Does it do any good to grade too conservatively?

[Dr. Balls]

I usually overgrade the books I want to keep. When I decide to sell, I regrade a little more realistically. Does that make sense?

[RedGiant]

if you are going to be selling said books, and grade too conservatively, in the long run you will probably build up quite the customer base.

+1

 

Here's an interesting example of this on ebay - cheme78 sells raw books from his personal collection - "read once, then stored" - I've never bought from him (because I ALWAYS get outbid) - but from his scans and feedback his 'NM' is clearly NM (or higher) - most books being 9.6/9.8 in my estimation. I am currently putting together a Miller DD run in 9.6 - figured, maybe I could buy some of his books, slab them and save a few books - don't think so! Most of his DDs in 'NM' sell for more than slabbed 9.6s. Recently sold 160, 161, 163, 164, 165, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, AND 175 for $70 each give or take a few bucks. Even more interesting, the 170 sold for $76.88 without a front cover scan (only back cover) - that book slabbed a 9.6 is only a $35 book according to GPA! Insane - reminds me of the early days of CGC when HG Miller DDs were going for INSANE prices.

[comix4fun]

There are certain sellers, like FlamingTelepath, that I would buy their books without even needing a scan.

 

Nick is always right on or slightly under grade on his books. It's an easy call and when you do it for a while customers will trust you and word will spread.

 

With other sellers who over grade or loosely grade, even with a big scan and a nice discount, I will be reluctant to buy. A 50% discount is no discount at all if they missed the grade by a couple of points.

[cd4ever]

I look at a number of CGC books in our own sales threads and I am struck by the number of books that don't match my developing understanding of the grades.

 

I have been recently regrading my books and, in effect, degrading my books as I find bends, stress lines and divots I had never noticed before.

 

I have been using a couple of dozen books that I have cracked open to serve as examples ranging from 6.5 to 9.2. These were all slabs from three to five years ago.

 

I am pretty secure that my assessments are backed by the evidence of the books that I have cracked out -- but does it do me any good to use older slabs as a resource when I can witness current books (e.g., books described as just back from the CGC) whose condition tells me that I am being way too conservative in grading?

 

Just feeling grumpy.

 

I crack a lot of books, and CGC is a crapshoot...., unless your actually cracking books out to see them outside the slab, you'll never know what the actual grade is......., in your system.

 

Another problem that I've recently started to realize is that different scanners and scanning techniques GREATLY ACCENTUATE FLAWS, or create flaws that aren't there, just as some scanners and scanning techniques hide flaws.

 

I remember looking at this book that the seller said was 9.2/9.4 and I was saying, 'really nice but 9.0 tops.' I even PM'd other boardies for their opinions - 9.0 tops..., some were less. I couldn't leave it alone and eventually bought the book after I beat the seller down in price to a reasonable 9.0 level. When I got the book and got a chance to look at it in hand....., solid 9.2/9.2+.

 

Score!

[sterlingcomics]

I think I've started to conform my grading to the way CGC grades.

 

So, you grade inconsistently.

It's a lofty goal, but we all strive to achieve it

[Junkdrawer]

I look at a number of CGC books in our own sales threads and I am struck by the number of books that don't match my developing understanding of the grades.

 

I have been recently regrading my books and, in effect, degrading my books as I find bends, stress lines and divots I had never noticed before.

 

I have been using a couple of dozen books that I have cracked open to serve as examples ranging from 6.5 to 9.2. These were all slabs from three to five years ago.

 

I am pretty secure that my assessments are backed by the evidence of the books that I have cracked out -- but does it do me any good to use older slabs as a resource when I can witness current books (e.g., books described as just back from the CGC) whose condition tells me that I am being way too conservative in grading?

 

Just feeling grumpy.

If it was ever possible to take every, lets say Daredevil #1 that CGC has graded 7.0, cracked them all and resubbed as is. I think you would be shocked at the results up and down. Grading a single book on the spot can be just as tricky as grading a whole collection. When I grade a collection, I am always comparing and shifting books up and down as I scrutinize. I think I grade better when grading a larger quantity of books.

[jimjum12]

I look at a number of CGC books in our own sales threads and I am struck by the number of books that don't match my developing understanding of the grades.

 

I have been recently regrading my books and, in effect, degrading my books as I find bends, stress lines and divots I had never noticed before.

 

I have been using a couple of dozen books that I have cracked open to serve as examples ranging from 6.5 to 9.2. These were all slabs from three to five years ago.

 

I am pretty secure that my assessments are backed by the evidence of the books that I have cracked out -- but does it do me any good to use older slabs as a resource when I can witness current books (e.g., books described as just back from the CGC) whose condition tells me that I am being way too conservative in grading?

 

Just feeling grumpy.

If it was ever possible to take every, lets say Daredevil #1 that CGC has graded 7.0, cracked them all and resubbed as is. I think you would be shocked at the results up and down. Grading a single book on the spot can be just as tricky as grading a whole collection. When I grade a collection, I am always comparing and shifting books up and down as I scrutinize. I think I grade better when grading a larger quantity of books.

 

.....it doesn't take a pro to grade a NM book.....but those 7.0's, that's another story. I still take PQ into the equation.....not everyone does. GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u