CGC Gets it right most of the time...

[skypinkblu]

I think it's more of a case that CGC's standards have slipped so much and for so long that other people's grading has matched it's downward trend.

 

I don't know if downward trend is the right way of saying it. I'm not the only one, but I handle a lot of CGC graded books. 1000's in a year.

 

I wouldn't say that it's been downhill over the years - it's been varied and as much up as it's been down.

 

There is a fairly steady "middle path" if you were to plot it on a graph.

 

Bollocks.

 

Honestly, bollocks.

 

And if you resort to the 'I never get along with Ares people' turdspeak, I'll finally classify you as unstable.

 

You're looking after your own arse, no more, no less.

 

Did I touch a nerve? Goodness, you'd think we were discussing abuse of human rights and not comics.

 

I do believe there is something to astrology. Not everything, but there is something there.

 

You don't have to agree with me on the astrology part, but you do have to agree that two people can see the same issue 2 completely different ways and disagree even though they are saying exactly the same thing. It's not even a right/wrong thing, it's just that we are two different people.

 

If you don't agree to that then you must always be right.

 

And if anyone is telling me that CGC is tighter 12 years ago than they are today, well that's just bollocks as I can probably pull off dozens of pics of overgraded books on Heritage sitting in old labels.

 

Interesting story: the first time I was introduced to grading inconsistency, before I even knew it existed saI was a noob to CGC at the time (circa 2003/2004) was from a guy who was explaining how overgraded some of his books were. So if we had overgraded books 10 years ago (and we do, they are sitting in old labels, which they did away with in 2003 I think) then where does that leave us today?

 

It's not even a discussion. We had over graded and under graded books in 2001, 2002, 2003 and we have them today.

 

It's cyclical. There has not been a steady decline in grade.

 

 

I'm lost...if they are always inconsistent, it's cyclical? then why wait to submit? If they are always inconstant, wouldn't they be just as inconsistent now?

 

I'm referring to this statement.

 

 

I've heard tight lately from several people.

 

I have a few hundred books that I'm not submitting for that reason.

 

You clearly have a huge problem with tight grading.

 

You're taking my statement out of the greater context of the conversation, though.

 

Why am I not submitting now? Because they will loosen up again later. Because of their inconsistency.

 

I purchased those books with my eye on a specific grade for each book. I paid $X because I expect each book (within a reasonable percentage - usually 80% when they are "middle of the road") to hit a certain grade.

 

If they were consistent all the time I'd never hold any books back but in this case, why would I submit them?

 

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

I think it's more of a case that CGC's standards have slipped so much and for so long that other people's grading has matched it's downward trend.

 

I don't know if downward trend is the right way of saying it. I'm not the only one, but I handle a lot of CGC graded books. 1000's in a year.

 

I wouldn't say that it's been downhill over the years - it's been varied and as much up as it's been down.

 

There is a fairly steady "middle path" if you were to plot it on a graph.

 

Bollocks.

 

Honestly, bollocks.

 

And if you resort to the 'I never get along with Ares people' turdspeak, I'll finally classify you as unstable.

 

You're looking after your own arse, no more, no less.

 

Did I touch a nerve? Goodness, you'd think we were discussing abuse of human rights and not comics.

 

I do believe there is something to astrology. Not everything, but there is something there.

 

You don't have to agree with me on the astrology part, but you do have to agree that two people can see the same issue 2 completely different ways and disagree even though they are saying exactly the same thing. It's not even a right/wrong thing, it's just that we are two different people.

 

If you don't agree to that then you must always be right.

 

And if anyone is telling me that CGC is tighter 12 years ago than they are today, well that's just bollocks as I can probably pull off dozens of pics of overgraded books on Heritage sitting in old labels.

 

Interesting story: the first time I was introduced to grading inconsistency, before I even knew it existed saI was a noob to CGC at the time (circa 2003/2004) was from a guy who was explaining how overgraded some of his books were. So if we had overgraded books 10 years ago (and we do, they are sitting in old labels, which they did away with in 2003 I think) then where does that leave us today?

 

It's not even a discussion. We had over graded and under graded books in 2001, 2002, 2003 and we have them today.

 

It's cyclical. There has not been a steady decline in grade.

 

 

I have a business partner. He's been in comics retail for 24 years. On and off, I've been in comics retail for 22 years.

 

We have submitted books from CGC's inception.

 

For the first seven/eight years of CGC's existence, our submission ratios were 10% overgraded, 50% on the mark, 35% a point under-graded, 5% under-graded outliers.

 

For the last three/four years, we have not had a single submission come back lower than the grade we assigned.

 

We're the same two guys, grading to the same personal standards.

 

CGC are 373 different guys, grading to unpublished, flexible standards.

 

There has been a steady decline in strictness of grading and I have more evidence of that fact than you can shake a shitty stick at. (thumbs u

[VintageComics]

I'm lost...if they are always inconsistent, it's cyclical? then why wait to submit? If they are always inconstant, wouldn't they be just as inconsistent now?

 

I'm referring to this statement.

 

This really isn't a discussion about me, is it?

 

Or at least it's not supposed to be.

 

[joecgcmaniac]

I think it's more of a case that CGC's standards have slipped so much and for so long that other people's grading has matched it's downward trend.

 

I don't know if downward trend is the right way of saying it. I'm not the only one, but I handle a lot of CGC graded books. 1000's in a year.

 

I wouldn't say that it's been downhill over the years - it's been varied and as much up as it's been down.

 

There is a fairly steady "middle path" if you were to plot it on a graph.

 

Bollocks.

 

Honestly, bollocks.

 

And if you resort to the 'I never get along with Ares people' turdspeak, I'll finally classify you as unstable.

 

You're looking after your own arse, no more, no less.

 

Did I touch a nerve? Goodness, you'd think we were discussing abuse of human rights and not comics.

 

I do believe there is something to astrology. Not everything, but there is something there.

 

You don't have to agree with me on the astrology part, but you do have to agree that two people can see the same issue 2 completely different ways and disagree even though they are saying exactly the same thing. It's not even a right/wrong thing, it's just that we are two different people.

 

If you don't agree to that then you must always be right.

 

And if anyone is telling me that CGC is tighter 12 years ago than they are today, well that's just bollocks as I can probably pull off dozens of pics of overgraded books on Heritage sitting in old labels.

 

Interesting story: the first time I was introduced to grading inconsistency, before I even knew it existed saI was a noob to CGC at the time (circa 2003/2004) was from a guy who was explaining how overgraded some of his books were. So if we had overgraded books 10 years ago (and we do, they are sitting in old labels, which they did away with in 2003 I think) then where does that leave us today?

 

It's not even a discussion. We had over graded and under graded books in 2001, 2002, 2003 and we have them today.

 

It's cyclical. There has not been a steady decline in grade.

 

 

I'm lost...if they are always inconsistent, it's cyclical? then why wait to submit? If they are always inconstant, wouldn't they be just as inconsistent now?

 

I'm referring to this statement.

 

 

I've heard tight lately from several people.

 

I have a few hundred books that I'm not submitting for that reason.

 

You clearly have a huge problem with tight grading.

 

You're taking my statement out of the greater context of the conversation, though.

 

Why am I not submitting now? Because they will loosen up again later. Because of their inconsistency.

 

I purchased those books with my eye on a specific grade for each book. I paid $X because I expect each book (within a reasonable percentage - usually 80% when they are "middle of the road") to hit a certain grade.

 

If they were consistent all the time I'd never hold any books back but in this case, why would I submit them?

 

 

 

 

I think Roy has managed to run around in circles so many times that he has forgotten where he started from. That, or he just got confused.

[VintageComics]

I think Roy has managed to run around in circles so many times that he has forgotten where he started from. That, or he just got confused.

 

I don't understand why we're discussing me.

 

CGC is inconsistent. Everyone can agree on that.

 

What does that have to do with me?

 

 

[joecgcmaniac]

I think Roy has managed to run around in circles so many times that he has forgotten where he started from. That, or he just got confused.

 

I don't understand why we're discussing me.

 

CGC is inconsistent. Everyone can agree on that.

 

What does that have to do with me?

 

 

My bad

 

 

I thought EVERYTHING had to do with you

[VintageComics]

I'm lost...if they are always inconsistent, it's cyclical? then why wait to submit? If they are always inconstant, wouldn't they be just as inconsistent now?

 

I'm referring to this statement.

 

 

I think Roy has managed to run around in circles so many times that he has forgotten where he started from. That, or he just got confused.

 

I wasn't saying that they are inconsistent on a daily basis.

 

What I was saying was that they go through cyclical swings over time - they go tight for a time, then they are "on" for a time, then they are loose for a time, then the cycle starts again.

 

Is this what you guys are asking me?

[VintageComics]

 

I thought EVERYTHING had to do with you

 

It apparently does whenever the same people start asking only me questions.

 

 

[skypinkblu]

I'm lost...if they are always inconsistent, it's cyclical? then why wait to submit? If they are always inconstant, wouldn't they be just as inconsistent now?

 

I'm referring to this statement.

 

 

I think Roy has managed to run around in circles so many times that he has forgotten where he started from. That, or he just got confused.

 

I wasn't saying that they are inconsistent on a daily basis.

 

What I was saying was that they go through cyclical swings over time - they go tight for a time, then they are "on" for a time, then they are loose for a time, then the cycle starts again.

 

Is this what you guys are asking me?

 

I'll put it another way...If they are always inconsistent, then don't you always have the same luck of the draw?

If you get a book that is graded too tightly in your opinion, do you send it in for a do-over?

 

I do have books graded, but very few, I'm more likely to just buy a book that's already in a case, so I'm just curious.

 

It seems like it's more how someone can game the system rather than going to a grading company for an honest grading opinion.

 

Or am I getting the wrong idea here?

 

[seanfingh]

I'm lost...if they are always inconsistent, it's cyclical? then why wait to submit? If they are always inconstant, wouldn't they be just as inconsistent now?

 

I'm referring to this statement.

 

 

I think Roy has managed to run around in circles so many times that he has forgotten where he started from. That, or he just got confused.

 

I wasn't saying that they are inconsistent on a daily basis.

 

What I was saying was that they go through cyclical swings over time - they go tight for a time, then they are "on" for a time, then they are loose for a time, then the cycle starts again.

 

Is this what you guys are asking me?

 

 

 

[mrmyst]

Quit pickin at Roy. He's statin' the true.

[skypinkblu]

and I need to read before hitting spell check's corrections;)

[seanfingh]

Quit pickin at Roy. He's statin' the true.

 

I'm making memes, dork.

[VintageComics]

I'll put it another way...If they are always inconsistent, then don't you always have the same luck of the draw?

If you get a book that is graded too tightly in your opinion, do you send it in for a do-over?

 

I do have books graded, but very few, I'm more likely to just buy a book that's already in a case, so I'm just curious.

 

It seems like it's more how someone can game the system rather than going to a grading company for an honest grading opinion.

 

Or am I getting the wrong idea here?

 

Again, I'm not sure why we are talking about me? This discussion was supposed to be about CGC's grading.

 

 

I've already answered that the inconstancy I was talking about is not a "luck of the draw" daily thing, it was a cyclical loose/tight cycle over time.

 

I do resubmit if the think the book has gotten the wrong grade.

 

I learned the hard way that it does happen - like the time years ago when I subbed an Iron Man #55 and it came back a CGC 9.2. The book was nearly flawless and I couldn't for the life of me figure out why it was only a 9.2 but I sold it as such on this forum only to have the new owner resubmit the book and get a more accurate 9.6 on the book with no pressing.

 

Is that gaming the system or should I have just gotten the correct grade on the book the first time?

 

Anyhow, I won't be answering any more questions. This wasn't supposed to be a discussion about me.

 

When words like turd, unstable and gaming start coming out to play it's time for me to find something fun to do on a Friday night, cause this isn't my idea of fun any more.

 

Nite all.

 

[VintageComics]

Quit pickin at Roy. He's statin' the true.

 

I'm making memes, dork.

 

Despite Sean's adamant disapproval, I like him.

 

His pictures suck, though.

 

[skypinkblu]

I'll put it another way...If they are always inconsistent, then don't you always have the same luck of the draw?

If you get a book that is graded too tightly in your opinion, do you send it in for a do-over?

 

I do have books graded, but very few, I'm more likely to just buy a book that's already in a case, so I'm just curious.

 

It seems like it's more how someone can game the system rather than going to a grading company for an honest grading opinion.

 

Or am I getting the wrong idea here?

 

Again, I'm not sure why we are talking about me? This discussion was supposed to be about CGC's grading.

 

 

I've already answered that the inconsiscy I was talking about is not a "luck of the draw" daily thing, it was a cyclical loose/tight cycle over time.

 

I do resubmit if the think the book has gotten the wrong grade.

 

I learned the hard way that it does happen - like the time years ago when I subbed an Iron Man #55 and it came back a CGC 9.2. The book was nearly flawless and I couldn't for the life of me figure out why it was only a 9.2 but I sold it as such on this forum only to have the new owner resubmit the book and get a more accurate 9.6 on the book with no pressing.

 

Is that gaming the system or should I have just gotten the correct grade on the book the first time?

 

Anyhow, I won't be answering any more questions. This wasn't supposed to be a discussion about me.

 

When words like turd, unstable and gaming start coming out to play it's time for me to find something fun to do on a Friday night, cause this isn't my idea of fun any more.

 

Nite all.

 

 

I asked YOU, because you seemed to present yourself as an expert. I'm not an expert.

 

I'm going to go along with consistently inconsistent;)

 

Now I have go find out how to do MEMES:)

[Columbia Comics]

I'll put it another way...If they are always inconsistent, then don't you always have the same luck of the draw?

If you get a book that is graded too tightly in your opinion, do you send it in for a do-over?

 

I do have books graded, but very few, I'm more likely to just buy a book that's already in a case, so I'm just curious.

 

It seems like it's more how someone can game the system rather than going to a grading company for an honest grading opinion.

 

Or am I getting the wrong idea here?

 

Again, I'm not sure why we are talking about me? This discussion was supposed to be about CGC's grading.

 

 

I've already answered that the inconstancy I was talking about is not a "luck of the draw" daily thing, it was a cyclical loose/tight cycle over time.

 

I do resubmit if the think the book has gotten the wrong grade.

 

I learned the hard way that it does happen - like the time years ago when I subbed an Iron Man #55 and it came back a CGC 9.2. The book was nearly flawless and I couldn't for the life of me figure out why it was only a 9.2 but I sold it as such on this forum only to have the new owner resubmit the book and get a more accurate 9.6 on the book with no pressing.

 

Is that gaming the system or should I have just gotten the correct grade on the book the first time?

 

Anyhow, I won't be answering any more questions. This wasn't supposed to be a discussion about me.

 

When words like turd, unstable and gaming start coming out to play it's time for me to find something fun to do on a Friday night, cause this isn't my idea of fun any more.

 

Nite all.

 

 

Guess you're taking your toys and leaving the sandbox huh??

[seanfingh]

I'll put it another way...If they are always inconsistent, then don't you always have the same luck of the draw?

If you get a book that is graded too tightly in your opinion, do you send it in for a do-over?

 

I do have books graded, but very few, I'm more likely to just buy a book that's already in a case, so I'm just curious.

 

It seems like it's more how someone can game the system rather than going to a grading company for an honest grading opinion.

 

Or am I getting the wrong idea here?

 

Again, I'm not sure why we are talking about me? This discussion was supposed to be about CGC's grading.

 

 

I've already answered that the inconsiscy I was talking about is not a "luck of the draw" daily thing, it was a cyclical loose/tight cycle over time.

 

I do resubmit if the think the book has gotten the wrong grade.

 

I learned the hard way that it does happen - like the time years ago when I subbed an Iron Man #55 and it came back a CGC 9.2. The book was nearly flawless and I couldn't for the life of me figure out why it was only a 9.2 but I sold it as such on this forum only to have the new owner resubmit the book and get a more accurate 9.6 on the book with no pressing.

 

Is that gaming the system or should I have just gotten the correct grade on the book the first time?

 

Anyhow, I won't be answering any more questions. This wasn't supposed to be a discussion about me.

 

When words like turd, unstable and gaming start coming out to play it's time for me to find something fun to do on a Friday night, cause this isn't my idea of fun any more.

 

Nite all.

 

 

[Logan510]

[buttock]

CGC is, of course, the best grading service out there in terms of quality and post-grading liquidity and I suspect they are spot on or undergrade 95-98% of the time.

 

Nothing like.

 

I have not seen a potentially undergraded book from CGC for over 3 years.

 

Not. A. One.

 

However, I have just learned not moments ago that a raw FN/VF (borderline VF-) I recently sold is now residing in a 9.0 slab without a damned thing being done to it.

 

CGC are obviously working to standards that (a) aren't made public, (b) change by the month and © are looser than anything I ever learned over 40 years of collecting and dealing.

 

And that's sad.

 

Without reading the rest of this thread, I have to agree with FT. I've been doing this as a hardcore hobby for over 20 years, and CGC's standards aren't the same as those I've come to know as a collector. They have evolved -- in my opinion -- to give a book the most liberal grade it can reasonably get. Accuracy isn't the target, customer satisfaction is.