PGX Question

[Balham's Finest]

I particularly like the conflation of "unfair" and "unethical".

[reddwarf666222]

no, that is not the one incident I am talking about. Go the Silver Age forum and the X-men #1 Club thread. There is a member there that bought an old raw X-men #1 book with Stan Sig on it. He sub it for Sig last year where Stan traced/signed over the old sig and he got the yellow label.

 

Don't know if you are referring to my book, but my book was done like this. I was advised to do it like this as a FF #1 and a TOS #39 were done the same way. All three books came from the same OO collection. All were signed by Stan over 30 years ago.

 

I am pretty sure they knocked the grade for the "writing" (old signature and date) on the cover. But I still got the yellow label, because Stan did sign it in a facilitators presence.

 

Last Con I was at, a guy came up to the cgc booth while I was submitting with a stack of signed books and asked to submit them SS. He was told they needed to be witnessed. He asked can they go back with him and either have the artist re-sign over them or tell them that he did sign it, and he was told flat out No. Not saying it hasn't happened before or will in the future. Just sharing an experience.

I witnessed a guy right in front of me go up to George Perez with a stack of books at a con including one with a signature already over it and he asked George to go over his old signature and he did. There were so many books GP was signing the witness was not paying attention after that I asked GP about it when GP was doing a sketch for me he said it was unethical CGC's sig series because you have older comics signed by artists and writers before the CGC was around and its unfair to the fan that I just can't look at a comic and say that is my sig or in some cases the sketch and say that is my sketch. I bumped into that guy later at my LCS and he got the yellow label and said he has been using this practice for years at the con to get yellow labels on comics because the witnesses are either too far away when witnessing the signature or just not really paying attention. He said he learned the practice after seeing another guy do it at a con and get away with it.

 

Sounds believable.

 

 

I really hope I end up with this guy the next time I'm CAW'ing for CGC - it will be my utmost pleasure to tell CGC what he's up to and ensure that every single book he submits comes back a GLOD.

I have not done the practice. I am just saying I have witnessed it done and the circumstances in which the person got away with it. You just don't like someone has found loopholes in CGC's practices and making them look bad. You accuse me of being someone I am not. It is unfortunate situation I described above, but it does happen.

[mschmidt]

no, that is not the one incident I am talking about. Go the Silver Age forum and the X-men #1 Club thread. There is a member there that bought an old raw X-men #1 book with Stan Sig on it. He sub it for Sig last year where Stan traced/signed over the old sig and he got the yellow label.

 

Don't know if you are referring to my book, but my book was done like this. I was advised to do it like this as a FF #1 and a TOS #39 were done the same way. All three books came from the same OO collection. All were signed by Stan over 30 years ago.

 

I am pretty sure they knocked the grade for the "writing" (old signature and date) on the cover. But I still got the yellow label, because Stan did sign it in a facilitators presence.

 

Last Con I was at, a guy came up to the cgc booth while I was submitting with a stack of signed books and asked to submit them SS. He was told they needed to be witnessed. He asked can they go back with him and either have the artist re-sign over them or tell them that he did sign it, and he was told flat out No. Not saying it hasn't happened before or will in the future. Just sharing an experience.

I witnessed a guy right in front of me go up to George Perez with a stack of books at a con including one with a signature already over it and he asked George to go over his old signature and he did. There were so many books GP was signing the witness was not paying attention after that I asked GP about it when GP was doing a sketch for me he said it was unethical CGC's sig series because you have older comics signed by artists and writers before the CGC was around and its unfair to the fan that I just can't look at a comic and say that is my sig or in some cases the sketch and say that is my sketch. I bumped into that guy later at my LCS and he got the yellow label and said he has been using this practice for years at the con to get yellow labels on comics because the witnesses are either too far away when witnessing the signature or just not really paying attention. He said he learned the practice after seeing another guy do it at a con and get away with it.

 

Sounds believable.

 

 

I really hope I end up with this guy the next time I'm CAW'ing for CGC - it will be my utmost pleasure to tell CGC what he's up to and ensure that every single book he submits comes back a GLOD.

I have not done the practice. I am just saying I have witnessed it done and the circumstances in which the person got away with it. You just don't like someone has found loopholes in CGC's practices and making them look bad. You accuse me of being someone I am not. It is unfortunate situation I described above, but it does happen.

 

Of course, I don't. It's douchebags like that who makes it harder for the rest of us - you know, the people that actually abide by the SS rules. Let me guess ... you're the kind of guy who, when a cashier hands you back incorrect change, doesn't say a word and walks away silently congratulating yourself for "sticking it to the man", right?

 

Feel free to keep on pretending you're not a shill - I'm sure it's going to start being convincing any day now

[Balham's Finest]

no, that is not the one incident I am talking about. Go the Silver Age forum and the X-men #1 Club thread. There is a member there that bought an old raw X-men #1 book with Stan Sig on it. He sub it for Sig last year where Stan traced/signed over the old sig and he got the yellow label.

 

Don't know if you are referring to my book, but my book was done like this. I was advised to do it like this as a FF #1 and a TOS #39 were done the same way. All three books came from the same OO collection. All were signed by Stan over 30 years ago.

 

I am pretty sure they knocked the grade for the "writing" (old signature and date) on the cover. But I still got the yellow label, because Stan did sign it in a facilitators presence.

 

Last Con I was at, a guy came up to the cgc booth while I was submitting with a stack of signed books and asked to submit them SS. He was told they needed to be witnessed. He asked can they go back with him and either have the artist re-sign over them or tell them that he did sign it, and he was told flat out No. Not saying it hasn't happened before or will in the future. Just sharing an experience.

I witnessed a guy right in front of me go up to George Perez with a stack of books at a con including one with a signature already over it and he asked George to go over his old signature and he did. There were so many books GP was signing the witness was not paying attention after that I asked GP about it when GP was doing a sketch for me he said it was unethical CGC's sig series because you have older comics signed by artists and writers before the CGC was around and its unfair to the fan that I just can't look at a comic and say that is my sig or in some cases the sketch and say that is my sketch. I bumped into that guy later at my LCS and he got the yellow label and said he has been using this practice for years at the con to get yellow labels on comics because the witnesses are either too far away when witnessing the signature or just not really paying attention. He said he learned the practice after seeing another guy do it at a con and get away with it.

 

Sounds believable.

 

 

I really hope I end up with this guy the next time I'm CAW'ing for CGC - it will be my utmost pleasure to tell CGC what he's up to and ensure that every single book he submits comes back a GLOD.

I have not done the practice. I am just saying I have witnessed it done and the circumstances in which the person got away with it. You just don't like someone has found loopholes in CGC's practices and making them look bad. You accuse me of being someone I am not. It is unfortunate situation I described above, but it does happen.

 

Tony, what is your point? I don't think that anybody is saying that CGC are absolutely flawless. They are not criminal though. PGX have engaged in fraudulent activity in the past - intentional fraudulent activity. This is what people have a problem with, and pointing out that it's possible, in certain crazy circumstances, to circumvent CGC's rules does nothing to change that.

 

It's nothing to do with "liking" or "not liking" what you are saying about CGC. At the end of the day, if you want to use PGX, go for it. Nobody is going to stop you, but they are going to disagree with you and chastise you for it (on these boards, anyway).

[reddwarf666222]

no, that is not the one incident I am talking about. Go the Silver Age forum and the X-men #1 Club thread. There is a member there that bought an old raw X-men #1 book with Stan Sig on it. He sub it for Sig last year where Stan traced/signed over the old sig and he got the yellow label.

 

Don't know if you are referring to my book, but my book was done like this. I was advised to do it like this as a FF #1 and a TOS #39 were done the same way. All three books came from the same OO collection. All were signed by Stan over 30 years ago.

 

I am pretty sure they knocked the grade for the "writing" (old signature and date) on the cover. But I still got the yellow label, because Stan did sign it in a facilitators presence.

 

Last Con I was at, a guy came up to the cgc booth while I was submitting with a stack of signed books and asked to submit them SS. He was told they needed to be witnessed. He asked can they go back with him and either have the artist re-sign over them or tell them that he did sign it, and he was told flat out No. Not saying it hasn't happened before or will in the future. Just sharing an experience.

I witnessed a guy right in front of me go up to George Perez with a stack of books at a con including one with a signature already over it and he asked George to go over his old signature and he did. There were so many books GP was signing the witness was not paying attention after that I asked GP about it when GP was doing a sketch for me he said it was unethical CGC's sig series because you have older comics signed by artists and writers before the CGC was around and its unfair to the fan that I just can't look at a comic and say that is my sig or in some cases the sketch and say that is my sketch. I bumped into that guy later at my LCS and he got the yellow label and said he has been using this practice for years at the con to get yellow labels on comics because the witnesses are either too far away when witnessing the signature or just not really paying attention. He said he learned the practice after seeing another guy do it at a con and get away with it.

 

Sounds believable.

 

 

I really hope I end up with this guy the next time I'm CAW'ing for CGC - it will be my utmost pleasure to tell CGC what he's up to and ensure that every single book he submits comes back a GLOD.

I have not done the practice. I am just saying I have witnessed it done and the circumstances in which the person got away with it. You just don't like someone has found loopholes in CGC's practices and making them look bad. You accuse me of being someone I am not. It is unfortunate situation I described above, but it does happen.

 

Tony, what is your point? I don't think that anybody is saying that CGC are absolutely flawless. They are not criminal though. PGX have engaged in fraudulent activity in the past - intentional fraudulent activity. This is what people have a problem with, and pointing out that it's possible, in certain crazy circumstances, to circumvent CGC's rules does nothing to change that.

 

It's nothing to do with "liking" or "not liking" what you are saying about CGC. At the end of the day, if you want to use PGX, go for it. Nobody is going to stop you, but they are going to disagree with you and chastise you for it (on these boards, anyway).

Point is I just pointed out a situation in which CGC's practices are shady at times, but people like MSchmidt can't admit it. As far as PGX most people are referring to incidents 6 years back. If your going attack them bring up issues within the last two years that they did that is relevant. If your looking to have something SS use CGC, looking to have a key graded use CGC, but a book that holds little to no value and you just want protection use PGX for that book.

[chunkybutt]

no, that is not the one incident I am talking about. Go the Silver Age forum and the X-men #1 Club thread. There is a member there that bought an old raw X-men #1 book with Stan Sig on it. He sub it for Sig last year where Stan traced/signed over the old sig and he got the yellow label.

 

Don't know if you are referring to my book, but my book was done like this. I was advised to do it like this as a FF #1 and a TOS #39 were done the same way. All three books came from the same OO collection. All were signed by Stan over 30 years ago.

 

I am pretty sure they knocked the grade for the "writing" (old signature and date) on the cover. But I still got the yellow label, because Stan did sign it in a facilitators presence.

 

This X-Men #1 of yours - does it say "name written on cover" (or something similar) on the label?

 

If that's the case, then CGC treated it like they would treat any other book with an unverified signature on the front cover - the unverified sig was treated as a defect when you subbed the book for SS.

 

The fact that Stan Lee "traced" over his old signature means nothing - the book would have come back with the same grade no matter whether he wrote his name.

 

One last thing: there's no chance whatsoever any CGC employee would tell you that it's ok to have an artist trace over their signature on the cover. I don't know who told you that, but it wasn't CGC :thumbsup:

 

No, there is no notation on the label. I am assuming it is because you cannot see the old signature. All you can see is the traced sig and the old date of '76.

 

I did not assume they docked the grade for him tracing, I assumed they docked the grade for the '76 written on the cover. Because we all know CGC does not dock for signatures.

 

I never implied that a CGC employee told me it was okay to have an artist trace over their signature. All I said was that I was advised to do it this way because 2 other books from same collection that were signed on the same day in 1976 had been done like this and received a yellow label.

[mschmidt]

no, that is not the one incident I am talking about. Go the Silver Age forum and the X-men #1 Club thread. There is a member there that bought an old raw X-men #1 book with Stan Sig on it. He sub it for Sig last year where Stan traced/signed over the old sig and he got the yellow label.

 

Don't know if you are referring to my book, but my book was done like this. I was advised to do it like this as a FF #1 and a TOS #39 were done the same way. All three books came from the same OO collection. All were signed by Stan over 30 years ago.

 

I am pretty sure they knocked the grade for the "writing" (old signature and date) on the cover. But I still got the yellow label, because Stan did sign it in a facilitators presence.

 

Last Con I was at, a guy came up to the cgc booth while I was submitting with a stack of signed books and asked to submit them SS. He was told they needed to be witnessed. He asked can they go back with him and either have the artist re-sign over them or tell them that he did sign it, and he was told flat out No. Not saying it hasn't happened before or will in the future. Just sharing an experience.

I witnessed a guy right in front of me go up to George Perez with a stack of books at a con including one with a signature already over it and he asked George to go over his old signature and he did. There were so many books GP was signing the witness was not paying attention after that I asked GP about it when GP was doing a sketch for me he said it was unethical CGC's sig series because you have older comics signed by artists and writers before the CGC was around and its unfair to the fan that I just can't look at a comic and say that is my sig or in some cases the sketch and say that is my sketch. I bumped into that guy later at my LCS and he got the yellow label and said he has been using this practice for years at the con to get yellow labels on comics because the witnesses are either too far away when witnessing the signature or just not really paying attention. He said he learned the practice after seeing another guy do it at a con and get away with it.

 

Sounds believable.

 

 

I really hope I end up with this guy the next time I'm CAW'ing for CGC - it will be my utmost pleasure to tell CGC what he's up to and ensure that every single book he submits comes back a GLOD.

I have not done the practice. I am just saying I have witnessed it done and the circumstances in which the person got away with it. You just don't like someone has found loopholes in CGC's practices and making them look bad. You accuse me of being someone I am not. It is unfortunate situation I described above, but it does happen.

 

Tony, what is your point? I don't think that anybody is saying that CGC are absolutely flawless. They are not criminal though. PGX have engaged in fraudulent activity in the past - intentional fraudulent activity. This is what people have a problem with, and pointing out that it's possible, in certain crazy circumstances, to circumvent CGC's rules does nothing to change that.

 

It's nothing to do with "liking" or "not liking" what you are saying about CGC. At the end of the day, if you want to use PGX, go for it. Nobody is going to stop you, but they are going to disagree with you and chastise you for it (on these boards, anyway).

Point is I just pointed out a situation in which CGC's practices are shady at times, but people like MSchmidt can't admit it. As far as PGX most people are referring to incidents 6 years back. If your going attack them bring up issues within the last two years that they did that is relevant. If your looking to have something SS use CGC, looking to have a key graded use CGC, but a book that holds little to no value and you just want protection use PGX for that book.

 

In what universe does somebody trying to circumvent the CGC SS rules translate to "CGC's practices are shady", TFL?

[mschmidt]

no, that is not the one incident I am talking about. Go the Silver Age forum and the X-men #1 Club thread. There is a member there that bought an old raw X-men #1 book with Stan Sig on it. He sub it for Sig last year where Stan traced/signed over the old sig and he got the yellow label.

 

Don't know if you are referring to my book, but my book was done like this. I was advised to do it like this as a FF #1 and a TOS #39 were done the same way. All three books came from the same OO collection. All were signed by Stan over 30 years ago.

 

I am pretty sure they knocked the grade for the "writing" (old signature and date) on the cover. But I still got the yellow label, because Stan did sign it in a facilitators presence.

 

This X-Men #1 of yours - does it say "name written on cover" (or something similar) on the label?

 

If that's the case, then CGC treated it like they would treat any other book with an unverified signature on the front cover - the unverified sig was treated as a defect when you subbed the book for SS.

 

The fact that Stan Lee "traced" over his old signature means nothing - the book would have come back with the same grade no matter whether he wrote his name.

 

One last thing: there's no chance whatsoever any CGC employee would tell you that it's ok to have an artist trace over their signature on the cover. I don't know who told you that, but it wasn't CGC :thumbsup:

 

No, there is no notation on the cover. I am assuming it is because you cannot see the old signature. All you can see is the traced sig and the old date of '76.

 

I did not assume they docked the grade for him tracing, I assumed they docked the grade for the '76 written on the cover. Because we all know CGC does not dock for signatures.

 

I never implied that a CGC employee told me it was okay to have an artist trace over their signature. All I said was that I was advised to do it this way because 2 other books from same collection that were signed on the same day in 1976 had been done like this and received a yellow label.

 

You posted this in the X-Men #1 thread:

 

They gave me a hard time about it and would not let Stan trace the " '76" so they docked me I think for having a date on the cover.

Non-the-less I was pelased

 

So who gave you a hard time about this and can we see a picture of your book, please? You do realize that what you did is totally against the SS rules, right?

[HugeRosen]

Point is I just pointed out a situation in which CGC's practices are shady at times, but people like MSchmidt can't admit it. As far as PGX most people are referring to incidents 6 years back. If your going attack them bring up issues within the last two years that they did that is relevant. If your looking to have something SS use CGC, looking to have a key graded use CGC, but a book that holds little to no value and you just want protection use PGX for that book.

 

I have to confess something. I murdered someone 6 years ago. I've been holding it in but since it's past the 2 year mark, I'm glad I can finally admit it now.

[chunkybutt]

no, that is not the one incident I am talking about. Go the Silver Age forum and the X-men #1 Club thread. There is a member there that bought an old raw X-men #1 book with Stan Sig on it. He sub it for Sig last year where Stan traced/signed over the old sig and he got the yellow label.

 

Don't know if you are referring to my book, but my book was done like this. I was advised to do it like this as a FF #1 and a TOS #39 were done the same way. All three books came from the same OO collection. All were signed by Stan over 30 years ago.

 

I am pretty sure they knocked the grade for the "writing" (old signature and date) on the cover. But I still got the yellow label, because Stan did sign it in a facilitators presence.

 

This X-Men #1 of yours - does it say "name written on cover" (or something similar) on the label?

 

If that's the case, then CGC treated it like they would treat any other book with an unverified signature on the front cover - the unverified sig was treated as a defect when you subbed the book for SS.

 

The fact that Stan Lee "traced" over his old signature means nothing - the book would have come back with the same grade no matter whether he wrote his name.

 

One last thing: there's no chance whatsoever any CGC employee would tell you that it's ok to have an artist trace over their signature on the cover. I don't know who told you that, but it wasn't CGC :thumbsup:

 

No, there is no notation on the cover. I am assuming it is because you cannot see the old signature. All you can see is the traced sig and the old date of '76.

 

I did not assume they docked the grade for him tracing, I assumed they docked the grade for the '76 written on the cover. Because we all know CGC does not dock for signatures.

 

I never implied that a CGC employee told me it was okay to have an artist trace over their signature. All I said was that I was advised to do it this way because 2 other books from same collection that were signed on the same day in 1976 had been done like this and received a yellow label.

 

You posted this in the X-Men #1 thread:

 

They gave me a hard time about it and would not let Stan trace the " '76" so they docked me I think for having a date on the cover.

Non-the-less I was pelased

 

So who gave you a hard time about this and can we see a picture of your book, please? You do realize that what you did is totally against the SS rules, right?

 

Actually, if it is against the rules I had no idea. The facilitator or witness (not sure which one I spoke to) gave me a hard time after the book was signed. Prior to it being signed, the other one (either facilitator or witness) who gave me the submission form to fill out, knew I was gonna do what I did.

 

This book and X-Men #2 were my first CGC SS books I ever had done. Let me find a pic or scan.

[chunkybutt]

[mschmidt]

[chunkybutt]

You do realize that what you did is totally against the SS rules, right?

 

I am not picking a fight, just truly curious. Where are CGC's rules on SS located.

I went to the home page and found nothing other than the book must be signed in the witness of an employee of CGC or an authorized witness. And that the book must be signed by someone of significance to the issue.

 

Personally, I see no problem in what I and others have done. Unless of course there is a rule against doing it.

[mschmidt]

You do realize that what you did is totally against the SS rules, right?

 

I am not picking a fight, just truly curious. Where are CGC's rules on SS located.

I went to the home page and found nothing other than the book must be signed in the witness of an employee of CGC or an authorized witness. And that the book must be signed by someone of significance to the issue.

 

Personally, I see no problem in what I and others have done. Unless of course there is a rule against doing it.

 

From the old SS Q&A thread where Kevin Boyd (the SS director at that time) answers this exact question:

 

Couldn't the artist re-sign over the old signatures when a CGC witness is there? That seems the only loophole.

Under no circumstances would a CGC Authorized Witness or Employee agree to accept the book for Signature Series if they saw that happen.

[Calidream'n]

"Point is I just pointed out a situation in which CGC's practices are shady at times, but people like MSchmidt can't admit it. As far as PGX most people are referring to incidents 6 years back. If your going attack them bring up issues within the last two years that they did that is relevant. If your looking to have something SS use CGC, looking to have a key graded use CGC, but a book that holds little to no value and you just want protection use PGX for that book. "

 

I think ol' DJBrady4U's crack, regrade higher and flip scam has been pretty well documented on here within the last year.

Also, wasn't there a situation with a PGX Swamp Thing first appearance that had a questionable signature/s?

[Point Five]

Just read this whole thread, and

 

Taint of Satan would be a pretty cool name for a band.

 

 

[chunkybutt]

You do realize that what you did is totally against the SS rules, right?

 

I am not picking a fight, just truly curious. Where are CGC's rules on SS located.

I went to the home page and found nothing other than the book must be signed in the witness of an employee of CGC or an authorized witness. And that the book must be signed by someone of significance to the issue.

 

Personally, I see no problem in what I and others have done. Unless of course there is a rule against doing it.

 

From the old SS Q&A thread where Kevin Boyd (the SS director at that time) answers this exact question:

 

Couldn't the artist re-sign over the old signatures when a CGC witness is there? That seems the only loophole.

Under no circumstances would a CGC Authorized Witness or Employee agree to accept the book for Signature Series if they saw that happen.

 

How is anyone suppose to know this? I have been a member her for two years, my job allows me to spend endless time reading these threads and I have never came across this specific post.

 

CGC should post this in their SS section on the home page along with any other opinions the director or former director have or had.

 

[Underground44]

Point is I just pointed out a situation in which CGC's practices are shady at times, but people like MSchmidt can't admit it. As far as PGX most people are referring to incidents 6 years back. If your going attack them bring up issues within the last two years that they did that is relevant. If your looking to have something SS use CGC, looking to have a key graded use CGC, but a book that holds little to no value and you just want protection use PGX for that book.

 

I have to confess something. I murdered someone 6 years ago. I've been holding it in but since it's past the 2 year mark, I'm glad I can finally admit it now.

 

Murder isn't really a good comparison. No-one's been killed here. Maybe robbery?

[mschmidt]

You do realize that what you did is totally against the SS rules, right?

 

I am not picking a fight, just truly curious. Where are CGC's rules on SS located.

I went to the home page and found nothing other than the book must be signed in the witness of an employee of CGC or an authorized witness. And that the book must be signed by someone of significance to the issue.

 

Personally, I see no problem in what I and others have done. Unless of course there is a rule against doing it.

 

From the old SS Q&A thread where Kevin Boyd (the SS director at that time) answers this exact question:

 

Couldn't the artist re-sign over the old signatures when a CGC witness is there? That seems the only loophole.

Under no circumstances would a CGC Authorized Witness or Employee agree to accept the book for Signature Series if they saw that happen.

 

How is anyone suppose to know this? I have been a member her for two years, my job allows me to spend endless time reading these threads and I have never came across this specific post.

 

CGC should post this in their SS section on the home page along with any other opinions the director or former director have or had.

 

It's not an opinion - it's one of the rules of the SS program (and has been since the program was introduced).

 

If you had gone to the CGC booth and asked any CGC employee whether it was ok to trace over an old signature on a cover, they would have said that you weren't allowed to do this :shrug:

[HugeRosen]

Point is I just pointed out a situation in which CGC's practices are shady at times, but people like MSchmidt can't admit it. As far as PGX most people are referring to incidents 6 years back. If your going attack them bring up issues within the last two years that they did that is relevant. If your looking to have something SS use CGC, looking to have a key graded use CGC, but a book that holds little to no value and you just want protection use PGX for that book.

 

I have to confess something. I murdered someone 6 years ago. I've been holding it in but since it's past the 2 year mark, I'm glad I can finally admit it now.

 

Murder isn't really a good comparison. No-one's been killed here. Maybe robbery?

 

Extreme example to combat extreme stupidity.

 

Company has a history of corrupt business practices. Until that person is no longer involved with the company, who cares how long it's been since it happened?

 

I hear Madoff is starting up a investment company. It's been 2 years since he stole billions of dollars. Lets all invest! (more accurate example) (thumbs u