Action 5, CGC 9.4 blue on CLINK

[sacentaur]

the recent 8.5 pressed

 

My thoughts exactly. I had snagged the pic of the 8.5 and when you compare them they have many similar points that suggest that they are the same book. Look at the upper left corner, the top edge above the No. 5, and the lower spine corner. Then look at how the pages are now splayed a bit more in the 9.4.

 

 

Is it just me, or does the book look better as an 8.5 than the pressed 9.4?

 

Yet another example of CGC simply losing it on their ability to grade properly of late, IMHO.

 

Steve, I love ya brother, but that is just stupid. The book looks exactly the same. The label looks different, but the book looks exactly the same. Now you may have better eyes than I and can see some flaw on the 9.4 scan that isn't present on the 8.5 scan. But since it is the same book scanned a few months apart any visual difference would just be the scans themselves, not the book. Now I'm sure you are just making a comment on the idea of pressing in general and pressing this book in particular. But since no one has presented any hard proof that the book actually was pressed then the only thing anyone here is really commenting on is the label itself. It's now in a 9.4 holder. I guess that is real shame for those who don't want it to be in that holder. It is absolutely a bonus for those who do want it in that holder. But either way it is still a stunning comic book.

 

The cover has shifted more to the left, on an angle. That is not scan artifact.

 

Precisely - I love ya too brother, but look again (without the pressing freaky-button lens on, please) - I was not making an ethical judgment on pressing, but only making a note of the (apparent) reason for the significant grade increase (in conjunction with CGC's recent inconsistencies).

 

And agreed, it is a beautiful book, regardless.

[lou_fine]

 

 

has anyone check the cert# of the 8.5? because the book may have been cracked/pressed or not/resub with the old label an now it is no longer a number that will work if you check census.

 

I can't since I am not a member.

 

as far as those "dots", it could be just dusts on the scanner...I wouldn't look to long and hard on blowing up any scans. To me the cut is more telling and the cut to me looks identical.

 

Both certs are still in the census, hence I was able to ascertain when they both were graded, ie 3 months apart.

 

 

That's troubling, ...since it's obviously the same book, not because of the grade bump so much as the fact that the census now carries a book which no longer technically exists, at least in 8.5.

 

That could pose a problem long term in establishing accurate numbers of books in the census for any given issue, thus limiting it's value as a reference.

 

I certainly hope you are not naive enough to believe the CGC census is actually anywhere close to being accurate with all of the resubs that are taking place.

 

Flippers are much more concerned with laundering a book to maximize their profit as opposed to maintaining the accuracy of the CGC census. I don't see why you think they would have any incentive at all to worry about the census when money is their primary concern.

[lou_fine]

I have it on good authority that they are indeed the same book, so no need to "speculate" or blow up scans anymore (thumbs u

 

Do you also have it on "good authority" that this was simply a major grading blunder on the part of CGC, or was the change in grade justified due to some intervening manipulation that took place?

 

Imagine the uproar if this had taken place on a copy of Action Comics #1 or 'Tec #27.

[cheetah]

I have it on good authority that they are indeed the same book, so no need to "speculate" or blow up scans anymore (thumbs u

 

Do you also have it on "good authority" that this was simply a major grading blunder on the part of CGC, or was the change in grade justified due to some intervening manipulation that took place?

 

Imagine the uproar if this had taken place on a copy of Action Comics #1 or 'Tec #27.

 

I doubt the uproar would have extended outside this forum.

[damonwad]

 

has anyone check the cert# of the 8.5? because the book may have been cracked/pressed or not/resub with the old label an now it is no longer a number that will work if you check census.

 

I can't since I am not a member.

 

as far as those "dots", it could be just dusts on the scanner...I wouldn't look to long and hard on blowing up any scans. To me the cut is more telling and the cut to me looks identical.

 

Both certs are still in the census, hence I was able to ascertain when they both were graded, ie 3 months apart.

 

 

That's troubling, ...since it's obviously the same book, not because of the grade bump so much as the fact that the census now carries a book which no longer technically exists, at least in 8.5.

 

That could pose a problem long term in establishing accurate numbers of books in the census for any given issue, thus limiting it's value as a reference.

 

I certainly hope you are not naive enough to believe the CGC census is actually anywhere close to being accurate with all of the resubs that are taking place.

 

Flippers are much more concerned with laundering a book to maximize their profit as opposed to maintaining the accuracy of the CGC census. I don't see why you think they would have any incentive at all to worry about the census when money is their primary concern.

 

I would definitely turn the label in and get the 8.5 off the census. A 9.4 with a 7.0 as the next highest grade (blue) looks a lot better than a 9.4 with an 8.5 next.

Some bidders may not know it's the same book and it has a good chance of getting a better price if it's the only high grade slabbed copy.

[lou_fine]

I have it on good authority that they are indeed the same book, so no need to "speculate" or blow up scans anymore (thumbs u

 

Do you also have it on "good authority" that this was simply a major grading blunder on the part of CGC, or was the change in grade justified due to some intervening manipulation that took place?

 

Imagine the uproar if this had taken place on a copy of Action Comics #1 or 'Tec #27.

 

I doubt the uproar would have extended outside this forum.

 

I am not so sure about this as all of the Action #1 sales have received a lot of non-comics publicity.

 

Imagine Vincent being on all of the business and news television shows explaining why a book that was worth $1.5 million dollars just a few months ago is now all of a sudden worth anywhere from $3 million dollars to $5 million dollars.

 

I believe the interviewers would be critical enough to ask the tough questions as to the reasons for this sudden increase in value for the exact same book. I sincerely don't believe the general public is going to accept excuses such as a CGC grading blunder or a $15 press job. Yes, bound to instill a lot of confidence in the comic book marketplace in the eyes of the general public.

 

Yes, the board members here buy these excuses because it means more money for everybody here, but do you really believe the general public is going to buy this, or simply see it more as a possible scam and that funny books is a dangerous place to be putting their money.

[markseifert]

I would definitely turn the label in and get the 8.5 off the census. A 9.4 with a 7.0 as the next highest grade (blue) looks a lot better than a 9.4 with an 8.5 next.

Some bidders may not know it's the same book and it has a good chance of getting a better price if it's the only high grade slabbed copy.

 

I'd agree with this, and would think it was definitely in the owner's best interest to get the 8.5 off of the census no matter what the circumstances of the resub.

 

 

[lou_fine]

I would definitely turn the label in and get the 8.5 off the census. A 9.4 with a 7.0 as the next highest grade (blue) looks a lot better than a 9.4 with an 8.5 next.

Some bidders may not know it's the same book and it has a good chance of getting a better price if it's the only high grade slabbed copy.

 

I'd agree with this, and would think it was definitely in the owner's best interest to get the 8.5 off of the census no matter what the circumstances of the resub.

 

 

If your statement was true, then we would have full disclosure for all books that have been worked on. Can you explain to me why we have virtually no disclosure of books that have been worked on and upgraded when they come up for sale, with the only exceptions being some sales on the boards here?

 

Are you really trying to convince me that it would be in the owner's best interest to let everybody potential bidder to know that this particular 9.4 Action #5 was in fact really nothing more than a regraded 8.5 Action #5 because it is in his best interest to maintain the integrity of the census? It is a hard sell to convince me that a regraded 8.5 book up to a 9.4 book would be in the owner's best interest (i.e. worth more money) than an originally graded 9.4 copy.

 

As history has shown us back to Borock's so-called "Wild Wild West Days", people who work on books and then pass them off without disclosure of any kind are really more interested in lining their own pockets with money, as opposed to maintaining the greater good of the hobby.

[G.A.tor]

I have it on good authority that they are indeed the same book, so no need to "speculate" or blow up scans anymore (thumbs u

 

Do you also have it on "good authority" that this was simply a major grading blunder on the part of CGC, or was the change in grade justified due to some intervening manipulation that took place?

 

Imagine the uproar if this had taken place on a copy of Action Comics #1 or 'Tec #27.

I would be hard pressed to answer that hehe

[lou_fine]

I have it on good authority that they are indeed the same book, so no need to "speculate" or blow up scans anymore (thumbs u

 

Do you also have it on "good authority" that this was simply a major grading blunder on the part of CGC, or was the change in grade justified due to some intervening manipulation that took place?

 

Imagine the uproar if this had taken place on a copy of Action Comics #1 or 'Tec #27.

I would be hard pressed to answer that hehe

 

Sorry about that as I only meant to pressed you softly for the answer!

[detective35]

Hello,

 

In Borocks wild west days we were really trying to battle against restoration and sending alot of books to Susan for restoration checking. A few dealers/quasi-dealers were selling books without total disclosure, but I think more of the restoration was done even in the period before Steve was collecting.

 

I agree, when you re-submit a book after pressing, make sure that you take the old grade off the census. When you look on the census I don't think anyone needs to know what books have been upgraded, but for the sake of the accuracy of the census, take off the old grade.

[Cat-Man_America]

 

has anyone check the cert# of the 8.5? because the book may have been cracked/pressed or not/resub with the old label an now it is no longer a number that will work if you check census.

 

I can't since I am not a member.

 

as far as those "dots", it could be just dusts on the scanner...I wouldn't look to long and hard on blowing up any scans. To me the cut is more telling and the cut to me looks identical.

 

Both certs are still in the census, hence I was able to ascertain when they both were graded, ie 3 months apart.

 

 

That's troubling, ...since it's obviously the same book, not because of the grade bump so much as the fact that the census now carries a book which no longer technically exists, at least in 8.5.

 

That could pose a problem long term in establishing accurate numbers of books in the census for any given issue, thus limiting it's value as a reference.

 

I certainly hope you are not naive enough to believe the CGC census is actually anywhere close to being accurate with all of the resubs that are taking place.

 

Flippers are much more concerned with laundering a book to maximize their profit as opposed to maintaining the accuracy of the CGC census. I don't see why you think they would have any incentive at all to worry about the census when money is their primary concern.

 

 

I was just making an observation in respect to this particular book and how the practice of failing to correct known double entries into the census further erodes it's usefulness.

 

Of course I realize that the census isn't 100% accurate, nor even 90% or 80% given the numbers of raw books, competitor slabbed books and undiscovered collections, but wise speculators factor in what is known along with what can be estimated about the market and adjust accordingly.

 

Folks who flip books aren't laundering anything IMO, well, pressing and dry cleaning maybe, but the word laundering leaves the impression of criminality, which isn't what I think you meant.

 

Speculating about motivations is a non-productive exercise. What we should be focusing on here is trying to set the record straight to improve the accuracy of the CGC census. And BTW, I'm not letting CGC off the hook on this. Books that are cracked out and resubmitted (especially high grade GA books that have unique identifiers) should be caught by CGC regardless of the end grade.

 

[bluechip]

When you look on the census I don't think anyone needs to know what books have been upgraded,

 

Most people define what they need to know as what they want to know.

 

 

 

[damonwad]

I would definitely turn the label in and get the 8.5 off the census. A 9.4 with a 7.0 as the next highest grade (blue) looks a lot better than a 9.4 with an 8.5 next.

Some bidders may not know it's the same book and it has a good chance of getting a better price if it's the only high grade slabbed copy.

 

I'd agree with this, and would think it was definitely in the owner's best interest to get the 8.5 off of the census no matter what the circumstances of the resub.

 

 

If your statement was true, then we would have full disclosure for all books that have been worked on. Can you explain to me why we have virtually no disclosure of books that have been worked on and upgraded when they come up for sale, with the only exceptions being some sales on the boards here?

 

Are you really trying to convince me that it would be in the owner's best interest to let everybody potential bidder to know that this particular 9.4 Action #5 was in fact really nothing more than a regraded 8.5 Action #5 because it is in his best interest to maintain the integrity of the census? It is a hard sell to convince me that a regraded 8.5 book up to a 9.4 book would be in the owner's best interest (i.e. worth more money) than an originally graded 9.4 copy.

 

As history has shown us back to Borock's so-called "Wild Wild West Days", people who work on books and then pass them off without disclosure of any kind are really more interested in lining their own pockets with money, as opposed to maintaining the greater good of the hobby.

 

My statement has nothing to do with maintaining the integrity of the census and ONLY to do with what I believe would be in the owners best interest regarding making the most money off the book. They just happen to coincide in this situation. This would only apply to books with low census numbers (GA or super high grade SA).

I think most of these books are assumed to be pressed anyways so the "rarity" factor over rides the "pressing" negative. Also, I'm sure there are deep pocket bidders that don't follow these boards or the CGC Census, but they will see the little blurb by the auction house stating "next highest graded is 7.0!!!"'.

 

Personally, I would return any label to CGC to keep the census as clean as possible and think CGC should be much more diligent in looking for resubbed high end or rare books. I gambled on a PGX book once and even sent that label back.

 

[markseifert]

Are you really trying to convince me that it would be in the owner's best interest to let everybody potential bidder to know that this particular 9.4 Action #5 was in fact really nothing more than a regraded 8.5 Action #5 because it is in his best interest to maintain the integrity of the census?

 

Yes, I absolutely am trying to convince you that it is in the Action #5 9.4 owner's best interest to maintain the integrity of the census in this case.

 

I simply agree with damonwad's statement that it's better to be the owner of the 9.4 with the next best thing on the census being a 7.0 than it is to be the owner of the 9.4 with the next best thing on the census being a 8.5.

[Cat-Man_America]

Are you really trying to convince me that it would be in the owner's best interest to let everybody potential bidder to know that this particular 9.4 Action #5 was in fact really nothing more than a regraded 8.5 Action #5 because it is in his best interest to maintain the integrity of the census?

 

Yes, I absolutely am trying to convince you that it is in the Action #5 9.4 owner's best interest to maintain the integrity of the census in this case.

 

I simply agree with damonwad's statement that it's better to be the owner of the 9.4 with the next best thing on the census being a 7.0 than it is to be the owner of the 9.4 with the next best thing on the census being a 8.5.

 

+1 (thumbs u That's a very sound, common sense perspective, IMO.

[otherworldsj33]

I'm not a lawyer, but I thnk it would make a fascinating court case. I wonder what a judge or jury would have to say about pressing being or not being restoration.

[bluechip]

I'm not a lawyer, but I thnk it would make a fascinating court case. I wonder what a judge or jury would have to say about pressing being or not being restoration.

 

If you're wondering what the average person would say about any of this, they would say the book looks the same in the 8.5 holder as it does in the 9.4 holder and they don't consider it any different, let alone that it was restored.

 

 

 

[jgallo]

I'm not a lawyer, but I thnk it would make a fascinating court case. I wonder what a judge or jury would have to say about pressing being or not being restoration.

 

If you're wondering what the average person would say about any of this, they would say the book looks the same in the 8.5 holder as it does in the 9.4 holder and they don't consider it any different, let alone that it was restored.

 

 

 

I would probably agree with this. I have had some first hand experience with non collector folk and they just don't get any aspect of it. I think most wouldn't even see a difference between a mid grade book and a high grade book. Only a "trained" eye will get it :-P

 

As for trying to explain pressing good luck when many on this board don't understand it I am doubtful that you could even attempt this in the "real" world.

 

James G

[tth2]

I'm not a lawyer, but I thnk it would make a fascinating court case. I wonder what a judge or jury would have to say about pressing being or not being restoration.

 

If you're wondering what the average person would say about any of this, they would say the book looks the same in the 8.5 holder as it does in the 9.4 holder and they don't consider it any different, let alone that it was restored.

 

 

 

I would probably agree with this. I have had some first hand experience with non collector folk and they just don't get any aspect of it. I think most wouldn't even see a difference between a mid grade book and a high grade book. Only a "trained" eye will get it :-P

Doesn't matter. A jury doesn't have to understand what makes a 8.5 book different from a 9.4 book. All they have to know is that the market of people who do understand the difference will pay a much higher price for a 9.4 than a 8.5, and that using pressing, it can be possible to transform an 8.5 into a 9.4.