Certified Collectibles Group (CCG) Acquires Classics Incorporated 3 3

[500Club]

Ahhh. I see. So the paper gets crushed and pushed beyond the staple, while the staple remains anchored to the less mobile inner sheafs.

 

Anyone have before/after pics?

[Moondog]

Just is just my opinion, but please do not attempt to compare the pressing of comic books to another collecting field that you may not be educated in. All that this does is either make you look like you do not know what you are talking about; or causes someone who is knowledgeable in the stated field to come and state facts, thus proving you wrong.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but this is so undeserved. It's pretty clear that you don't know who you are 'talking' to on these boards. If so, you might not be so confident in your 'expertise.'

 

When it comes to the hobby we talk about on these pages most of the time, I'll take Moondog's opinion over yours any day.

 

Well, to be fair, mint, moondog was only asking a question. He didn't seem to be stating or implying anything. You coming on here and explaining is pretty much what he was looking for. (thumbs u

 

Andy

 

Thanks Andy. Mint's claim that there is more larceny going on in other fields of collecting prompted my question. I was not aware that the embossing on currency would be flattened by pressing. I assumed that currency collectors would be put off by pressing and clearly I was correct.

 

And Mint, I was not trying to bait you. I enjoy your posts and learn something from many of them. No worries on my end.

 

Gary

[Moondog]

Just is just my opinion, but please do not attempt to compare the pressing of comic books to another collecting field that you may not be educated in. All that this does is either make you look like you do not know what you are talking about; or causes someone who is knowledgeable in the stated field to come and state facts, thus proving you wrong.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but this is so undeserved. It's pretty clear that you don't know who you are 'talking' to on these boards. If so, you might not be so confident in your 'expertise.'

 

When it comes to the hobby we talk about on these pages most of the time, I'll take Moondog's opinion over yours any day.

 

OPINION duly noted.

 

 

 

 

Moondog is truly an expert in the field of comics and one who is very well respected. He's also a very bright, thoughtful and kind person, overall.

 

[originalisbest]

I would agree with positive kudos for Gary, who is simply one of the nicest, and knowledgeable comic guys around, with genuine unadulterated passion for the pop culture hobby.

 

Not sure which page the question about pressing currency came up, as I really only made it to page 25 so far... but will chime in and say currency collectors frown on pressed bills. It does remove some of the "snap" and does tend to flatten the embossed appearance, IMO. It's really a different animal though than your typical 64-page golden age book, which I don't view as subject to negative effects caused by pressing, if the pressing is done professionally and well. As, a piece of currency is just that, one piece of paper.

 

In the field of rare stamps, it's a given that a stamp (depending on whether it has fugitive inks meant to run in water, as a security device against washing off cancels) will generally be improved and freshened, with a soapy water bath and pressing in a drying book. On the other hand, it's detectable when dipping stamps in watermark fluid, to see if there's been an ironed-out crease, which is a noteable flaw and worth mentioning, but simply adjusts the value down -- how much, "depends."

 

While I may not have the energy to read all 125 pages so far, just wanted to chime in on the well-deserved praise for Gary, and to say congratulations to Matt! I can see there's already been some wailing and gnashing of teeth (uberunderstatement) but it's really not needed, IMO. I will use Joey's and Matt's services on my personal books that would benefit visually from their services. I rarely sell; it's really just for my own pride and enjoyment of some of my favorite books.

 

 

[NP_Gresham]

Is this a debate about who should be the MVP?

 

It certainly is taking on alot of the characteristics of a "sabermetrics" vs old school baseball stats argument.

 

Personally I vote Trout.

 

Finally a topic i know a little about. Enough of this comic stuff. Dude!! Cabrera won the Triple Crown. THE TRIPLE CROWN!! And he got his team to the World Series.

 

Jeff

 

Cabrera was the best offensive player. Trout was the most valuable player. Value in baseball is about wins. Wins is a factor of runs scored vs runs allowed.

 

There is a high correlation between run differential (or Runs scored vs runs allowed) and wins. As evidence of this, no team with a below .500 record had a positive run differential this year. That is a fancy way of saying they scored less runs than they allowed. Every team with a .500 or better record scored more runs than they allowed. This fact tells me that there are at least 2 components to determining value, that is runs created and runs saved. Defense does make a difference.

 

Offensive value should come from primarily 1 area...runs created. Runs created encompasses so many different factors of offense, from hitting, to effective slugging, to baserunning. It also includes factors which are not included in sabermetric stats, such as the ability to hit a sacrifice fly, or drive in a run from 3rd base on a ground ball to the 2nd baseman. These 2 things have value, even though they are not factored in to the advanced metrics. There are new stats such as extra base taken%, but these are all included in runs scored. An extra base taken or a stolen base which does not score, generally has zero value. In actual value(runs created), the only stats that really have an impact on the club's win total are runs scored and runs driven in.

 

So my formula to determine the most valuable player would be the player who creates the most runs on offense and the player who saves the most runs on defense. Runs created + runs saved = MVP. Runs saved is extremely hard to judge, so going with metrics of plus or minus runs saved above average from Fan Graphs and the Fielding Bible.

 

Cabrera - 139 RBI + 109 runs - 44 HRs +(-8 PMRS) = 196

Trout - 83 RBI + 129 runs - 30 HRs + (21 PMRS) = 203

 

When you include defense, it is clear that Trout is in fact more valuable to his team than Cabrera. I was somewhat surprised by this outcome, but I feel it is a very fair way to evaluate who is the Most Valuable.

 

 

Defense is a big deal, ill agree there. But the Angels finished third this year if im not mistaken. Take Trout out and where do the Angels finish?? Im thinking still third. Take Cabrera away from the Tigers and where do they finish?? Not first and not in the Playoffs.

 

I know Sabermetrics and all this new stuff about analyzing a player is common and has become a big part in valuing a player, sometimes though i think the core of an evauation is right there in front of you and not beyond the numbers. If the Angels go to the playoff this year, then there is a bigger arguement for Trout, but still debatable,

 

Jeff

 

The MVP is misnamed.

The true MVP almost always get the Cy Young award.

While the MVP goes to the best hitter.

[originalisbest]

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.

 

at this from Bob!

[originalisbest]

Is this a debate about who should be the MVP?

 

It certainly is taking on alot of the characteristics of a "sabermetrics" vs old school baseball stats argument.

 

Personally I vote Trout.

 

Finally a topic i know a little about. Enough of this comic stuff. Dude!! Cabrera won the Triple Crown. THE TRIPLE CROWN!! And he got his team to the World Series.

 

Jeff

 

Cabrera was the best offensive player. Trout was the most valuable player. Value in baseball is about wins. Wins is a factor of runs scored vs runs allowed.

 

There is a high correlation between run differential (or Runs scored vs runs allowed) and wins. As evidence of this, no team with a below .500 record had a positive run differential this year. That is a fancy way of saying they scored less runs than they allowed. Every team with a .500 or better record scored more runs than they allowed. This fact tells me that there are at least 2 components to determining value, that is runs created and runs saved. Defense does make a difference.

 

Offensive value should come from primarily 1 area...runs created. Runs created encompasses so many different factors of offense, from hitting, to effective slugging, to baserunning. It also includes factors which are not included in sabermetric stats, such as the ability to hit a sacrifice fly, or drive in a run from 3rd base on a ground ball to the 2nd baseman. These 2 things have value, even though they are not factored in to the advanced metrics. There are new stats such as extra base taken%, but these are all included in runs scored. An extra base taken or a stolen base which does not score, generally has zero value. In actual value(runs created), the only stats that really have an impact on the club's win total are runs scored and runs driven in.

 

So my formula to determine the most valuable player would be the player who creates the most runs on offense and the player who saves the most runs on defense. Runs created + runs saved = MVP. Runs saved is extremely hard to judge, so going with metrics of plus or minus runs saved above average from Fan Graphs and the Fielding Bible.

 

Cabrera - 139 RBI + 109 runs - 44 HRs +(-8 PMRS) = 196

Trout - 83 RBI + 129 runs - 30 HRs + (21 PMRS) = 203

 

When you include defense, it is clear that Trout is in fact more valuable to his team than Cabrera. I was somewhat surprised by this outcome, but I feel it is a very fair way to evaluate who is the Most Valuable.

 

 

Defense is a big deal, ill agree there. But the Angels finished third this year if im not mistaken. Take Trout out and where do the Angels finish?? Im thinking still third. Take Cabrera away from the Tigers and where do they finish?? Not first and not in the Playoffs.

 

I know Sabermetrics and all this new stuff about analyzing a player is common and has become a big part in valuing a player, sometimes though i think the core of an evauation is right there in front of you and not beyond the numbers. If the Angels go to the playoff this year, then there is a bigger arguement for Trout, but still debatable,

 

Jeff

 

The MVP is misnamed.

The true MVP almost always get the Cy Young award.

While the MVP goes to the best hitter.

 

Also pleased to read up on the Baseball aspect of this thread!

[Underground44]

What's the record for the most amount of pages in a Non-stickied thread?

[Moondog]

I would agree with positive kudos for Gary, who is simply one of the nicest, and knowledgeable comic guys around, with genuine unadulterated passion for the pop culture hobby.

 

Not sure which page the question about pressing currency came up, as I really only made it to page 25 so far... but will chime in and say currency collectors frown on pressed bills. It does remove some of the "snap" and does tend to flatten the embossed appearance, IMO. It's really a different animal though than your typical 64-page golden age book, which I don't view as subject to negative effects caused by pressing, if the pressing is done professionally and well. As, a piece of currency is just that, one piece of paper.

 

In the field of rare stamps, it's a given that a stamp (depending on whether it has fugitive inks meant to run in water, as a security device against washing off cancels) will generally be improved and freshened, with a soapy water bath and pressing in a drying book. On the other hand, it's detectable when dipping stamps in watermark fluid, to see if there's been an ironed-out crease, which is a noteable flaw and worth mentioning, but simply adjusts the value down -- how much, "depends."

 

While I may not have the energy to read all 125 pages so far, just wanted to chime in on the well-deserved praise for Gary, and to say congratulations to Matt! I can see there's already been some wailing and gnashing of teeth (uberunderstatement) but it's really not needed, IMO. I will use Joey's and Matt's services on my personal books that would benefit visually from their services. I rarely sell; it's really just for my own pride and enjoyment of some of my favorite books.

 

 

[originalisbest]

I would agree with positive kudos for Gary, who is simply one of the nicest, and knowledgeable comic guys around, with genuine unadulterated passion for the pop culture hobby.

 

Not sure which page the question about pressing currency came up, as I really only made it to page 25 so far... but will chime in and say currency collectors frown on pressed bills. It does remove some of the "snap" and does tend to flatten the embossed appearance, IMO. It's really a different animal though than your typical 64-page golden age book, which I don't view as subject to negative effects caused by pressing, if the pressing is done professionally and well. As, a piece of currency is just that, one piece of paper.

 

In the field of rare stamps, it's a given that a stamp (depending on whether it has fugitive inks meant to run in water, as a security device against washing off cancels) will generally be improved and freshened, with a soapy water bath and pressing in a drying book. On the other hand, it's detectable when dipping stamps in watermark fluid, to see if there's been an ironed-out crease, which is a noteable flaw and worth mentioning, but simply adjusts the value down -- how much, "depends."

 

While I may not have the energy to read all 125 pages so far, just wanted to chime in on the well-deserved praise for Gary, and to say congratulations to Matt! I can see there's already been some wailing and gnashing of teeth (uberunderstatement) but it's really not needed, IMO. I will use Joey's and Matt's services on my personal books that would benefit visually from their services. I rarely sell; it's really just for my own pride and enjoyment of some of my favorite books.

 

 

 

[ComicConnoisseur]

Pressing combined with slabbing very very profitable.

A bigger money maker than the raw comics themselves.

 

You might be onto something.

Artificial Value

 

One day the powers to be sat around a room, and said how can we get people to spend

to slab

a bronze/copper/ modern comic book only really worth this in nm?

 

 

 

Ah

We will do away with NM grades and come up with the digital 9s label to make profit. Bronze,Copper, and Modern age comics that are only worth $1 in near mint at best,now they will go for much more when we slap the 9.4,9.6 and 9.8 level on it.

Now they will pay

for a book really only worth

 

 

without the slab

and thus than an empire was born

 

The only thing I would change about your argument is I would substitute the term "manufactured value" for "artificial value", as has been pointed out, value is whatever someone is willing to pay at a specific time.

 

I would guess 90% of the angst in this hobby stems from the ridiculous notion of grading paper down to tenths of a point. A system that would have left well enough alone by grading steps that went 8.0, 8.5, 9.0, 9.5, 10.0 would eliminate a very large portion of the "problems" which produce dozens of threads here. But to point out such reality makes you a heretic, and so it goes.

 

There is a bit of a problem, however, with your $1 value transformed into $20 scenario. If an unslabbed modern is worth $1, and it cost $20 to slab it, and the book is now worth $20, is there really any "artificial" value, or is the book price simply reflecting the slabbing costs. If I put a $100 painting in a $100 frame, and ask $200 for it... I'm not really creating artificial value, but simply asking the value of the two combined products.

 

I always thought, especially for less expensive books, that it was ludicrous that collectors won't spend any more on a slabbed $50 book, say in 6.0, than they would for the raw version... which is why, as Dale has also pointed out, it isn't cost-efficient for many dealers to slab much of their inventory.

 

But apparently on cheap moderns, buyers are willing to include the cost of the slab into their valuations.

I pretty much agree with your line of thinking. I will point out though that when you put that $100 painting in a $100 frame it`s a lot different then someone putting a comic book in a 9.8 slab because that $100 painting you put in the $100 frame only has one copy of itself, while most of these bronze,copper and modern comicbooks had print runs in the hundreds of thousands . Your painting was unique to itself,and not a manufactured collectible like the 9.4,9.6 or 9.8 comic books are.

Edited November 21, 2012 by ComicConnoisseur

[mintcollector]

Just is just my opinion, but please do not attempt to compare the pressing of comic books to another collecting field that you may not be educated in. All that this does is either make you look like you do not know what you are talking about; or causes someone who is knowledgeable in the stated field to come and state facts, thus proving you wrong.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but this is so undeserved. It's pretty clear that you don't know who you are 'talking' to on these boards. If so, you might not be so confident in your 'expertise.'

 

When it comes to the hobby we talk about on these pages most of the time, I'll take Moondog's opinion over yours any day.

 

Well, to be fair, mint, moondog was only asking a question. He didn't seem to be stating or implying anything. You coming on here and explaining is pretty much what he was looking for. (thumbs u

 

Andy

 

Thanks Andy. Mint's claim that there is more larceny going on in other fields of collecting prompted my question. I was not aware that the embossing on currency would be flattened by pressing. I assumed that currency collectors would be put off by pressing and clearly I was correct.

 

And Mint, I was not trying to bait you. I enjoy your posts and learn something from many of them. No worries on my end.

 

Gary

 

Hello Gary,

 

I know you were not trying to 'bait me' in any way regarding your response. My major points throughout this thread have only been that at the end of the day we are very lucky to have third party grading in our said fields of interest.

 

Rather then continue to attempt to state what I have stated many posts ago, I think part of the answer to most individuals questions does lie in looking at the said relationship between NCS and NGC (both owned by the Certified Collectibles Group). This relationship is very professional and is not, in my opinion; a conflict of interest.

 

I would also like to point out some of the horrid things that go on in other collecting fields that have no third party grading or any such safe guards; other then the trust and knowledge of the dealers and experts of their chosen fields. After reading what I have written below, I don't think anyone here will want to go back to the 'dark days' (as someone else once called it; before CGC.

 

As I have said before, we can now manufacture a two hundred year old Windsor Chair from parts made available at the Home Depot, age it, and sell it through an auction house for top dollar. This is not restoration. This is the manufacture of a reproduction meant to deceive. It is also disgusting if not disclosed to the buyer; and truly unethical (again if NOT disclosed).

 

In the marble collecting fields (which is very strong right now) we can not only 'polish' marbles to make them look new; but contemporary marbles can be made to look antique and vintage to an untrained eye. This is why most contemporary marble artists are encouraged to sign there work (i.e. the marble). In fact, a lot of pressure has been put on artists who refuse to do so.

 

I paid a record price recently for an antique bottle. It made the local news...for about ten seconds. We can now 'tumble' antique bottles to the point that even 'experts' are being fooled and these bottles are being sold with no way of knowing if they are 'attic mint' (an actual term in this collecting field) or 'manipulated.' Again, it pays to go through a vetted auction house (but again, mistakes do happen).

 

In book collecting, rebinding is becoming so advanced that even experts are having to question whether an actual first edition was in fact kept in true very fine condition (note that there is no true condition of 'mint' in the rare book market; take note); or if it was in fact 'altered.'

 

In other areas of glass collecting (art glass, carnival glass, depression glass, and high end Tiffany glass); repairs have gotten so good that even a blacklight in some cases (the previous standard of detecting a repair) will not work.

 

Now I ask you to look at my point from this perspective (my perspective of what I see on a daily basis in the antiques and collectibles industry); and on the eve of Thanksgiving. A lot of fine men and brave turkeys (okay, maybe I need to switch the wording of this statement) gave their life for us to have this discussion. However, when one deals with just a few of the instances I have mentioned above you have to wonder why myself (who also collects comic books) would truly worry about a process where we 'press' an ORIGINAL comic book to remove a corner ding, stress line, or crease.

 

That is my only point. I do however, respect the opinions of those who differ. I did post a thread regarding my experiences with pressing in the proper forum for those to see.

 

In conclusion, have a HAPPY THANKSGIVING and be grateful for what you have, the knowledge we ALL have shared, and the ideas that have been stated. For everything in life has started by one small idea that began to grow.

 

Thank you for reading.

 

Kind Regards,

 

'mint'

[comicwiz]

My first experience hearing about CT removal happened post-CGC, and I won't go into specifics (and please don't ask), but suffice it to say that it involved a key GA book in a purple label. The tip was dropped into the lap of someone I knew by an insider. The book was purchased, the insider removed the resto, and the book was later flipped for an obscenely higher price than it would ever fetch in a restored state.

 

This is not simply about people's aversion to pressing. This is about altering and manipulating vintage items in a manner that is really no different than someone tumbling to attain an appearance of aging, or someone chemically altering a coin to attain a rainbow tone.

 

We are simply fooling ourselves into believing it's "acceptable" and that any demonstration of resistance is futile, but in reality, as paper lab methods become more and more advanced, we need to take a few steps back and consider that it is slowly eroding collector confidence and hobby trust.

 

Modernizing a home or object for utilitarian purposes is very different than modernizing a collectible as a commodity in hopes of fooling people into believing it's gracefully aged with time rather than through man-made reconditioning techniques.

 

At the moment, the hobby is making rain, but when a drought occurs, it isn't unfathomable to imagine that it will come from people combing-out the manipulation and reconditioning to the degree that untampered or truly pristine examples will be the only items collectors will pursue.

[mysterio]

My first experience hearing about CT removal happened post-CGC, and I won't go into specifics (and please don't ask), but suffice it to say that it involved a key GA book in a purple label. The tip was dropped into the lap of someone I knew by an insider. The book was purchased, the insider removed the resto, and the book was later flipped for an obscenely higher price than it would ever fetch in a restored state.

 

This is not simply about people's aversion to pressing. This is about altering and manipulating vintage items in a manner that is really no different than someone tumbling to attain an appearance of aging, or someone chemically altering a coin to attain a rainbow tone.

 

We are simply fooling ourselves into believing it's "acceptable" and that any demonstration of resistance is futile, but in reality, as paper lab methods become more and more advanced, we need to take a few steps back and consider that it is slowly eroding collector confidence and hobby trust.

 

Modernizing a home or object for utilitarian purposes is very different than modernizing a collectible as a commodity in hopes of fooling people into believing it's gracefully aged with time rather than through man-made reconditioning techniques.

 

At the moment, the hobby is making rain, but when a drought occurs, it isn't unfathomable to imagine that it will come from people combing-out the manipulation and reconditioning to the degree that untampered or truly pristine examples will be the only items collectors will pursue.

 

Or (scary thought), the people who don't mind manipulation as long as it looks good will start to outnumber those of us who do object and that will become the collecting norm.

[Flaming_Telepath]

My first experience hearing about CT removal happened post-CGC, and I won't go into specifics (and please don't ask), but suffice it to say that it involved a key GA book in a purple label. The tip was dropped into the lap of someone I knew by an insider. The book was purchased, the insider removed the resto, and the book was later flipped for an obscenely higher price than it would ever fetch in a restored state.

 

This is not simply about people's aversion to pressing. This is about altering and manipulating vintage items in a manner that is really no different than someone tumbling to attain an appearance of aging, or someone chemically altering a coin to attain a rainbow tone.

 

We are simply fooling ourselves into believing it's "acceptable" and that any demonstration of resistance is futile, but in reality, as paper lab methods become more and more advanced, we need to take a few steps back and consider that it is slowly eroding collector confidence and hobby trust.

 

Modernizing a home or object for utilitarian purposes is very different than modernizing a collectible as a commodity in hopes of fooling people into believing it's gracefully aged with time rather than through man-made reconditioning techniques.

 

At the moment, the hobby is making rain, but when a drought occurs, it isn't unfathomable to imagine that it will come from people combing-out the manipulation and reconditioning to the degree that untampered or truly pristine examples will be the only items collectors will pursue.

 

Or (scary thought), the people who don't mind manipulation as long as it looks good will start to outnumber those of us who do object and that will become the collecting norm.

 

Certainly in this end of the pool, I think they already have.

 

And here's the really ironic thing...

 

One of CGC's supposed intended goals at inception was to provide an answer to the question of undisclosed restoration, to give a sense of security to buyers, that they knew exactly what they were getting when they slapped down the cash.

 

That has been twisted and milked to such an extent that you are now more likely to get a book that - in relation to the traditional definitions of restoration - has been worked on and is not being disclosed in a Universal label than on the raw market.

 

And the horrible thing is that we, as a market, have been so blinded by the sea of green washing around us that we have allowed it to happen.

[The-Collector]

Pressing combined with slabbing very very profitable.

A bigger money maker than the raw comics themselves.

 

You might be onto something.

Artificial Value

 

One day the powers to be sat around a room, and said how can we get people to spend

to slab

a bronze/copper/ modern comic book only really worth this in nm?

 

 

 

Ah

We will do away with NM grades and come up with the digital 9s label to make profit. Bronze,Copper, and Modern age comics that are only worth $1 in near mint at best,now they will go for much more when we slap the 9.4,9.6 and 9.8 level on it.

Now they will pay

for a book really only worth

 

 

without the slab

and thus than an empire was born

 

The only thing I would change about your argument is I would substitute the term "manufactured value" for "artificial value", as has been pointed out, value is whatever someone is willing to pay at a specific time.

 

I would guess 90% of the angst in this hobby stems from the ridiculous notion of grading paper down to tenths of a point. A system that would have left well enough alone by grading steps that went 8.0, 8.5, 9.0, 9.5, 10.0 would eliminate a very large portion of the "problems" which produce dozens of threads here. But to point out such reality makes you a heretic, and so it goes.

 

There is a bit of a problem, however, with your $1 value transformed into $20 scenario. If an unslabbed modern is worth $1, and it cost $20 to slab it, and the book is now worth $20, is there really any "artificial" value, or is the book price simply reflecting the slabbing costs. If I put a $100 painting in a $100 frame, and ask $200 for it... I'm not really creating artificial value, but simply asking the value of the two combined products.

 

I always thought, especially for less expensive books, that it was ludicrous that collectors won't spend any more on a slabbed $50 book, say in 6.0, than they would for the raw version... which is why, as Dale has also pointed out, it isn't cost-efficient for many dealers to slab much of their inventory.

 

But apparently on cheap moderns, buyers are willing to include the cost of the slab into their valuations.

I pretty much agree with your line of thinking. I will point out though that when you put that $100 painting in a $100 frame it`s a lot different then someone putting a comic book in a 9.8 slab because that $100 painting you put in the $100 frame only has one copy of itself, while most of these bronze,copper and modern comicbooks had print runs in the hundreds of thousands . Your painting was unique to itself,and not a manufactured collectible like the 9.4,9.6 or 9.8 comic books are.

 

You are conflating two unrelated issue.

 

The number of copies in existence has no effect on whether grading creates artificial value or is only reflective of the grading fee.

[The-Collector]

In an event I do not think the premium paid for Cgc books is only reflective of the actual grading cost I think it is an aggregate of the grading fees and risk costs.

 

CGC identifies value by giving a guarantee as to quality.

 

It has not changed the underlying quality of the goods it is simply identifying the true quality of them. Thus eliminating the risk cost in pricing the comic. Hence the premium commanded.

 

This is not artificial it is simply a premium paid for a much higher degree of certainty in a field where that uncertainty is a large cost.

 

Edit:

 

This also helps you understand why the super high grades (HG) command such high premiums.

 

As grade increases so to does the likelihood that it will have some defect that prevents it from receiving a 9.X+ grade.

 

So with higher grades risk cost increases substantially and hence so does the premium paid for Cgc copies of these HG books.

 

This is probably a bit off topics..

 

But not as off topic as the sports discussion.

 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2012 by The-Collector

[fantastic_four]

That's as clear an indication as any that no matter how detailed a set of grading standards is defined, there's beauty in books that's still in the eye of the beholder.

 

I think he never attempted to define a standard, as in writing one down. He's said in the forums he doesn't think you can account for the infinity of defects that are possible on a comic. I disagree because I've seen human knowledge categorize plenty of other seemingly-chaotic parts of nature in other arts, but given that Overstreet's grading guides don't achieve the goal of standardizing grading, the possibility of it remains to be proven. I'm vaguely interested in proving this but have no actual incentive to spend the six to twelve man-months it'd take to do so. We all write our own guide and categorize defects in our heads--if humans can do it, they can write it down and agree. It's just that nobody's done it yet.

 

Yes, grading is an art in that we decide how much to deduct for defects. But the science is in categorizing defects and coming to agreement on how much to deduct for them. It's tough to collaborate to this degree and get the community to accept it, but it's possible. Quite tough, but also quite possible. CGC has implicitly done this already via their stance on defects and how much they deduct for them. Plenty of us disagree with the way they downgrade, yet we comprehend what they're doing. If they were able to openly discuss their standards instead of keeping the secret sauce a secret, more of us may actually come to agree with them. I don't expect them to ever do this, but someone else in the hobby can. The contradiction is that nobody's had the incentive to do so.

[pickycollector]

Certainly in this end of the pool, I think they already have.

 

And here's the really ironic thing...

 

One of CGC's supposed intended goals at inception was to provide an answer to the question of undisclosed restoration, to give a sense of security to buyers, that they knew exactly what they were getting when they slapped down the cash.

 

That has been twisted and milked to such an extent that you are now more likely to get a book that - in relation to the traditional definitions of restoration - has been worked on and is not being disclosed in a Universal label than on the raw market.

 

And the horrible thing is that we, as a market, have been so blinded by the sea of green washing around us that we have allowed it to happen.

Sad but so true

[Flaming_Telepath]

CGC identifies value by giving a guarantee as to quality.

 

CGC 'guarantees' nothing other than your book was viewed by three people.

 

They don't even guarantee that a book in a Universal label is unrestored.

 

Just that it was viewed by three people.