was saying is "Look at all the money this guy left on the table by choosing CGG over CGC"... Because clearly he did... There is no disputing that...

[BassGMan]

With everything being said, I just want to point out one thing. Just because most of us have not "heard" of somebody, like the guys at CGG, this does not mean that they do not do a good job or are not talented at their profession. I'll give you one very very lame parallel. We have all heard of Madonna and Britney Spears. As singers they absolutely are terrible, although they are hugely successful. There are dozens of completely unkown singers that we have never heard of that are truly talented (not referring to William Hung) on American Idol, seriously. So, because Britney Spears is well known and successful, does that mean she is better at creating music than an unkown from American Idol? Yeah, I know, apples and oranges, just trying to make a point about having heard of someone before and how capable they are. -----Sid

[lighthouse]

With everything being said, I just want to point out one thing. Just because most of us have not "heard" of somebody, like the guys at CGG, this does not mean that they do not do a good job or are not talented at their profession. I'll give you one very very lame parallel. We have all heard of Madonna and Britney Spears. As singers they absolutely are terrible, although they are hugely successful. There are dozens of completely unkown singers that we have never heard of that are truly talented (not referring to William Hung) on American Idol, seriously. So, because Britney Spears is well known and successful, does that mean she is better at creating music than an unkown from American Idol? Yeah, I know, apples and oranges, just trying to make a point about having heard of someone before and how capable they are. -----Sid

 

CGG - The William Hung of 3rd Party Comic Grading

 

Has a nice ring to it...

[awe4one]

With everything being said, I just want to point out one thing. Just because most of us have not "heard" of somebody, like the guys at CGG, this does not mean that they do not do a good job or are not talented at their profession. I'll give you one very very lame parallel. We have all heard of Madonna and Britney Spears. As singers they absolutely are terrible, although they are hugely successful. There are dozens of completely unkown singers that we have never heard of that are truly talented (not referring to William Hung) on American Idol, seriously. So, because Britney Spears is well known and successful, does that mean she is better at creating music than an unkown from American Idol? Yeah, I know, apples and oranges, just trying to make a point about having heard of someone before and how capable they are. -----Sid

 

You're right Sid....that was a bad example.

 

We have heard things about CGG and the more "I" hear, the more questions pile up.....

 

Should be the other way around.....

 

Jim