• 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.

No Steve, no Mark, no West...who's grading Golden Age books these days?

Started by nearmint,

97 posts in this topic

cheetah

cheetah

Posted
Posted

I just got the grades back on about 30 GA books. I had Matt Nelson to a pro-screen on them. CGC agreed with his grade most of the time and was within one grade on all but three. One a bit lower and two markedly higher. From my past dealing with Matt, that's pretty typical. Matt tends to grade a little lower than CGC for the most part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I just got the grades back on about 30 GA books. I had Matt Nelson to a pro-screen on them. CGC agreed with his grade most of the time and was within one grade on all but three. One a bit lower and two markedly higher. From my past dealing with Matt, that's pretty typical. Matt tends to grade a little lower than CGC for the most part.

 

Good to know. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted

I wouldn't worry. Litch was new once, so was Borock and Haspel. Lots of those graders have been there for years.

 

Personnel turnover in corporations is a normal thing. This one just happens to get a lot of publicity around here.

 

I say the ship sails as it always has.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
I hear they are out sourcing to India. :grin:

 

Isn't Mark just taking a break? Is CGC running a sweat shop, backing up a truck of comics and dumping them on these graders desks?

Considering the number of large collections that have been brought to market and sent to CGC for grading just in the past year or so, I'd say that might be closer to the truth than you realized. hm

 

There certainly seems to be a feeling that CGC's standards have loosened of late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted

There certainly seems to be a feeling that CGC's standards have loosened of late.

 

Funny you say that. I graded about 100 books on site in Philly a few weeks ago. My first batch was bang on, which means I was about 70-80% accurate in my guesses. My second batch, I got slammed and every book except for 2 was under the grade I had hoped for.

 

It swings both ways but I have seen some headscratchers that I definitely am resubmitting.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So plitch is probably grading golden age, but there are supposed to be three graders on each book, one of whom is the head grader. Even if plitch is the head grader, who are the other two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
Looser???? I am typically .5 tighter than Cgc. My last 4 books graded this week I was .5 higher than Cgc :o

 

That's what I'm sayin'!

 

:sumo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
So plitch is probably grading golden age, but there are supposed to be three graders on each book, one of whom is the head grader. Even if plitch is the head grader, who are the other two?

 

They had 14 graders the last time I checked.

 

That was a few years ago. Who knows?

 

Anybody?

 

Bradmeister? Matt? Shawn Sean?

 

:whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
  • Author
Posted
So plitch is probably grading golden age, but there are supposed to be three graders on each book, one of whom is the head grader. Even if plitch is the head grader, who are the other two?

 

They had 14 graders the last time I checked.

 

That was a few years ago. Who knows?

 

Anybody?

 

Bradmeister? Matt? Shawn Sean?

 

:whistle:

 

There are 8 listed on the website, but one of those is Mark, and another is a magazine grader. That leaves 6, none of which are said to grade Golden Age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted

There certainly seems to be a feeling that CGC's standards have loosened of late.

 

Funny you say that. I graded about 100 books on site in Philly a few weeks ago. My first batch was bang on, which means I was about 70-80% accurate in my guesses. My second batch, I got slammed and every book except for 2 was under the grade I had hoped for.

 

It swings both ways but I have seen some headscratchers that I definitely am resubmitting.

 

Maybe you've loosened your own standards because you've gotten used to CGC's looseness lately?

 

All I know is that at least 2 collectors I know have made predictions on numerous SA and BA submissions recently and have been consistently getting equal or higher grades from CGC.

 

There seems to be a ton of 9.6 and 9.8 SAs and BAs coming out of CGC lately. I can remember when a 9.6 was something really special and 9.8 was a genuine rarity. It's gotten so bad that a 9.4, even for a pre-1964 book, is now zzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted

Maybe you've loosened your own standards because you've gotten used to CGC's looseness lately?

 

All I know is that at least 2 collectors I know have made predictions on numerous SA and BA submissions recently and have been consistently getting equal or higher grades from CGC.

A loose thought, but wouldn't Roy and Gator's experience with tight grading balance out your two collector friends' experience with loose grading, thus once again proving that CGC is spot on? I know that is a loosely thought out hypothesis. But my standards are looser today based on my own general looseness. I will certainly tighten it up as my standards get tighter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ted Knight

Ted Knight

Posted
Posted

There certainly seems to be a feeling that CGC's standards have loosened of late.

 

Funny you say that. I graded about 100 books on site in Philly a few weeks ago. My first batch was bang on, which means I was about 70-80% accurate in my guesses. My second batch, I got slammed and every book except for 2 was under the grade I had hoped for.

 

It swings both ways but I have seen some headscratchers that I definitely am resubmitting.

 

Maybe you've loosened your own standards because you've gotten used to CGC's looseness lately?

 

All I know is that at least 2 collectors I know have made predictions on numerous SA and BA submissions recently and have been consistently getting equal or higher grades from CGC.

 

There seems to be a ton of 9.6 and 9.8 SAs and BAs coming out of CGC lately. I can remember when a 9.6 was something really special and 9.8 was a genuine rarity. It's gotten so bad that a 9.4, even for a pre-1964 book, is now zzz

 

+1. I've seen the exact same thing. 9.6s with color breaks on corners or spine. It never used to be like that. And SA 9.4s look very soft lately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted
Shawn Sean?

Chone

 

I just did it to bust his balls. He hates being called SEAN.

 

:devil:

So does Chone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing