Certified Collectibles Group (CCG) Acquires Classics Incorporated 3 3

[VintageComics]

 

Sound bite.

 

Fact.

 

It might be a fact as an abstract model but Borock already came on here and admitted that pressing and resubmission was

 

a) not built into the original CGC model

b) was not shared with only a select group of people

 

So your model doesn't really apply.

 

So it is therefore just sensationalism and sound bite.

 

 

 

 

[seanfingh]

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.

 

Joseph, was this book purchased in a CGC purple holder initially?

 

The reason I ask is because it's not CGC's or the insider's (or the resto remover's for that matter) fault that the market puts an extremely unrealistic and irrationally low value on restored books, opening up the gap and therefore the market for people to remove restoration.

 

Unfortunately, that fault can squarely be placed on the shoulders of the open market and it's lack of education and understanding of how to understand restoration and how to value a book based on the amount and type of resto.

 

If a book goes cheap because everyone shuns resto even though it's just one dot of colour touch that is the real shame.

 

I respectfully disagree Roy, and a lot of the reasoning pertains to the particular context of the situation. Suffice it to say that if the book had dislcosed "colour touch removed" - and in this particular case, there was no reason it couldn't except for the reason that the people involved knew full well about the repercussions - the book would NEVER have attained the same price.

 

Ironically, it's evolved to the point where the "apparent" designation better suits blue label with hidden and/or deliberately undisclosed work than on a purple label.

 

I get where you're coming from.

 

My point was that if the market had valued the book with a dot of colour touch at the same value as it did with the colour touch removed (where it realistically should have been valued - that is how I would have valued it) then you wouldn't have that price gap and therefore that ability to remove colour touch and increase the price.

 

This is just wrong. The graders job is to grade the book as it is in hand. Period.

 

If a book had a tear seal that is unsealed, or a piece added to the corner, and the piece is removed, the book should be graded "as is".

 

You don't want graders speculating as to what might have been done to a book, with absolutely zero evidence present.

 

I agree with you.

 

I think that Joseph may be implying that CGC knew that the resto was removed and should have pro-actively notated it on the label but I do agree that the grader should really only knows what they see in front of them - ie the condition of the book and paper and nothing really more.

 

 

These guys remember books that they have graded, especially if they have seen them many times. I had a book signed by Robert Crumb and Art Spiegelman. It was a purple label 9.8 Funny Aminals. After the fact, I hated that purple label. I sent it to Matt Nelson to have the CT removed. It came back 9.6 Purple Yellow. I wasn't real happy

 

I called Haspel about it to see if he could give me any insight. He said that that particular book had been graded by CGC at least 6 times and that there was a swab of India ink an inch by an inch that had been applied copiously as though with someone's fingers. He didn't need any prompting or an invoice number because he knew the exact book I was talking about.

 

These guys remember the books that they see.

 

The fact that they remember books is completely irrelevant. They can't grade on memory. They have to grade what is in their hands in front of them.

 

 

It is relevant to the part of the quote I was interested in. I underlined it above. My point is that they don't have to speculate what was done if they can tell what was done since the last time they graded that particular book.

 

The graders' mandate must be to grade the book in front of them, not to draw from any previous knowledge of the book.

 

Mandate induced amnesia. Brilliant!!!!!

[VintageComics]

The graders' mandate must be to grade the book in front of them, not to draw from any previous knowledge of the book.

 

Exactly what I just said in my second last post.

 

For the system to remain impartial you need to have certain borders drawn up. Much like the Chinese Wall mentioned earlier which is needed to keep higher ups from interfering with operations, you need a set of guidelines to keep a submitter from interfering with operations as well. That includes everything that was done to the book up until the time that the book passes into CGC's hands.

 

The operation being as impartial of an opinion towards the grade of a submitted book as a grader can give.

 

The reality is that if you allow certain things to be made privy to graders for certain books then that affects what they know about the books and you are no longer allowing them to grade with the same playing field for all submissions.

 

 

[nearmint]

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.

 

Joseph, was this book purchased in a CGC purple holder initially?

 

The reason I ask is because it's not CGC's or the insider's (or the resto remover's for that matter) fault that the market puts an extremely unrealistic and irrationally low value on restored books, opening up the gap and therefore the market for people to remove restoration.

 

Unfortunately, that fault can squarely be placed on the shoulders of the open market and it's lack of education and understanding of how to understand restoration and how to value a book based on the amount and type of resto.

 

If a book goes cheap because everyone shuns resto even though it's just one dot of colour touch that is the real shame.

 

I respectfully disagree Roy, and a lot of the reasoning pertains to the particular context of the situation. Suffice it to say that if the book had dislcosed "colour touch removed" - and in this particular case, there was no reason it couldn't except for the reason that the people involved knew full well about the repercussions - the book would NEVER have attained the same price.

 

Ironically, it's evolved to the point where the "apparent" designation better suits blue label with hidden and/or deliberately undisclosed work than on a purple label.

 

I get where you're coming from.

 

My point was that if the market had valued the book with a dot of colour touch at the same value as it did with the colour touch removed (where it realistically should have been valued - that is how I would have valued it) then you wouldn't have that price gap and therefore that ability to remove colour touch and increase the price.

 

This is just wrong. The graders job is to grade the book as it is in hand. Period.

 

If a book had a tear seal that is unsealed, or a piece added to the corner, and the piece is removed, the book should be graded "as is".

 

You don't want graders speculating as to what might have been done to a book, with absolutely zero evidence present.

 

I agree with you.

 

I think that Joseph may be implying that CGC knew that the resto was removed and should have pro-actively notated it on the label but I do agree that the grader should really only knows what they see in front of them - ie the condition of the book and paper and nothing really more.

 

 

These guys remember books that they have graded, especially if they have seen them many times. I had a book signed by Robert Crumb and Art Spiegelman. It was a purple label 9.8 Funny Aminals. After the fact, I hated that purple label. I sent it to Matt Nelson to have the CT removed. It came back 9.6 Purple Yellow. I wasn't real happy

 

I called Haspel about it to see if he could give me any insight. He said that that particular book had been graded by CGC at least 6 times and that there was a swab of India ink an inch by an inch that had been applied copiously as though with someone's fingers. He didn't need any prompting or an invoice number because he knew the exact book I was talking about.

 

These guys remember the books that they see.

 

The fact that they remember books is completely irrelevant. They can't grade on memory. They have to grade what is in their hands in front of them.

 

 

It is relevant to the part of the quote I was interested in. I underlined it above. My point is that they don't have to speculate what was done if they can tell what was done since the last time they graded that particular book.

 

The graders' mandate must be to grade the book in front of them, not to draw from any previous knowledge of the book.

 

Mandate induced amnesia. Brilliant!!!!!

 

No one suggested amnesia. Only that if a grader has previous knowledge of a book, their mandate is to not factor that knowledge into the grade given.

[seanfingh]

 

The reality is that if you allow certain things to be made privy to graders for certain books then that affects what they know about the books and you are no longer allowing them to grade with the same playing field for all submissions.

 

 

Do they have Zatanna handle the mindwipe duties?

[VintageComics]

Mandate induced amnesia. Brilliant!!!!!

 

There is no way to remove the human aspect of grading. You know it. I know it.

 

Rules are set in place in any place of business to control what can be controlled as much as possible. You can't remove humanity from the equation.

 

 

 

 

[seanfingh]

Mandate induced amnesia. Brilliant!!!!!

 

There is no way to remove the human aspect of grading. You know it. I know it.

 

Rules are set in place in any place of business to control what can be controlled as much as possible. You can't remove humanity from the equation.

 

 

 

 

Exactly. Embracing reality will allow all apologists, no matter how extreme, to maintain a modicum of logic.

[Comicopolis]

 

The reality is that if you allow certain things to be made privy to graders for certain books then that affects what they know about the books and you are no longer allowing them to grade with the same playing field for all submissions.

 

 

Do they have Zatanna handle the mindwipe duties?

 

[VintageComics]

 

The reality is that if you allow certain things to be made privy to graders for certain books then that affects what they know about the books and you are no longer allowing them to grade with the same playing field for all submissions.

 

 

Do they have Zatanna handle the mindwipe duties?

 

I think as soon as Lawyers learn how to read minds so that they can finally do their jobs honestly, properly, efficiently and professionally we can then start worrying about whether a grader can do theirs.

 

 

[Davenport]

That illusion of "increased disclosure/certainty/knowledge" is THE cornerstone of the Crack-Out-Game. It's the required "confidence" ingredient.

 

The Game only works if workbench beauties and truly rare gems become indiscernible.

Sound bite.

Fact.

It might be a fact as an abstract model but Borock already came on here and admitted that pressing and resubmission was

 

a) not built into the original CGC model

b) was not shared with only a select group of people

 

So your model doesn't really apply.

 

So it is therefore just sensationalism and sound bite.

The model was imported over from coins.

[VintageComics]

And that was not a poke at lawyers at all. It just shows that in any business rules are drawn up to take our own humanity into account and we work around or with those rules.

 

 

[seanfingh]

And that was not a poke at lawyers at all. It just shows that in any business rules are drawn up to take our own humanity into account and we work around those rules.

 

 

Kick save, and a beauty!

[Boba]

Big surprise 5 (correction11) pages long already - and on a Friday night no less

132 pages and counting

[comicwiz]

And that was not a poke at lawyers at all. It just shows that in any business rules are drawn up to take our own humanity into account and we work around those rules.

 

 

Kick save, and a beauty!

 

[A-DONIS]

Is this purchase going to increase turnaround times?

[Prince Namor]

Is this purchase going to increase turnaround times?

 

Probably the opposite.

[mysterio]

No way this can reduce turnaround times. I think at best we can hope for them to say the way they are, which is a scary thing to hope for.

[VintageComics]

And that was not a poke at lawyers at all. It just shows that in any business rules are drawn up to take our own humanity into account and we work around those rules.

 

 

Kick save, and a beauty!

 

It's fun watching it on a big screen sometimes.

 

[Comicopolis]

Is this purchase going to increase turnaround times?

 

The original turnaround times will be restored to minty freshness.

[seanfingh]

 

The only thing this thread needed was a discussion of TATs.

 

2007's bugaboo = Pressing

 

2012s bugaboo = TATs

 

Two great tastes that taste great together.