Wizard First Program - Not April's Fools

[FlamingCarrot]

Wow! Everything that has to be said is already being said.

 

That being said , What happens if Wizard gets a thousand pre pays for Spiderman #4 in 'Wizard First 10.0', but only receive 100 in such a grade from CGC? Does anyone really think Wizard will actually refund the money for 900 orders? or will they just have a talking to with their new partners and have them turn on the Wizard First 10.0 faucet in Tampa and complete the transactions?

 

it's probably too late to stop this disasterously short sighted decision from going forward. The reactions on the board is quite clear and I'm certain, representative of the core customers that CGC has worked so hard to build up. When these customers get chased away, CGC will have no one to blame but themselves. Oh well, I guess they can enjoy the business of pure speculators because they're loyal, faithful and will stick around for the long term, right?

[Red Hook]

What next? 11.0?

 

Jim

 

 

Comic Grading by Spinal Tap...

 

Once again for your edification......

 

Everthing I needed to know about Comic Grading I learned from Spinal Tap!

 

Interviewer questioning Nigel about the numbers on the dial of his amp.......

 

Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and....

Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?

Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.

Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?

Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?

Marty DiBergi: I don't know.

Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?

Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.

Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.

Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?

Nigel Tufnel: [Pause.] These go to eleven.

[awe4one]

it's probably too late to stop this disasterously short sighted decision from going forward. The reactions on the board is quite clear and I'm certain, representative of the core customers that CGC has worked so hard to build up.

 

Unless money has changed hands or iron clad contracts signed, there always time to reverse this incredibly stupid decision.

 

It reminds me alot of the "restoration removal" service that CGC wanted to start. That was a boneheaded idea that CGC was quick to squash due to the overwhelming negative reaction. It would be wise for them to make that same decision here as well....

 

Jim

[Zanarkand]

But isn't that the whole point of going with a 10.0 to 9.5 gap, to ensure you get a disproportionate amount of 10's back? Otherwise, what's the benefit to Wizard in doing this, as they'd be giving up a ton of 9.9 and 9.8 comics that could be sold for much more than a 9.5.

 

The only way I see it working is that comics grading 9.751 and above (using CGC's "closest whole grade" format) would receive a 10.0 and anything 9.750 and below would receive a 9.5.

 

This effectively turns a Wizard 10.0 into a CGC 9.8 to 10.0 equivalent, which would make sense.

 

I was approaching it from the standpoint that Perfect = 10, and anything less is 9.5. At least according to Wizard's Own Magical CGC Endorsed Grading Scale. You're right though, they could just as easily make option A of my previous post true - inflate grades and start handing out 10s like candy.

 

Super, now not only do unsuspecting collectors have a made up CGC 9.5 (oh, I'm sorry, CGC just grades it, slabs it, and sticks their name on it, but it's a Wizard scale, my mistake) to contend with, their 10s may not even be real as well.

[joe_collector]

It reminds me alot of the "restoration removal" service that CGC wanted to start. That was a boneheaded idea that CGC was quick to squash due to the overwhelming negative reaction. It would be wise for them to make that same decision here as well....

 

No can do, as Wizard has already announced it, and if CGC reneged, there would likely be serious financial penalties.

[FFB]

None of this makes a damn bit of difference to me, or makes me feel any better about it. I cannot believe you guys agreed to this.

 

O.K. real quick ( I do have books to grade) and I will answer ANY other questions at the chat board dinner this weekend.

 

1: Wizard wanted to sell a "First Look" product.

 

2: They contacted us because they like us and like working with us. We also like working with them. They are the ones that make on-site grading possible and put on the best conventions in the country.

 

3: The deal is that Wizard will get a limited amount of copies of only a few titles from Marvel right off the press and they CONTRACTED us to grade their books using WIZARD'S NEW GRADING SCALE. This is stated on the back of the label.

 

4: There is NO change in the CGC grading scale.

 

5: The label says "CGC GRADED" and is red. It does not say Universal like a blue CGC label does. It is a Wizard product that they sell. There should be very little if any confusion in the market place.

 

6: We are a Business and I would rather grade their product then Wizard going somewhere else or grading it themselves. We like the additional revenue and I would much rather have our team grade the books then someone else who does not know how to grade properly.

 

7: In no way does this affect the CGC certified market. If a Wizard First book is re-submitted, it will not get that designation and will be put in a CGC Universal label using the CGC grading scale. The two products are NOT interchangable.

 

8: This will not affect turn around times. As most of you have probably noticed, turn times are getting better. Not only that, but we have hired a new person in the Modern dept., a new customer service/recieving person, two new people in encapsulation, and the big news is that I have hired a superstar of a grader whose name most of you know and I will announce who he is later today or tomorrow.

 

See some of you in San Francisco and save me a dinner seat next to the guys with the most questions (like Garth) so I can get you even more info to post here about CGC.

 

Later,

Steve

[AlexH]

Let's see how the general population feels using numbers:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=permcomicpolls&Number=465170&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&vc=1&fpart=1

 

Go vote!

[drbanner]

Where's the "Good for Wizard, Bad for CGC" option?

[AlexH]

Where's the "Good for Wizard, Bad for CGC" option?

 

It's in the same place as the "crash" option.

[drbanner]

Where's the "Good for Wizard, Bad for CGC" option?

 

It's in the same place as the "crash" option.

 

WTF does that mean?

[wormboy]

The only reason they can, and will, pull this off, is that they have a monopoly on the business. Where else can we go to get books graded?

 

We could sell them raw, but customers think, "If it's really a 9.4 why didn't he have it graded?", and they bid accordingly. So we have to take it up the , overpay for $hitty service, and now let Wizard cut in line in front of us.

 

I submitted two books BEFORE Christmas. One was a Punisher related book, submitted to take advantage of the movie. Figured I had plenty of time to get the book back for an April film release. I got the books back this week. So much for that sale.

 

I'll keep submitting books to CGC, because I still have books to sell, and there are no viable alternatives (though, after this rant, the grades may not be as good). When those books are gone, I'm done. Over and out. Can't believe a company that is so far behind on it's service would announce a program like this (Yes, I read what Steve said about turnaround times - I just don't believe it).

[AlexH]

Where's the "Good for Wizard, Bad for CGC" option?

 

It's in the same place as the "crash" option.

 

WTF does that mean?

 

It means I didn't include it. There would have been too many variables added.

- good for CGC, bad for Wiz

- good for CGC, good for Wiz

- bad for CGC, bad for Wiz

- bad for CGC, good for Wiz

[drbanner]

Where's the "Good for Wizard, Bad for CGC" option?

 

It's in the same place as the "crash" option.

 

WTF does that mean?

 

It means I didn't include it. There would have been too many variables added.

- good for CGC, bad for Wiz

- good for CGC, good for Wiz

- bad for CGC, bad for Wiz

- bad for CGC, good for Wiz

 

If by "too many" you mean 2 (the existing 2 would be 4 as you outline above), then I guess you're right...

[Kevin Boyd]

So much for impartiality. CGC has just sold out to the highest bidder.

 

Well... uh... yeah. But as Steve said, they worked out a deal that everyone was more or less ok with.

 

Again, I'm not saying I'm ok with it, but that's not my call. Steve has already said why.

 

Are you SERIOUSLY okay with that?? Since when is "rounding" an acceptable practice for a grading service WHOSE BUSINESS IS BASED ON PRECISION and a REPUTATION FOR PRECISE GRADING???

 

Who says I'm ok with it? But then again, who is saying that the "Wizard Grading System" of 9.0 - 9.5 - 10.0 won't be precisely graded according to the specifications of those grades?

 

All I was trying to do was suggest what those grades might get thru the normal grading service of 9.0-9.2-9.4-9.6-9.8-9.9-10.0

[Zanarkand]

Where's the "Good for Wizard, Bad for CGC" option?

 

It's in the same place as the "crash" option.

 

WTF does that mean?

 

It means I didn't include it. There would have been too many variables added.

- good for CGC, bad for Wiz

- good for CGC, good for Wiz

- bad for CGC, bad for Wiz

- bad for CGC, good for Wiz

 

- good for CGC cash position, bad for reputation

- good for Wiz cash position, reputation essentially unchanged though

- good for now, bad for later

- good for CGC member dealers who make the money from schemes like this, bad for CGC employees who are the ones who get person_without_enough_empathyed at

- good for short term speculators, bad for collectors

- good for nothing, bad for hobby

[AlexH]

Where's the "Good for Wizard, Bad for CGC" option?

 

It's in the same place as the "crash" option.

 

WTF does that mean?

 

It means I didn't include it. There would have been too many variables added.

- good for CGC, bad for Wiz

- good for CGC, good for Wiz

- bad for CGC, bad for Wiz

- bad for CGC, good for Wiz

 

- good for CGC cash position, bad for reputation

- good for Wiz cash position, reputation essentially unchanged though

- good for now, bad for later

- good for CGC member dealers who make the money from schemes like this, bad for CGC employees who are the ones who get person_without_enough_empathyed at

- good for short term speculators, bad for collectors

- good for nothing, bad for hobby

 

Yeah, what he said.

[awe4one]

- good for nothing, bad for hobby

 

We have a winner!

 

Jim

[BassGMan]

Steve B., I know you are a budding guitarist so I have a little comparison for you. When I first started playing bass in the late 70s I quickly became a Fender fan and bought a Fender bass. Then I started seeing all these other "Fender" bass and "Fender Stratocaster" guitars all over the place for alot cheaper. As a kid I did not know how things worked and I thought they were all really Fenders. Actually, most of the cheaper guitars were just modeled after Fender and were cheaper copies. At least they had a different brand name clearly stamped on the headstock.

 

Then in the 80s Fender stated making many different versions of their own Stratocaster and Precision basses. Some cheap, some expensive, some imported, some domestic, some with higher end electronics, tuning pegs and etc. So now, I knew the different brands apart, but I did not know which was the "real" Fender Stratocaster and which was a "lessor" or "imitation" Stratocaster, even though they were all Fender. Just too confusing to me and I decided to avoid Fender entirely. Especially since Fender, as a pioneer of electric guitars, now has so much competion anyway that I could easily avoid them without having that much less to choose from.

 

Alot of similarities with CGC and your new TWO different grading scales. It may be a "Wizard grading scale" but as long as it has the CGC name attached it is also a CGC grade according to the public. So, now we see that there are two different kinds of 10.0 grades. The people "in the know" will know the difference (just like guys who really knew those Fender guitars) but the general public will not know the difference. Which "10.0" was better, was it the blue one or the red one? Hmmmm? Much confusion. And you bet that some shady dealers will try to pass off the "worse 10.0" for the "better 10.0".

 

I would seriously advise cancelling this contract and taking any monetary penalty that may result. Think of it as a learning experience.

 

With that all said, I really would not categorize this move as greedy. I would label it as a creative way to find a new revenue stream. Businesses strive for this all the time and brainstorming a project like this is not a bad idea. However, this move is not a good one. Seriously rethink this one as you have already offended most of us loyal CGC customers already and the project has not even started yet. Good luck, I'll see you at the Wondercon dinner on Saturday. Hopefully you won't feel "put on the spot" too much by all this. -----Sid

[Foolkiller]

With that all said, I really would not categorize this move as greedy. I would label it as a creative way to find a new revenue stream. Businesses strive for this all the time and brainstorming a project like this is not a bad idea.

 

No, I think greed is the proper characterization here... but in the immortal words of Gordon Gekko, Greed is Good.

[Mr. Zipper]

The only way I see it working is that comics grading 9.751 and above (using CGC's "closest whole grade" format) would receive a 10.0 and anything 9.750 and below would receive a 9.5.

 

This effectively turns a Wizard 10.0 into a CGC 9.8 to 10.0 equivalent, which would make sense.

 

... the Wizard slab has "CGC Grade" emblazoned across the top of the label. How will this NOT cause confusion? So, in effect there will be 2 CGC grading scales.

 

Are the 10.0s equivalent or is there a rounding up as JC speculated? Will there now be "real" 10.0s and "Wizard" 10.0s? Why couldn't they have done the same "private label" program without messing with the grading scale?

 

Ah, what the heck do I care... I wouldn't pay more than cover price for a modern comic anyway...