Why has a better grading system never been introduced ?

[PovertyRow]

 

Some of us that consider ourselves "historians" actually prefer neat and unobtrusive date stamps. It tells you when a book was actually on the stands and for sale. Publishers would try to get more shelf life for their books by the cover date being months later than the distribution date. Annuals often only listed the year

 

For instance, it is the arrival dates that tell us that Strange Tales annual #2 is the fourth appearance of Spider-Man.

 

 

 

I fully endorse this. In my heyday (hey! hey!) of collecting pre-cdoe horror/crime and sci-fi and Pre-hero Marvels, given a coice between two books in the same "grade", one with and one without a date stamp, I would always go for the date stamp. It was, in addition to a being a bit of historical documentation, also a tiny "time capsule" that conjured images of newsstands, supermarkets and spinner racks. (thumbs u

[koollectablz]

Yeah, I follow that thinking.

 

But if you're that concerned with a date stamp, there's nothing to stop you or anyone else years later adding your own. Yeah I know it wasn't done period - but honestly so what, there's no difference if you didn't know?

 

If you put together a great run of same period comics and wanted to add value via a pedigree designation the easiest way would be to write a name/date stamp on the cover and say 'ooooo look, OO owner collection, you can tell by the added writing....'.

 

CGC is actually rewarding defacement of covers when you really think about it.

 

Everyone right now as they buy their newsstand fresh comics really needs to be adding their name and date to the covers for future value.

 

In fact, who's to say that this tactic hasn't already been done?

 

I guess I and cgc will just never agree that it's a flaw. So be it.

 

Just like cgc thinks its ok for Church copies to have CT or glue and not have it counted as restoration.

 

Don't like the fact that it's a fudge really.

[PovertyRow]

Yeah, I follow that thinking.

 

But if you're that concerned with a date stamp, there's nothing to stop you or anyone else years later adding your own. Yeah I know it wasn't done period - but honestly so what, there's no difference if you didn't know?

 

If you put together a great run of same period comics and wanted to add value via a pedigree designation the easiest way would be to write a name/date stamp on the cover and say 'ooooo look, OO owner collection, you can tell by the added writing....'.

 

CGC is actually rewarding defacement of covers when you really think about it.

 

Everyone right now as they buy their newsstand fresh comics really needs to be adding their name and date to the covers for future value.

 

In fact, who's to say that this tactic hasn't already been done?

 

I guess I and cgc will just never agree that it's a flaw. So be it.

 

Just like cgc thinks its ok for Church copies to have CT or glue and not have it counted as restoration.

 

Don't like the fact that it's a fudge really.

 

A pedigree = provenance. In every collectible area I know of, provenance can increase value, just as the provenance associated with the Church, etc. pedigrees help increase their value. Provenance is a fact in collecting.

 

Is it possible to fake a pedigree? Probably, but there are VERY knowledgeable people who can spot most forgeries. It is no where near as simple as just writing an initial etc.

[Tony S]

Yeah, I follow that thinking.

 

But if you're that concerned with a date stamp, there's nothing to stop you or anyone else years later adding your own. Yeah I know it wasn't done period - but honestly so what, there's no difference if you didn't know?

 

If you put together a great run of same period comics and wanted to add value via a pedigree designation the easiest way would be to write a name/date stamp on the cover and say 'ooooo look, OO owner collection, you can tell by the added writing....'.

 

CGC is actually rewarding defacement of covers when you really think about it.

 

Everyone right now as they buy their newsstand fresh comics really needs to be adding their name and date to the covers for future value.

 

In fact, who's to say that this tactic hasn't already been done?

 

I guess I and cgc will just never agree that it's a flaw. So be it.

 

Just like cgc thinks its ok for Church copies to have CT or glue and not have it counted as restoration.

 

Don't like the fact that it's a fudge really.

 

A pedigree = provenance. In every collectible area I know of, provenance can increase value, just as the provenance associated with the Church, etc. pedigrees help increase their value. Provenance is a fact in collecting.

 

Is it possible to fake a pedigree? Probably, but there are VERY knowledgeable people who can spot most forgeries. It is no where near as simple as just writing an initial etc.

 

If someone more familiar with CGC wants to jump in, please do. But I'm pretty certain that in order to have a book designated a pedigree by CGC you have to establish the provenance by previous owners - who you bought it from and when - not just by codes written on the books.

 

Most pedigrees have no special markings or codes.

[PovertyRow]

Yeah, I follow that thinking.

 

But if you're that concerned with a date stamp, there's nothing to stop you or anyone else years later adding your own. Yeah I know it wasn't done period - but honestly so what, there's no difference if you didn't know?

 

If you put together a great run of same period comics and wanted to add value via a pedigree designation the easiest way would be to write a name/date stamp on the cover and say 'ooooo look, OO owner collection, you can tell by the added writing....'.

 

CGC is actually rewarding defacement of covers when you really think about it.

 

Everyone right now as they buy their newsstand fresh comics really needs to be adding their name and date to the covers for future value.

 

In fact, who's to say that this tactic hasn't already been done?

 

I guess I and cgc will just never agree that it's a flaw. So be it.

 

Just like cgc thinks its ok for Church copies to have CT or glue and not have it counted as restoration.

 

Don't like the fact that it's a fudge really.

 

A pedigree = provenance. In every collectible area I know of, provenance can increase value, just as the provenance associated with the Church, etc. pedigrees help increase their value. Provenance is a fact in collecting.

 

Is it possible to fake a pedigree? Probably, but there are VERY knowledgeable people who can spot most forgeries. It is no where near as simple as just writing an initial etc.

 

If someone more familiar with CGC wants to jump in, please do. But I'm pretty certain that in order to have a book designated a pedigree by CGC you have to establish the provenance by previous owners - who you bought it from and when - not just by codes written on the books.

 

Most pedigrees have no special markings or codes.

 

That is correct as far as I know. In the other collectible worlds, a large part of provenance is tracking back through previous owners.

[koollectablz]

Missing the point.

 

I'm not saying fake a pedigree already known, just that if you want to establish a pedigree for the future that's the easiest way to do it.

 

Stick some kind of unique defacement on it!

 

That's exactly what's happened to the biggest pedigree of all.

 

In fact being totally dispassionate about it and taking the long term view - what's the best way to ensure a pedigreed collection? Buy up all the very best copies of comics you can, all raw. Give em a finite time period or summat, maybe a 10 year span, say 1965-1975 concentrating on some superhero goodness.

 

Then add your unique defacement. A surname or code or whatever, then store them all in a big cedar chest for about 10-15 years to give em a uniform smell and to promote some natural 'pressing'.

 

Then bingo! New OO collection surfaces! Hobbyists rejoice, CGC count the grading fees and laugh all the way to the bank.

 

I mean, it's already happened. The church copy of Tec #27 wasn't OO was it, plus plenty of others in the same boat, yet they are all designated Chruch pedigreed status.

 

Course the same thing will happen again, all you have to take into account is the timescale.

 

That's why I think any writing on a comic should be down graded not actively rewarded. It's a defect.

[Tony S]

Missing the point.

 

I'm not saying fake a pedigree already known, just that if you want to establish a pedigree for the future that's the easiest way to do it.

 

Stick some kind of unique defacement on it!

 

That's exactly what's happened to the biggest pedigree of all.

 

In fact being totally dispassionate about it and taking the long term view - what's the best way to ensure a pedigreed collection? Buy up all the very best copies of comics you can, all raw. Give em a finite time period or summat, maybe a 10 year span, say 1965-1975 concentrating on some superhero goodness.

 

Then add your unique defacement. A surname or code or whatever, then store them all in a big cedar chest for about 10-15 years to give em a uniform smell and to promote some natural 'pressing'.

 

Then bingo! New OO collection surfaces! Hobbyists rejoice, CGC count the grading fees and laugh all the way to the bank.

 

I mean, it's already happened. The church copy of Tec #27 wasn't OO was it, plus plenty of others in the same boat, yet they are all designated Chruch pedigreed status.

 

Course the same thing will happen again, all you have to take into account is the timescale.

 

That's why I think any writing on a comic should be down graded not actively rewarded. It's a defect.

 

I understand what you are saying. But consider this:

 

"Modern" pedigrees are going to be rare to non-existent. There are very few pedigrees for late Bronze age and later books. CGC doesn't recognize such pedigrees becaise high grade, original owner copies of books published the last 35 years are not rare. Writing on books published the last 35 years is a defect, because collecting comics was an established hobby and collectors knew better.

 

Again, lots of recognized pedigrees have no writing what so ever. Their provenance is established by previous ownership. But I'd be glad to buy up Mile High copies on the cheap if anyone is put off by the writing on the cover

[mackenzie999]

my very fine is diferent from your very fine is different from his very fine.

 

I suggest you adopt your system, promote it as best you can, and let us know how that goes. If it has true merit and is can be utilized in a practical way, then perhaps the collecting community will embrace it. Personally, I find Overstreet is enough of a common ground to be in the same ballpark as other collectors, and the HG guys all seem pretty confident about which books are 9.6 and which books are 9.8, so I don't really think a new standard is necessary, but hey you never know. You seem to feel strongly about this, go for it.

 

 

[koollectablz]

Yup agreed.

 

The problem I have is with them not treating all comics equally. Can kinda understand the GA bump and maybe even letting Church restored copies come in blue label (if they hadn't let this happen then maybe CGC wouldn't exist in the same fashion as now? - obv a purely pragmatic money driven decision), but the playing field HAS been set poorly, comics over a certain age can have writing thats not considered a defect but then we punish newer ones with exactly the same defect?

 

At some point in time all modern comics now will be decades old just like all the GA at the minute.

 

And I don't hold with the 'it's the way it is so we can't change it now' argument. At some point in time all graded comics will either come back to CGC to be regraded or go onto another company to be graded anew, at that point all restoration (church or not) should be noted as a defect and all writing and dist stains too. JMHO.

 

If CGC is an apple then unfortunately the GA core is somewhat rotten.

[PovertyRow]

the playing field HAS been set poorly, comics over a certain age can have writing thats not considered a defect but then we punish newer ones with exactly the same defect?

 

At some point in time all modern comics now will be decades old just like all the GA at the minute.

 

Those statements are kind of revealing as far as your perception of collecting goes.

 

There is absolutely no way a modern book will, even decades from now, EVER be "just like all GA". It is a ridiculous assertion.

 

Comic book collecting as we know it didn't even start until the 60s. Before that it was a much smaller, dedicated group who were not near concerned about "grades" as most now are. And in the GA itself? Comic book collecting barely existed at all. just reading and trading but not much actual collecting. (BTW - This is one reason why the provenance of the older collections is so important. That someone would consistently buy issues off the shelf and preserve them? Unheard of.)

 

Starting in the 60s some people started buying multiple copies to preserve. In the 70s more did and by the 80s it was rampant. Because of that high grade moderns are common, while high grade GA are uncommon.

 

It sounds like the reasoning I hear on home shopping channels when they sell the new coins, especially things like the silver dollars the mint produces. To paraphrase: "Now think about this, folks. We are offering Mint State 69" for only $300. A Mint state 69 Morgan or Peace dollar could fetch hundreds of thousands of dollars or more. But now YOU have the chance to get this kind of potential for ONLY $300!!!"

 

Total and complete rubbish.

 

And the rules by collectors in the old days of collecting, when books had 3 grades and were often advertised as "all books are Good to Mint", were very different. Scotch tape was often used and accepted to reinforce books. As was a little glue. These are factors CGC took into consideration when they were first being formed and Steve B was the man there.

 

PS - I always disagreed about the scotch tape and glue aspect, but because non-archival (which they were) tape and glue can be destructive.

[mackenzie999]

...comics over a certain age can have writing thats not considered a defect but then we punish newer ones with exactly the same defect?

 

I've often felt that because of the disparity over what is and isn't considered acceptable...stamps, writing, resto, etc, all have their opponents and proponents...I've felt that CGC slabs should come in one color, the numbered grade should reflect only the physical structure of the book, and anything else (stamps, etc) should simply be listed on the label. That way purple labels aren't stigmatized as much...you can still hate resto all you want, but those that choose to include resto books in their collections, for whatever reasons, can still have a Tec 27 that fits in with the rest of their collection, without having the label stick out like a sore thumb. Those that deal in resto books can probably move them easier as well...no one is being deceived (assuming they can and do read labels). Universal would finally mean universal.

 

I'm a graphic designer by trade, studied typography in London under one of the best designers in the world, and I would looooove to redesign the CGC slab label. It will never happen, but man I could make it so much better.