• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

another reason not to trust PGX

Started by G.A.tor,

40 posts in this topic

bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted

 

I don't have the slightest idea who runs PGX and have maybe one or two books in their slabs which I bought from somebody else. And I know that defending them in the slightest way on a CGC board can inspire full-throated, veins-bulging outrage from boardies hoping that CGC will take favorable notice...

 

...but if they note on the label that it says centerfold reinforced, and that's all they noticed, because maybe somebody scraped off the color touch (or, gasp, didn't consider it restoration because it didn't increase the grade or the appearance), then it's quite possible they also didn't consider it cleaned. In fact it looks to me like the book is still pretty dirty.

 

Even that aside, from what I've seen and read here, many books have been cleaned without being noted by CGC. (or they're put in a label that says "don't worry. it's cleaned but it's still an "investment")

 

And it's also pretty well accepted here that some forms of cleaning are "okay" (meaning it gets a label that says it's still okay to buy it). In fact, the most regularly accepted form of cleaning appears to be attempts at cleaning that are horribly unsuccessful and which, instead of removing a mark, remove the cover inks instead)

 

If the larger concern is that they put such notes in writing, as opposed to putting books in "Bad, Bad! This Is Not An Investment" label, with an express purpose of keeping people away from books whether or not they don't mind a little work on them, that's a whole different argument. In fact, I knew little enough about PGX that I didn't even realize they also have "must not buy this" label color.

 

But even if they do have a punishment label color, as CGC does, the fact that they sometimes put books with minor work in the non-punishment label color doesn't make them different from CGC. Whether they are different from CGC in other ways (and I am sure that a CGC fundamentalist can point out many ways they feel it differs), it has been acknowledged here that CGC does put some books with glue or color touch or cleaning or reinforcment in a label that boldly says "it's okay to buy this one."

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheWatcher

TheWatcher

Posted
Posted
it has been acknowledged here that CGC does put some books with glue or color touch or cleaning or reinforcment in a label that boldly says "it's okay to buy this one."

 

Please show me where a book that's been reinforced got a blue label, as I don't recall every seeing one :popcorn: The cleaning you refer to is dry cleaning, which CGC doesn't consider restoration, as opposed to aqueous cleaning. If CGC notes that a cover has been cleaned, it's of the latter type. The fact that book doesn't sport a restored label with the centerfold being reinforced and a disassembled, aqueous cleaning of the cover tells a buyer to stay far away from PGX

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted
it has been acknowledged here that CGC does put some books with glue or color touch or cleaning or reinforcment in a label that boldly says "it's okay to buy this one."

 

Please show me where a book that's been reinforced got a blue label, as I don't recall every seeing one :popcorn: The cleaning you refer to is dry cleaning, which CGC doesn't consider restoration, as opposed to aqueous cleaning. If CGC notes that a cover has been cleaned, it's of the latter type. The fact that book doesn't sport a restored label with the centerfold being reinforced and a disassembled, aqueous cleaning of the cover tells a buyer to stay far away from PGX

 

If, in fact, there is no such thing a "blue" book that has reinforcment, it would still leave the other areas, glue, color touch, cleaning in the grey area in which some books with them are in blue labels and some books with them are not.

 

I don't know how you know that cleaning of this book in particular means it was "disassembled, aqueous cleaning." Was it on the label of the book when it was CGC'd? Or was it in their notes?

 

But, presuming all that was on CGC's label or in their notes. Suppose that PGX, or any company, simply used the same label color on all books and also used exactly the same WORDS that CGC used -- "centerfold reinforced" and "disassembled aqueous cleaning."

 

Would that still make them a company to "stay away" from?

 

Just because they didn't compound the grading with a "stay away" label?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
detective35

detective35

Posted
Posted

I also in all my years have NEVER seen re-enforcement on a book given a blue label.

 

Dry cleaning using a professional art eraser or pressing does not involve the book to be taken apart pieces added etc., so CGC does not note it (whether you agree or disagree, but that is a whole nother issue, and personallly neither the processes bothers me).

 

As far as glue or color touch as seen on some Mile High's...I am sure there is a criteria of how much they do allow before they purple label it (PM Steve Borock and ask him), however they would NEVER blue label re-enforcement.

 

People that use PGX, well there have been numerous warnings out there about them, so do not use them, ever!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted

I can understand Rick being upset if he was made to feel that he had to sell a book for a small amount because it had the "stay away" label, then sees someone else selling it in a label that is somehow interpreted as being an "okay to buy" label even with words describing restoration.

 

I've had the same experience with a couple of key books, including one that I was told would have to sell for X dollars and no more because it was in the "don't buy" label. Not so long after, I saw the same book (not similar book, the same book) appear in a "it's okay to buy" label. It had additional damage to the spine, where something had been removed. Book recently sold for just a little under three times what i'd sold it for,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comicopolis

Comicopolis

Posted
Posted

We all know how dubious PGX are, for many reasons.

 

Isn't the more pertinent question to ask if the consignor knows the previous history of the book regarding the restoration and the CGC label?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
high_and_outside-migration

high_and_outside-migration

Posted
Posted

 

I don't have the slightest idea who runs PGX and have maybe one or two books in their slabs which I bought from somebody else. And I know that defending them in the slightest way on a CGC board can inspire full-throated, veins-bulging outrage from boardies hoping that CGC will take favorable notice...

 

...but if they note on the label that it says centerfold reinforced, and that's all they noticed, because maybe somebody scraped off the color touch (or, gasp, didn't consider it restoration because it didn't increase the grade or the appearance), then it's quite possible they also didn't consider it cleaned. In fact it looks to me like the book is still pretty dirty.

 

Even that aside, from what I've seen and read here, many books have been cleaned without being noted by CGC. (or they're put in a label that says "don't worry. it's cleaned but it's still an "investment")

 

And it's also pretty well accepted here that some forms of cleaning are "okay" (meaning it gets a label that says it's still okay to buy it). In fact, the most regularly accepted form of cleaning appears to be attempts at cleaning that are horribly unsuccessful and which, instead of removing a mark, remove the cover inks instead)

 

If the larger concern is that they put such notes in writing, as opposed to putting books in "Bad, Bad! This Is Not An Investment" label, with an express purpose of keeping people away from books whether or not they don't mind a little work on them, that's a whole different argument. In fact, I knew little enough about PGX that I didn't even realize they also have "must not buy this" label color.

 

But even if they do have a punishment label color, as CGC does, the fact that they sometimes put books with minor work in the non-punishment label color doesn't make them different from CGC. Whether they are different from CGC in other ways (and I am sure that a CGC fundamentalist can point out many ways they feel it differs), it has been acknowledged here that CGC does put some books with glue or color touch or cleaning or reinforcment in a label that boldly says "it's okay to buy this one."

 

It's funny, I was thinking that you're as bad as PGX when it comes to disclosing restoration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I can understand Rick being upset if he was made to feel that he had to sell a book for a small amount because it had the "stay away" label, then sees someone else selling it in a label that is somehow interpreted as being an "okay to buy" label even with words describing restoration.

 

I've had the same experience with a couple of key books, including one that I was told would have to sell for X dollars and no more because it was in the "don't buy" label. Not so long after, I saw the same book (not similar book, the same book) appear in a "it's okay to buy" label. It had additional damage to the spine, where something had been removed. Book recently sold for just a little under three times what i'd sold it for,

I actually didn't sell it for any small amount or loss, I bought it raw, thought it was restored (the glue was "bad" on the interior cover and the cover was cleaned and smelled and felt cleaned, so I sent to cgc to confirm)...

 

I never gave any real consideration to the support (though the cover was being held on by glue, and pgx failed to disclose that too), it was the tear seal/glue and cleaning that got me...so, I returned book for full refund... I am just "warning" potential buyers that the book is a wolf in sheeps clothing and that if the glue was scraped off, you still can't unclean a book, and it is "restored" and should command full fmv, but only if folks are aware what they are buying (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
  • Author
Posted
it has been acknowledged here that CGC does put some books with glue or color touch or cleaning or reinforcment in a label that boldly says "it's okay to buy this one."

 

Please show me where a book that's been reinforced got a blue label, as I don't recall every seeing one :popcorn: The cleaning you refer to is dry cleaning, which CGC doesn't consider restoration, as opposed to aqueous cleaning. If CGC notes that a cover has been cleaned, it's of the latter type. The fact that book doesn't sport a restored label with the centerfold being reinforced and a disassembled, aqueous cleaning of the cover tells a buyer to stay far away from PGX

 

If, in fact, there is no such thing a "blue" book that has reinforcment, it would still leave the other areas, glue, color touch, cleaning in the grey area in which some books with them are in blue labels and some books with them are not.

 

I don't know how you know that cleaning of this book in particular means it was "disassembled, aqueous cleaning." Was it on the label of the book when it was CGC'd? Or was it in their notes?

 

But, presuming all that was on CGC's label or in their notes. Suppose that PGX, or any company, simply used the same label color on all books and also used exactly the same WORDS that CGC used -- "centerfold reinforced" and "disassembled aqueous cleaning."

 

Would that still make them a company to "stay away" from?

 

Just because they didn't compound the grading with a "stay away" label?

 

 

 

 

bob, my point has nothing to do with what is, and what isn't restoration, or what color label they use, that is not relevant to my warning etc...

 

it is just to warn my fellow boardies that this book has had "stuff" done to it, and that they should know that the current status of the book doesn't disclose what stuff was done...

 

not saying it is or wasn't worth the asking price before or now, but if it is being touted as "highest" unrestored copy, and it is clearly had restoration done (by anyone'e definition), then it is dishonest and disingenuous assuming the seller even knows... I have no idea who the seller is...they might have bought the book raw (cracked out from where I returned it to seller) and not been told what was done and sent to pgx because that is the grading company they trust and respect (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yecul

yecul

Posted
Posted

At the end of the day it's about disclosure. There's a market and buyer for everything. Misrepresenting your wares may lead to short term gain, but it always comes back to bite you in the end.

 

I'm not interested in the book, but do appreciate this type of heads up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheWatcher

TheWatcher

Posted
Posted
I don't know how you know that cleaning of this book in particular means it was "disassembled, aqueous cleaning." Was it on the label of the book when it was CGC'd? Or was it in their notes?

 

See Rick's initial, and subsequent, post. The only cover cleaning CGC notes is the aqueous type. The only way I've read that procedure is done is by removing the cover and submerging it in the solution

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I don't know how you know that cleaning of this book in particular means it was "disassembled, aqueous cleaning." Was it on the label of the book when it was CGC'd? Or was it in their notes?

 

See Rick's initial, and subsequent, post. The only cover cleaning CGC notes is the aqueous type. The only way I've read that procedure is done is by removing the cover and submerging it in the solution

I could tell right when I got the book it had been cleaned (chemical vs the non restoration defined dry)...has that different feel and smell to it, etc...cgc only reinforced what I 'Knew" (thumbs u
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted

 

I don't have the slightest idea who runs PGX and have maybe one or two books in their slabs which I bought from somebody else. And I know that defending them in the slightest way on a CGC board can inspire full-throated, veins-bulging outrage from boardies hoping that CGC will take favorable notice...

 

...but if they note on the label that it says centerfold reinforced, and that's all they noticed, because maybe somebody scraped off the color touch (or, gasp, didn't consider it restoration because it didn't increase the grade or the appearance), then it's quite possible they also didn't consider it cleaned. In fact it looks to me like the book is still pretty dirty.

 

Even that aside, from what I've seen and read here, many books have been cleaned without being noted by CGC. (or they're put in a label that says "don't worry. it's cleaned but it's still an "investment")

 

And it's also pretty well accepted here that some forms of cleaning are "okay" (meaning it gets a label that says it's still okay to buy it). In fact, the most regularly accepted form of cleaning appears to be attempts at cleaning that are horribly unsuccessful and which, instead of removing a mark, remove the cover inks instead)

 

If the larger concern is that they put such notes in writing, as opposed to putting books in "Bad, Bad! This Is Not An Investment" label, with an express purpose of keeping people away from books whether or not they don't mind a little work on them, that's a whole different argument. In fact, I knew little enough about PGX that I didn't even realize they also have "must not buy this" label color.

 

But even if they do have a punishment label color, as CGC does, the fact that they sometimes put books with minor work in the non-punishment label color doesn't make them different from CGC. Whether they are different from CGC in other ways (and I am sure that a CGC fundamentalist can point out many ways they feel it differs), it has been acknowledged here that CGC does put some books with glue or color touch or cleaning or reinforcment in a label that boldly says "it's okay to buy this one."

 

It's funny, I was thinking that you're as bad as PGX when it comes to disclosing restoration.

 

As I said...

 

<<<>>>

 

If you want I will let CGC know that you dutifully attacked someone who didn't blindly join into an attack on PGX.

 

Anybody know who this person with the brand new account is or has any other questions please feel free to email me at request.information.007@gmail.com

 

As to the others, responding civilly, I am not here to bash CGC or PGX.

 

If Rick says it had a clear feel to it of a book once immersed, then I think I know what he's tallking about and I know that when I hold books like that they cry out that they've been restored, which would not be the case inside a plastic case. So in those instances, of course, the cleaning should be noted.

 

And I think the words "reinforced" and "wet cleaned" would be enough to let a buyer know what he needed to know.

 

I would be extremely happy btw if CGC noted those defects -- and all major defects affecting grade -- in some detailed way on the label, instead of relying on short descriptions and "okay" or "stay away" colors. (Then, people would decide whether to buy based on the words. The fact that people buy blue label books with the words "glue" and "color touch" on them clearly indicates that those defects don't necessarily kill a book's value)

 

btw I would have liked it even more if, when I first bought a book in a "restored" label, I had been told something other than it's "not for investment" and "won't go up in value." Had I been told, instead, that somebody could easily remove the tiny bits of glue and make the book worthy in their view of getting a "good investment" label then I might have been the person who was able to resell it for nine times the profit that I made.

 

 

If PGX wanted to offer a true alternative to CGC, then a reliable and very detailed accounting of resto work with details of where the work was done, whether its removable, etc. would be one way to do it. But instead they apparently are presenting an imitation of CGC services, colored labels and doing it weakly and less consistently. So I am not inclined to use them, with or without the comments here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted
I don't know how you know that cleaning of this book in particular means it was "disassembled, aqueous cleaning." Was it on the label of the book when it was CGC'd? Or was it in their notes?

 

See Rick's initial, and subsequent, post. The only cover cleaning CGC notes is the aqueous type. The only way I've read that procedure is done is by removing the cover and submerging it in the solution

I could tell right when I got the book it had been cleaned (chemical vs the non restoration defined dry)...has that different feel and smell to it, etc...cgc only reinforced what I 'Knew" (thumbs u

 

I know exactly what you mean by that feel. I don't like it myself and you can feel and smell the chemicals. While I think people take it way too far when they say a book with a dot of glue or color touch is "not genuine," I do know that heavily chemical'd books actually feel as if they aren't real.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sal

Sal

Posted
Posted

PGX is a guy in his garage, with a slabbing machine, a computer, and - charitably - the same amount of experience and ability to grade and detect restoration as any number of people here, and less than many others.

 

 

Sending a book to PGX is just stupid. Stupid. Might as well make your own labels and just slab the damn things yourself. Is CGC perfect? Obviously not. But is it a professional organisation? Absolutely. PGX cannot make that claim. Well, they can, but there's no evidence to support it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I don't know how you know that cleaning of this book in particular means it was "disassembled, aqueous cleaning." Was it on the label of the book when it was CGC'd? Or was it in their notes?

 

See Rick's initial, and subsequent, post. The only cover cleaning CGC notes is the aqueous type. The only way I've read that procedure is done is by removing the cover and submerging it in the solution

I could tell right when I got the book it had been cleaned (chemical vs the non restoration defined dry)...has that different feel and smell to it, etc...cgc only reinforced what I 'Knew" (thumbs u

 

I know exactly what you mean by that feel. I don't like it myself and you can feel and smell the chemicals. While I think people take it way too far when they say a book with a dot of glue or color touch is "not genuine," I do know that heavily chemical'd books actually feel as if they aren't real.

of course I agree with you on the dot of color touch or glue...silly, I know! but it is the market's perception (price willing to pay) that seems to matter...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comicopolis

Comicopolis

Posted
Posted
PGX is a guy in his garage, with a slabbing machine, a computer, and - charitably - the same amount of experience and ability to grade and detect restoration as any number of people here, and less than many others.

 

 

Sending a book to PGX is just stupid. Stupid. Might as well make your own labels and just slab the damn things yourself. Is CGC perfect? Obviously not. But is it a professional organisation? Absolutely. PGX cannot make that claim. Well, they can, but there's no evidence to support it

 

In a nutshell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
swapto

swapto

Posted
Posted
PGX is a guy in his garage, with a slabbing machine, a computer, and - charitably - the same amount of experience and ability to grade and detect restoration as any number of people here, and less than many others.

 

 

Sending a book to PGX is just stupid. Stupid. Might as well make your own labels and just slab the damn things yourself. Is CGC perfect? Obviously not. But is it a professional organisation? Absolutely. PGX cannot make that claim. Well, they can, but there's no evidence to support it

 

In a nutshell.

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites
detective35

detective35

Posted
Posted
PGX is a guy in his garage, with a slabbing machine, a computer, and - charitably - the same amount of experience and ability to grade and detect restoration as any number of people here, and less than many others.

 

 

Sending a book to PGX is just stupid. Stupid. Might as well make your own labels and just slab the damn things yourself. Is CGC perfect? Obviously not. But is it a professional organisation? Absolutely. PGX cannot make that claim. Well, they can, but there's no evidence to support it

 

 

I agree!!

 

Dwight

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing