• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Certified Collectibles Group (CCG) Acquires Classics Incorporated
3 3

Started by bgraves-migration,

1,496 posts in this topic

blazingbob

blazingbob

Posted
Posted

Almost all of these were owned by Doug.

 

I would venture to say that they were pressed quite a bit.

 

I would venture to say that a lot of time was talking about how these were 9.8's.

 

I guess you have not been schmelled before until you cave so he stops talking.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted
To me, this is merely a snapshot of what is going on at large. Pedigree books already in high grade being submitted up to 7 times. This group of books doesn't say much in and of itself, but it's a microcosm of how the game is played.

And the problem is...

 

I've stated it. It defeats the purpose of paying premiums for high grades, and it's only a matter of time until most collectors realize this. Considering that high grades still command a premium, the value received for the money spent is diminishing, which is discouraging for some people.

 

It's a problem for some, not for others. For whatever reason, people seem incapable of at least understanding the side they're not on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JuliusSeizure

JuliusSeizure

Posted
Posted
Ultimately, this is a futile discussion. Individuals who feel their books have been damaged by pressing will post their evidence or experience, those who suckle at the CPR tit will either deny or minimize whatever is presented because it's in their interests to do so, and round and round we will continue to go.

 

I don't know if pressing damages books. My advice to those who are concerned about it would be don't get your books pressed.

 

But they aren't "damaged" in any sense of the word that means anything, if they are in a 9.6 or 9.8 holder. Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted
Almost all of these were owned by Doug.

 

I would venture to say that they were pressed quite a bit.

 

We all know Doug had them. And, as I said, the assumption is that they were pressed. But Masterchief's chart offers no definitive proof of which specific ones were pressed or unpressed. It only shows the before and after grades. And a large percentage of the grades did not change. So, again, what purpose does it really serve other than to show that Doug resubmitted those books?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lunchbox-migration

Lunchbox-migration

Posted
Posted
Almost all of these were owned by Doug.

 

I would venture to say that they were pressed quite a bit.

 

We all know Doug had them. And, as I said, the assumption is that they were pressed. But Masterchief's chart offers no definitive proof of which specific ones were pressed or unpressed. It only shows the before and after grades. And a large percentage of the grades did not change. So, again, what purpose does it really serve other than to show that Doug resubmitted those books?

 

If CGC hadn't nuked the relevant threads, you'd be able to put this info into a better/larger context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted
Ultimately, this is a futile discussion. Individuals who feel their books have been damaged by pressing will post their evidence or experience, those who suckle at the CPR tit will either deny or minimize whatever is presented because it's in their interests to do so, and round and round we will continue to go.

 

I don't know if pressing damages books. My advice to those who are concerned about it would be don't get your books pressed.

 

But they aren't "damaged" in any sense of the word that means anything, if they are in a 9.6 or 9.8 holder. Right?

 

If by a meaningful sense of the word damage you mean the label, then I guess not. If that JIM was a 9.2 before and after the staple damage, then the label did not change, and if that's the primary concern for buyers, then I guess no damage was done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mysterio

mysterio

Posted
Posted

 

No wonder they couldn't afford another encapulation machine! They were saving up for a pressing/restoration business.

 

 

this is actually a very good point... If the encapsulating was the bottle neck (which I think I heard at one point, but made me go :taptaptap: cause really? isnt it the grading part that is the most time consuming? but whatever) then why not spend the money to address it?

 

At the end of the day they arent in the business for us, they are in the business for them (and their wallets) so Im guessing the profit margins on the CI business made it a good buy from the bottom dollar perspective, more so than improving efficiency and cutting down on their time to grade numbers.

 

Word around the campfire is that once your books are graded it can take another 3-4 weeks to get encapsulated and shipped. If they could cut that time in half by adding another encapsulation machine and some unskilled labor to pack boxes it would make a dent in improving TATs for little cost. But apparently that is not how they feel their capital should be employed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted
Those who are angry about books being pressed are only angry because pressing as a potential damage vector is profit oriented.

 

Those same angry few aren't angry about the damage vector know as book reading, presumably.

 

Some of us are angry because this thread is being hijacked into a pressing thread. Pressing is not the problem. It's a conflict of interest.

 

Pressing is part of the suite of services which will be offered by CGC. Pressing is a big part of Matt's business. We're talking about pressing as a premise to support the fact that this acquisition presents a conflict of interest. So I'm not sure why you're angry. Conversations have their own flow, and you can't control it.

I'm not trying to control it. Just pointing out that it's derailing the underlying bigger issue. We've gone ad nauseam on pressing before. Is there really anything new here? If so, don't bury it in this thread. Bring it to the masses in a new one. It will get more press there.

 

It's not a derailment, it's merely an aspect of this discussion that you don't think is important or worth focusing on. And you might be right. If you'd like to keep discussing the conflict of interest, no one is stopping you.

You're right. I don't think it's relevant to the discussion. But the same people are trotting out the same pro/anti-pressing arguments and examples.

 

If I were to envision a bigger risk for conflict of interest, it wouldn't be on the pressing side. That's just more likely to happen due to volume. My bet would be on examples where resto is removed (blue label vs. plod) or added (slight vs mod vs ext). That's my 2c

 

I'll drop the pressing stuff. I'm just a broken record at this point anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Speedy-D

Speedy-D

Posted
Posted
Potential ways for their to be a conflict of interest that results in something shady, depending on your amount of tinfoil:

 

1. CGC actively undergrades books which do not get CI services first.

2. CGC actively overgrades books which do get CI services first.

3. CGC actively ignores borderline restoration after CI performs resto removal.

 

Whether you think any of these will happen depends on the level of trust you have in CGC.

All irrelevant. The books will continue to go into the grading process blind, devoid of any information regarding submitter or prep work.

 

This.

 

It's ridiculous to think that CGC would do anything in this situation that even smells of a conflict of interest - does anyone honestly think they're going to flush a reputation earned over 12 years down the toilet simply so they can sell a couple extra $10 press jobs?

Why not? Companies over reach and misstep all the time. Is CGC so different?

 

By the way, this thread is wonderful proof that there is at least a "smell" of conflict of interest. You choose to have faith in the company. Others don't. Personally, I check myself frequently to make sure I'm not showing any corporate entity too much love. They don't love me, they just want my money. I shouldn't love them, I should just want their product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted
Geeze, 7 pages since I checked the thread an hour ago. Do none of you people work? :censored:

 

I'm in a library pretending to study.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mysterio

mysterio

Posted
Posted
Those who are angry about books being pressed are only angry because pressing as a potential damage vector is profit oriented.

 

Those same angry few aren't angry about the damage vector know as book reading, presumably.

 

Some of us are angry because this thread is being hijacked into a pressing thread. Pressing is not the problem. It's a conflict of interest.

 

Pressing is part of the suite of services which will be offered by CGC. Pressing is a big part of Matt's business. We're talking about pressing as a premise to support the fact that this acquisition presents a conflict of interest. So I'm not sure why you're angry. Conversations have their own flow, and you can't control it.

I'm not trying to control it. Just pointing out that it's derailing the underlying bigger issue. We've gone ad nauseam on pressing before. Is there really anything new here? If so, don't bury it in this thread. Bring it to the masses in a new one. It will get more press there.

 

It's not a derailment, it's merely an aspect of this discussion that you don't think is important or worth focusing on. And you might be right. If you'd like to keep discussing the conflict of interest, no one is stopping you.

You're right. I don't think it's relevant to the discussion. But the same people are trotting out the same pro/anti-pressing arguments and examples.

 

If I were to envision a bigger risk for conflict of interest, it wouldn't be on the pressing side. That's just more likely to happen due to volume. My bet would be on examples where resto is removed (blue label vs. plod) or added (slight vs mod vs ext). That's my 2c

 

This is a big concern for me as well. Since we all know that the grades can be off 0.5-1.0 on a regular basis in either direction the resto check is a bigger part of the value of the CGC service for me (probably the chief concern). If the confidence in that resto check becomes shaken that is the biggest problem for CGC that I see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted
Almost all of these were owned by Doug.

 

I would venture to say that they were pressed quite a bit.

 

We all know Doug had them. And, as I said, the assumption is that they were pressed. But Masterchief's chart offers no definitive proof of which specific ones were pressed or unpressed. It only shows the before and after grades. And a large percentage of the grades did not change. So, again, what purpose does it really serve other than to show that Doug resubmitted those books?

 

If CGC hadn't nuked the relevant threads, you'd be able to put this info into a better/larger context.

We both read those threads. Why don't you put it into a better/larger context for the newbs? Heck, I'd love to see what better/larger context it could be put into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lunchbox-migration

Lunchbox-migration

Posted
Posted
Almost all of these were owned by Doug.

 

I would venture to say that they were pressed quite a bit.

 

We all know Doug had them. And, as I said, the assumption is that they were pressed. But Masterchief's chart offers no definitive proof of which specific ones were pressed or unpressed. It only shows the before and after grades. And a large percentage of the grades did not change. So, again, what purpose does it really serve other than to show that Doug resubmitted those books?

 

If CGC hadn't nuked the relevant threads, you'd be able to put this info into a better/larger context.

We both read those threads. Why don't you put it into a better/larger context for the newbs? Heck, I'd love to see what better/larger context it could be put into.

 

Yes, let me summarize a thread that went for months and contained huge amounts of data and hours of hard work into a nice little one-post package for you.

 

As I mentioned, I could do what you ask if CGC hadn't nuked the threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
3 3
Go to topic listing