Certified Collectibles Group (CCG) Acquires Classics Incorporated 3 3

[Dale Roberts]

Now that you mention it, it does depend upon how long they are. Three tiny ticks that are 1/32" in length may be consistent with their standard.

 

That falls under the combination of defects. Of course, we don't know exactly what that combination might include.

 

Some of us might...I may have a few years ago but have forgotten by now. Of course I don't mean I have magic access to their standards, I just mean people have figured out their standards. The top end of CGC's scale is the easiest to reverse-engineer.

 

Right, which is why I said that about the spine ticks.

 

I would guess several people who submit a ton of books can get a pretty good idea by examining a 100 or so slabs in each grade. In fact, we could probably get a small group together and basically write out CGC's standards with a little effort.

 

i.e. A 9.8 must have 3 sharp corners, and may have 1/8" of cumulative defects, et al infinitum.

 

I agree it is easier to work from the top down, than from the bottom up.

[Dick Pontoon]

All this talk of hard and soft just makes it clear that my Professional Opinion Service is definitely a need in this hobby.

 

POS's opinion of a hard 9.2 - http://www.highgradecomics.com/images/catalog/as48gmwfc

 

That's a catchy little mascot you've adopted for your service!

 

I don't get what a mushroom has to do with high grade comics.

[Dale Roberts]

All this talk of hard and soft just makes it clear that my Professional Opinion Service is definitely a need in this hobby.

 

POS's opinion of a hard 9.2 - http://www.highgradecomics.com/images/catalog/as48gmwfc

 

That's a catchy little mascot you've adopted for your service!

 

I don't get what a mushroom has to do with high grade comics.

 

Thats what happens to Bob when he sees a high grade book.

[sterlingcomics]

All this talk of hard and soft just makes it clear that my Professional Opinion Service is definitely a need in this hobby.

 

POS's opinion of a hard 9.2 - http://www.highgradecomics.com/images/catalog/as48gmwfc

 

That's a catchy little mascot you've adopted for your service!

 

I don't get what a mushroom has to do with high grade comics.

 

Thats what happens to Bob when he sees a high grade book.

[fantastic_four]

I would guess several people who submit a ton of books can get a pretty good idea by examining a 100 or so slabs in each grade. In fact, we could probably get a small group together and basically write out CGC's standards with a little effort.

 

Yep, but it's a bit more than "a little" effort. At least a few months of collaboration and writing. Could take 6 to 12 man-months to do right.

[shrunkenhead]

I grew up in the rare book arena, as well as got into comics in the early '80s, so that no doubt influences my prejudices.

 

 

Getting into comics "way back in the 80s"=nerd street cred?

 

 

[Bookery]

Except for those 9.8s that have 2-3 color breaking spine ticks.

 

If CGC would release its grading standards to the public, this could be resolved.

 

Actually, if there were published standards, I think I'd be much more at ease with the 25-point system. And they could still include a caveat that in rare cases eye-appeal might be so great as to trump a specific rule now and again.

 

But say Joe submits a book he thinks will get a 9.6, and it comes back a 9.4. He may agree or disagree with the CGC grade, but admits book has flaw "x" that is disallowed in 9.6 by CGC. Joe decides it would not be worth resubmitting the book (let alone resubmitting it 7 times).

 

On the other hand, Joe gets a book that seems to go against a CGC standard. It's likely they simply missed something, or were too strict, and so that book makes a good resub candidate for Joe.

 

As it is, and as we've seen, people resubmit books multiple times (exposing them to more damage with every resub) based on "gambling" as to the outcome. No set of rules could be perfect... but it would help a lot.

 

[Bookery]

I grew up in the rare book arena, as well as got into comics in the early '80s, so that no doubt influences my prejudices.

 

 

Getting into comics "way back in the 80s"=nerd street cred?

 

 

Street cred???

I'm just admitting that I have my own prejudices and where they come from. And the "getting into" means as a dealer... not as a childhood reader, of course.

 

People read an awful lot into the most straight-forward of statements.

 

 

 

 

[Dale Roberts]

Except for those 9.8s that have 2-3 color breaking spine ticks.

 

If CGC would release its grading standards to the public, this could be resolved.

 

Actually, if there were published standards, I think I'd be much more at ease with the 25-point system. And they could still include a caveat that in rare cases eye-appeal might be so great as to trump a specific rule now and again.

 

But say Joe submits a book he thinks will get a 9.6, and it comes back a 9.4. He may agree or disagree with the CGC grade, but admits book has flaw "x" that is disallowed in 9.6 by CGC. Joe decides it would not be worth resubmitting the book (let alone resubmitting it 7 times).

 

On the other hand, Joe gets a book that seems to go against a CGC standard. It's likely they simply missed something, or were too strict, and so that book makes a good resub candidate for Joe.

 

As it is, and as we've seen, people resubmit books multiple times (exposing them to more damage with every resub) based on "gambling" as to the outcome. No set of rules could be perfect... but it would help a lot.

 

I don't think most people are resubbing based on gambling. It is truly a skill to be able to spot and determine whether a book is a good resub candidate.

 

I don't CGC ever releasing their grading standard, because a company like PGX could immediately adapt those same standards and offer the same "product".

[shrunkenhead]

I grew up in the rare book arena, as well as got into comics in the early '80s, so that no doubt influences my prejudices.

 

 

Getting into comics "way back in the 80s"=nerd street cred?

 

 

Street cred???

I'm just admitting that I have my own prejudices and where they come from. And the "getting into" means as a dealer... not as a childhood reader, of course.

 

People read an awful lot into the most straight-forward of statements.

 

 

 

 

It was supposed to be a joke.

[Bookery]

Basically what you are saying is other dealers bought books from you because you under graded them, they graded them accurately and made more money. They probably left you with all of the books you over graded.

 

A mythical beast, my friend, a mythical beast...

 

 

[Bookery]

I don't think most people are resubbing based on gambling. It is truly a skill to be able to spot and determine whether a book is a good resub candidate.

 

I'm just taking people posting here at their word when they say there are lots of famous books out there that have been resubbed multiple times. Obviously, there are plenty of subbers who don't have such skills or this wouldn't happen.

 

I don't CGC ever releasing their grading standard, because a company like PGX could immediately adapt those same standards and offer the same "product".

 

CGC is selling their skills. Overstreet has published his standards for years, and yet dealer grading is still all over the place. PGX might attempt to adapt those standards... but being able to pull it off is an entirely different matter. I know CGC isn't going to do it, but I think it could be more beneficial than detrimental to them in the long run. I could be wrong.

 

[blazingbob]

Professional Opinion's Service has three categories of a graded book

 

Limp

 

Half mast

 

Gave me wood

 

Admit the "peter" meter goes hand in hand with the BSD segment of the hobby.

 

CCG buying CI is the comic equivalent of introducing Viagra to the comic industry.

 

Edited November 20, 2012 by blazingbob

[fantastic_four]

I don't think most people are resubbing based on gambling. It is truly a skill to be able to spot and determine whether a book is a good resub candidate.

 

I'm just taking people posting here at their word when they say there are lots of famous books out there that have been resubbed multiple times. Obviously, there are plenty of subbers who don't have such skills or this wouldn't happen.

 

Yea it would. If CGC graded with a high degree of consistency on the 25-notch scale, then yes, you're right, people wouldn't repeatedly re-sub. Given that they don't, a handful of people have realized they can profit simply via repeated resubmissions hoping that the CGC margin of error turns out in their favor.

 

This is why a few of us are suggesting the 25-point scale is too ambitious.

[nearmint]

Professional Opinion's Service has three categories of a graded book

 

Limp

 

Half mast

 

Gave me wood

 

Admit the "peter" meter goes hand in hand with the BSD segment of the hobby.

 

Peter meter.

[seanfingh]

Professional Opinion's Service has three categories of a graded book

 

Limp

 

Half mast

 

Gave me wood

 

Admit the "peter" meter goes hand in hand with the BSD segment of the hobby.

 

This is awesome.

[shrunkenhead]

PGX might attempt to adapt those standards... but being able to pull it off is an entirely different matter.

 

Agreed, not going to happen. PGX is dead in the water. At the root, this is the problem, i.e. no authentic competition for CGC.

[Bookery]

Peter meter.

 

Is that the giveaway comics from the '50s that Walt Kelly worked on?

 

[Dale Roberts]

I don't think most people are resubbing based on gambling. It is truly a skill to be able to spot and determine whether a book is a good resub candidate.

 

I'm just taking people posting here at their word .

 

 

That was your first mistake

[Dale Roberts]

Peter meter.

 

Is that the giveaway comics from the '50s that Walt Kelly worked on?

 

No, I think it is a Robert Crumb book