Action 5, CGC 9.4 blue on CLINK

[Scrooge]

I believe that most here would agree that there has been some inconsistencies but compared to pre-CGC days, we're better off. I know I know a few people will come in and chime that people knew how to grade before CGC existed and I agree. Having CGC does not mean people shouldn't learn to grade properly on their own ... which goes back that it would be great to know the grading standards they use ... When chemicals or other commodities go through certification, the submitters know exactly what the specs to meet are to get the various grades and depend that their production facilities can meet up and match these standards. The collecting world, on the other hand, likes to play with its own rules ... For example, why, oh why, is CGC doing away with most grading notes: First they disappeared from the label, now they are harder to have access to?

[Phill the Governor]

I completely agree with what you've said. The last part is mainly my argument. If CGC is going to give a book a certain grade, couldn't they at least have one or two main points on the label as to why the grade is the grade they gave it? At least for the books that grade 7.0 and up....

[MasterChief]

 

My earlier use of the term "flippers" was not correct as I was really referring to buyers who purchase books, surreptitiously manipulate them, and then resell them without any disclosure even though the work that was done is legally okay from CGC's point of view.

 

I use the word laundering because their very behaviour leaves the impression that is exactly what they are doing as evident by Jeff's comment below:

 

. I'm sure the 8.5 label will be submitted after the auction is over.

 

Since it's actually okay to press and resubmit books according to CGC, then I don't understand why they simply don't turn in the label at the time of resub, instead of waiting until the auction is over. This key difference in timing leaves the impression that the seller himself believes that what he is doing is not totally above board and honest. If he felt what he was doing is okay, shouldn't he also have the balls to MANNUP and turn in the old label up front instead of waiting until the auction is over.

 

 

Lou, you're proceeding from the assumption that the book's owner is the one that cracked it out, rather then the person pressing the book. My understanding from Matt is that he does send labels in, but who knows how often.

 

All I know is, I had one book pressed by Matt that was in a cgc case. Actually, it was restored already, and the pages were out of order, that was why I sent it to him, he suggested the pressing. He resubmitted it without the label, and when I asked where the label was (as it was a high $$ book and I wanted it OFF the census) he said he tossed it.

I think the census is wildly inaccurate. I've personally sold 2 books I know have been resubmitted and they were never taken off. I also own a book that is (or at least was at the time ) the highest copy at 6.5, the next highest copy on the census was a 4.5, yet a boarder SOLD a copy on the boards that was in-between those grades (I think it was 5.0) and much to my surprise, when I looked, it was not listed on the census

 

Most of my books are not CGC'd, so my examples are only a tiny tiny part of the whole picture.

 

After years of conducting in-depth research on literally hundreds of manipulated books, the corresponding before and after certification numbers with which they were assigned, and the comic book related transactions that laundered their sale to the collecting community, I have come to the conclusion that the census is in fact misleading and unreliable.

 

Collectors, sellers, dealers, manipulators, and scammers have removed an unimaginable number of books from their holders without notifying CGC. In fact, CGC themselves have failed to update the census on occasion when books were recertified.

 

As time goes by the level of resubmissions continues to compound without label returns and the reliability and accuracy of the census continues to degrade. So much so, the population report for a good many issues will, or already has, become completely compromised and invalid.

 

CGC themselves recognizes that fact and have issued a legal disclaimer for same which reads:

 

Notices regarding CGC’s Census Report

 

The utilization of this report as a tool for assessing the population and value of certified comic books in any character or grade is unreliable. The following characteristics inherent in the marketplace undermine the accuracy of this report:

• Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not
   
  
• Comic certification services are predominantly utilized for higher-grade comics
   
  
• Certified comic books are often removed from their holders without notifying the grading service; therefore, computer tallies utilized to provide population reports may be misleading
   
  
• Rarity is only one factor that must be weighed in determining the market value of a comic book

CGC encourages all collectors to seek the counsel of qualified professionals familiar with the certified comics marketplace before making any purchase based on this report.

 

 

 

[lou_fine]

.After years of conducting in-depth research on literally hundreds of manipulated books, the corresponding before and after certification numbers with which they were assigned, and the comic book related transactions that laundered their sale to the collecting community, I have come to the conclusion that the census is in fact misleading and unreliable.

 

Collectors, sellers, dealers, manipulators, and scammers have removed an unimaginable number of books from their holders without notifying CGC. In fact, CGC themselves have failed to update the census on occasion when books were recertified.

 

As time goes by the level of resubmissions continues to compound without label returns and the reliability and accuracy of the census continues to degrade. So much so, the population report for a good many issues will, or already has, become completely compromised and invalid.

 

CGC themselves recognizes that fact and have issued a legal disclaimer for same which reads:

 

Notices regarding CGC’s Census Report

 

The utilization of this report as a tool for assessing the population and value of certified comic books in any character or grade is unreliable. The following characteristics inherent in the marketplace undermine the accuracy of this report:

• Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not
   
  
• Comic certification services are predominantly utilized for higher-grade comics
   
  
• Certified comic books are often removed from their holders without notifying the grading service; therefore, computer tallies utilized to provide population reports may be misleading
   
  
• Rarity is only one factor that must be weighed in determining the market value of a comic book

CGC encourages all collectors to seek the counsel of qualified professionals familiar with the certified comics marketplace before making any purchase based on this report.

 

 

 

Masterchief;

 

As usual, just another excellent post from you! (thumbs u

[skypinkblu]

 

My earlier use of the term "flippers" was not correct as I was really referring to buyers who purchase books, surreptitiously manipulate them, and then resell them without any disclosure even though the work that was done is legally okay from CGC's point of view.

 

I use the word laundering because their very behaviour leaves the impression that is exactly what they are doing as evident by Jeff's comment below:

 

. I'm sure the 8.5 label will be submitted after the auction is over.

 

Since it's actually okay to press and resubmit books according to CGC, then I don't understand why they simply don't turn in the label at the time of resub, instead of waiting until the auction is over. This key difference in timing leaves the impression that the seller himself believes that what he is doing is not totally above board and honest. If he felt what he was doing is okay, shouldn't he also have the balls to MANNUP and turn in the old label up front instead of waiting until the auction is over.

 

 

Lou, you're proceeding from the assumption that the book's owner is the one that cracked it out, rather then the person pressing the book. My understanding from Matt is that he does send labels in, but who knows how often.

 

All I know is, I had one book pressed by Matt that was in a cgc case. Actually, it was restored already, and the pages were out of order, that was why I sent it to him, he suggested the pressing. He resubmitted it without the label, and when I asked where the label was (as it was a high $$ book and I wanted it OFF the census) he said he tossed it.

I think the census is wildly inaccurate. I've personally sold 2 books I know have been resubmitted and they were never taken off. I also own a book that is (or at least was at the time ) the highest copy at 6.5, the next highest copy on the census was a 4.5, yet a boarder SOLD a copy on the boards that was in-between those grades (I think it was 5.0) and much to my surprise, when I looked, it was not listed on the census

 

Most of my books are not CGC'd, so my examples are only a tiny tiny part of the whole picture.

 

After years of conducting in-depth research on literally hundreds of manipulated books, the corresponding before and after certification numbers with which they were assigned, and the comic book related transactions that laundered their sale to the collecting community, I have come to the conclusion that the census is in fact misleading and unreliable.

 

Collectors, sellers, dealers, manipulators, and scammers have removed an unimaginable number of books from their holders without notifying CGC. In fact, CGC themselves have failed to update the census on occasion when books were recertified.

 

As time goes by the level of resubmissions continues to compound without label returns and the reliability and accuracy of the census continues to degrade. So much so, the population report for a good many issues will, or already has, become completely compromised and invalid.

 

CGC themselves recognizes that fact and have issued a legal disclaimer for same which reads:

 

Notices regarding CGC’s Census Report

 

The utilization of this report as a tool for assessing the population and value of certified comic books in any character or grade is unreliable. The following characteristics inherent in the marketplace undermine the accuracy of this report:

• Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not
   
  
• Comic certification services are predominantly utilized for higher-grade comics
   
  
• Certified comic books are often removed from their holders without notifying the grading service; therefore, computer tallies utilized to provide population reports may be misleading
   
  
• Rarity is only one factor that must be weighed in determining the market value of a comic book

CGC encourages all collectors to seek the counsel of qualified professionals familiar with the certified comics marketplace before making any purchase based on this report.

 

 

 

Thank you ! I never saw that disclaimer.

[MasterChief]

Here's another scan perspective of the 8.5 copy courtesy of the CGC Gallery...

 

 

 

[Cat-Man_America]

Actually, there might be a simple, cost effective solution to improving the census tally that insures every future book graded or resubmitted would be recognized.

 

It involves placing a very small invisible ink stamp on the back cover of every CGC graded book that would fluoresce under a black light. Something like this (see the stamp, half way down) only much smaller...

 

http://www.fake-proof.com/

 

Each time a book was resubmitted it would receive a small ink stamp that would fluoresce a different color.

 

First, of course, any questions about marking valuable comics with invisible ink would need to be addressed, but if these issues are resolvable I foresee secondary advantages to improving the census, such as the ability to track valuable books that are stolen, cracked out and resold, etc.

 

The link above is just a site I quickly researched while considering this idea; other sites which discuss watermarking valuables with invisible ink may go into greater detail and discuss the pros and cons. It does seem like an interesting idea though.

 

Opinions?

[skypinkblu]

Actually, there might be a simple, cost effective solution to improving the census tally that insures every future book graded or resubmitted would be recognized.

 

It involves placing a very small invisible ink stamp on the back cover of every CGC graded book that would fluoresce under a black light. Something like this (see the stamp, half way down) only much smaller...

 

http://www.fake-proof.com/

 

Each time a book was resubmitted it would receive a small ink stamp that would fluoresce a different color.

 

First, of course, any questions about marking valuable comics with invisible ink would need to be addressed, but if these issues are resolvable I foresee secondary advantages to improving the census, such as the ability to track valuable books that are stolen, cracked out and resold, etc.

 

The link above is just a site I quickly researched while considering this idea; other sites which discuss watermarking valuables with invisible ink may go into greater detail and discuss the pros and cons. It does seem like an interesting idea though.

 

Opinions?

 

I think if you do a search, it's been brought up before, and suggestions were also made that the mark be on the centerfold.

 

I like it because of the theft aspect,but I'm wondering how people who love very high grade books would feel OR people who want to press books and not disclose the fact that they were pressed..

[tth2]

CGC themselves recognizes that fact and have issued a legal disclaimer for same which reads:

 

Notices regarding CGC’s Census Report

 

The utilization of this report as a tool for assessing the population and value of certified comic books in any character or grade is unreliable. The following characteristics inherent in the marketplace undermine the accuracy of this report:

• Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not
   
  
• Comic certification services are predominantly utilized for higher-grade comics
   
  
• Certified comic books are often removed from their holders without notifying the grading service; therefore, computer tallies utilized to provide population reports may be misleading
   
  
• Rarity is only one factor that must be weighed in determining the market value of a comic book

CGC encourages all collectors to seek the counsel of qualified professionals familiar with the certified comics marketplace before making any purchase based on this report.

 

 

While I agree with you that the Census may be inaccurate and it`s disgraceful that people like Matt, who should know better, don`t seem to care about its accuracy except when it suits them, I wouldn`t read too much into the disclaimer as anything other than fear of legal liability. If I were their lawyer, I`d advise them to put in that kind of disclaimer even if the Census were 99.9% accurate.

[tth2]

Actually, there might be a simple, cost effective solution to improving the census tally that insures every future book graded or resubmitted would be recognized.

 

It involves placing a very small invisible ink stamp on the back cover of every CGC graded book that would fluoresce under a black light. Something like this (see the stamp, half way down) only much smaller...

 

http://www.fake-proof.com/

 

Each time a book was resubmitted it would receive a small ink stamp that would fluoresce a different color.

 

First, of course, any questions about marking valuable comics with invisible ink would need to be addressed, but if these issues are resolvable I foresee secondary advantages to improving the census, such as the ability to track valuable books that are stolen, cracked out and resold, etc.

 

The link above is just a site I quickly researched while considering this idea; other sites which discuss watermarking valuables with invisible ink may go into greater detail and discuss the pros and cons. It does seem like an interesting idea though.

 

Opinions?

 

I think if you do a search, it's been brought up before, and suggestions were also made that the mark be on the centerfold.

 

I like it because of the theft aspect,but I'm wondering how people who love very high grade books would feel OR people who want to press books and not disclose the fact that they were pressed..

It has indeed been discussed here, but a lot of people went ballistic at the idea of even a microdot of invisible ink being put on their comics.

[tb]

Actually, there might be a simple, cost effective solution to improving the census tally that insures every future book graded or resubmitted would be recognized.

 

It involves placing a very small invisible ink stamp on the back cover of every CGC graded book that would fluoresce under a black light. Something like this (see the stamp, half way down) only much smaller...

 

http://www.fake-proof.com/

 

Each time a book was resubmitted it would receive a small ink stamp that would fluoresce a different color.

 

First, of course, any questions about marking valuable comics with invisible ink would need to be addressed, but if these issues are resolvable I foresee secondary advantages to improving the census, such as the ability to track valuable books that are stolen, cracked out and resold, etc.

 

The link above is just a site I quickly researched while considering this idea; other sites which discuss watermarking valuables with invisible ink may go into greater detail and discuss the pros and cons. It does seem like an interesting idea though.

 

Opinions?

 

I think if you do a search, it's been brought up before, and suggestions were also made that the mark be on the centerfold.

 

I like it because of the theft aspect,but I'm wondering how people who love very high grade books would feel OR people who want to press books and not disclose the fact that they were pressed..

It has indeed been discussed here, but a lot of people went ballistic at the idea of even a microdot of invisible ink being put on their comics.

 

Some day, such a service could lead to a whole new business model for certifying comics. I can envision encoding various information in an invisible barcode that could be read by a cell phone. The information could either be public or optionally be encrypted with a key only known to the owner/service provider. It could then be used by the owner and/or future potential buyers if questions about ownership, grade bumps, restoration etc. were to surface (I really don't see many collectors caring that deeply about the registry). Since I tend to hold on to my own books for many years, I would seriously consider using such a service. If it were accepted widely among collectors, it could be a considerable prevention against theft. Such a code could even reduce the need for a CGC holder, especially if were to be combined with a link to a CGC webpage with a scan of the book (which could be viewed on a cell phone after scanning the barcode). Although the technology is largely there, I imagine it will be at least another generation before such a service would be feasible since collectors are so conservative.

 

I imagine these kinds of ideas are being considered by the United Nations as part of the initiative to mark diamonds in order to counter the sale of conflict diamonds. In contrast to comics, there is an urgent political need to address this problem that is more important than diamond buyers' reluctance to have invisible stamps on their jewelry.

[nearmint]

Invisible stamps are so unsightly.

[Cat-Man_America]

Invisible stamps are so unsightly.

 

[Silver Surfer]

I don't like invisible stamps because 20 years later and 6 resubs its going to be a mess.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

I don't like invisible stamps because 20 years later and 6 resubs its going to be a mess.

 

Why? If a barcode designation exists, there is no reason to stamp the book again.

 

Instead, they'll be a detailed history associated with that particular barcode available for whoever the owner is 20 years, and 6 resubs later.

 

Of course, the business of swapping out centerfolds or wraps to be rid of existing barcodes and to muddy the history of a particular book will then take hold. CGC seems to already give many blue labels to disassembled/reassembled books, they would have to better perfect this part of their restoration detection service in order for it to work. There will ALWAYS be someone out there ready to game the system.

 

 

[Silver Surfer]

I don't like invisible stamps because 20 years later and 6 resubs its going to be a mess.

 

Why? If a barcode designation exists, there is no reason to stamp the book again.

 

Instead, they'll be a detailed history associated with that particular barcode available for whoever the owner is 20 years, and 6 resubs later.

 

Of course, the business of swapping out centerfolds or wraps to be rid of existing barcodes and to muddy the history of a particular book will then take hold. CGC seems to already give many blue labels to disassembled/reassembled books, they would have to better perfect this part of their restoration detection service in order for it to work. There will ALWAYS be someone out there ready to game the system.

 

 

Yeah I never thought of that. I guess that would be an easy solution provided that they stick to the same process. Still something tells me holder of $200k+, $1M+ books would against this.

[Cat-Man_America]

Actually, there might be a simple, cost effective solution to improving the census tally that insures every future book graded or resubmitted would be recognized.

 

It involves placing a very small invisible ink stamp on the back cover of every CGC graded book that would fluoresce under a black light. Something like this (see the stamp, half way down) only much smaller...

 

http://www.fake-proof.com/

 

Each time a book was resubmitted it would receive a small ink stamp that would fluoresce a different color.

 

First, of course, any questions about marking valuable comics with invisible ink would need to be addressed, but if these issues are resolvable I foresee secondary advantages to improving the census, such as the ability to track valuable books that are stolen, cracked out and resold, etc.

 

The link above is just a site I quickly researched while considering this idea; other sites which discuss watermarking valuables with invisible ink may go into greater detail and discuss the pros and cons. It does seem like an interesting idea though.

 

Opinions?

 

I think if you do a search, it's been brought up before, and suggestions were also made that the mark be on the centerfold.

 

I like it because of the theft aspect,but I'm wondering how people who love very high grade books would feel OR people who want to press books and not disclose the fact that they were pressed..

 

Thanks Sha. The search functions on this site are difficult, at least for me.

 

I'm not at all surprised that I'm not the first person to bring up this topic, but this seems like a good idea and the right time and place to revisit it.

 

It has indeed been discussed here, but a lot of people went ballistic at the idea of even a microdot of invisible ink being put on their comics.

 

I think you both may have hit upon the biggest concern of folks who are steadfast in their vocal dissent ...barring any documented problems arising from the application of a minuscule amount of invisible fluorescing ink.

 

It really shouldn't be an issue if a small invisible ink stamp is safe for the comics. OTOH, if disclosure is the concern then one has to factor in profit motivation. Is the real issue the invisible ink or deceiving potential customers about a CGC grade bump?

 

Personally, I'm not opposed to the idea of resubmitting books to get second and third opinions, perhaps from other graders for whatever reason, but full disclosure should be priority #1.

 

 

 

 

 

[Cat-Man_America]

I don't like invisible stamps because 20 years later and 6 resubs its going to be a mess.

 

Oh the horror! My comic might look like a vintage steamer trunk under a black light!

[Cat-Man_America]

I don't like invisible stamps because 20 years later and 6 resubs its going to be a mess.

 

Why? If a barcode designation exists, there is no reason to stamp the book again.

 

Instead, they'll be a detailed history associated with that particular barcode available for whoever the owner is 20 years, and 6 resubs later.

 

Of course, the business of swapping out centerfolds or wraps to be rid of existing barcodes and to muddy the history of a particular book will then take hold. CGC seems to already give many blue labels to disassembled/reassembled books, they would have to better perfect this part of their restoration detection service in order for it to work. There will ALWAYS be someone out there ready to game the system.

 

 

Yeah I never thought of that. I guess that would be an easy solution provided that they stick to the same process. Still something tells me holder of $200k+, $1M+ books would against this.

 

That's where the tracking security aspect is an inducement. (thumbs u

[Matt Nelson]

CGC themselves recognizes that fact and have issued a legal disclaimer for same which reads:

 

Notices regarding CGC’s Census Report

 

The utilization of this report as a tool for assessing the population and value of certified comic books in any character or grade is unreliable. The following characteristics inherent in the marketplace undermine the accuracy of this report:

• Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not Inexpensive comics, which are not generally submitted for certification, may appear scarce but are not
   
  
• Comic certification services are predominantly utilized for higher-grade comics
   
  
• Certified comic books are often removed from their holders without notifying the grading service; therefore, computer tallies utilized to provide population reports may be misleading
   
  
• Rarity is only one factor that must be weighed in determining the market value of a comic book

CGC encourages all collectors to seek the counsel of qualified professionals familiar with the certified comics marketplace before making any purchase based on this report.

 

 

While I agree with you that the Census may be inaccurate and it`s disgraceful that people like Matt, who should know better, don`t seem to care about its accuracy except when it suits them, I wouldn`t read too much into the disclaimer as anything other than fear of legal liability. If I were their lawyer, I`d advise them to put in that kind of disclaimer even if the Census were 99.9% accurate.

 

How did you come to the conclusion that I don't care about the consistency of the census report from my post?