THE AMAZING FANTASY #15 CLUB 39 39

[ProcessedMeatMan]

5 minutes ago, paul747 said:

I wish you would have documented this because you would be one of the first people saying that.  I have seen them close but i would say its the exact opposite of that.  even look at some of the given same grades a moderate grader can see the difference.  I'm calling a foul on that statement.  Unless like mentioned below, some kind of defect that one is hitting the book for and the other is not.

I understand the skepticism, but I honestly have no reason to lie. No benefit for me at all. Just sharing my experience.
I only have the old label for ToS 52. The others were cracked by the presser (CBCS slabs are a pain in the ), so I didn't keep those.

[paul747]

6 minutes ago, ProcessedMeatMan said:

Swamp Thing #1 - 8.0 to 8.5

Tales of Suspense #52 - 5.0 to 5.5

Tales of Suspense #57 - 5.0 to 5.5

Daredevil #158 - 9.0 to 9.6 (This one was pressed, so bit of a skew here)

Amazing Spider-Man #238 - 9.2 to 9.6

Marvel Super-Heroes #13 - 7.0 to 7.5

 

These aren't exactly mind-blowing differences in grades, but they signal to me that the grades are very close in general and likely within the margin of error. I don't know what happened with ASM 238, but I'm not complaining.

I also have an Avengers 4, ASM 6 and 15 that are former CBCS books being pressed and resubmitted. No idea how those will turn out. 

 

do you have before and after photos of any of these books? you had only one pressed?

[lou_fine]

8 minutes ago, ProcessedMeatMan said:

49 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

May I ask the genre of book and the grade range ?  Perhaps CBCS is tighter in GA or the low midgrade range or some kind of discernible pattern.  Perhaps they view tape, writing, printing defects, etc differently than CGC. I suspect there is good info from your post we can extract.

Swamp Thing #1 - 8.0 to 8.5

Tales of Suspense #52 - 5.0 to 5.5

Tales of Suspense #57 - 5.0 to 5.5

Daredevil #158 - 9.0 to 9.6 (This one was pressed, so bit of a skew here)

Amazing Spider-Man #238 - 9.2 to 9.6

Marvel Super-Heroes #13 - 7.0 to 7.5

 

These aren't exactly mind-blowing differences in grades, but they signal to me that the grades are very close in general and likely within the margin of error. I don't know what happened with ASM 238, but I'm not complaining.

May I ask the time period these were graded by CGC, as they kind of have a reputation for swinging between tight and loose grading time periods, almost like a pendulum sometimes?  Was it the early part of 2017? 

[paul747]

Don't get me wrong ,  i am not saying your lying but i would like to see the pics, if you have them.  Only one was worked on, none of the others that got a bump were touched?

 

CBCS books go for less money and you get a good bump this should raise their stock. 

 

AMS 238/ 2 whole grade bumps ?

Edited March 31, 2017 by paul747
.

[Get Marwood & I]

5 minutes ago, ProcessedMeatMan said:

I understand the skepticism, but I honestly have no reason to lie. No benefit for me at all. Just sharing my experience.
I only have the old label for ToS 52. The others were cracked by the presser (CBCS slabs are a pain in the ), so I didn't keep those.

 

Different page qualities too I see.

[ProcessedMeatMan]

Sorry guys, no other photo evidence. I wasn't really planning on conducting a scientific analysis! However, I did take tons of photos of the Avengers 4, ASM 6 and 15. But they are being pressed, so I'm not sure how valuable that info will be.

To be 100% honest, while I've been a collector for many many years, the whole pressing thing was relatively new to me until early last year. I didn't know that was done. And I came into some CBCS books through local trades. I prefer CGC overall (and am a bit OCD), so am in process of sending them all to CGC. 

[comicquant]

7 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

May I ask the time period these were graded by CGC, as they kind of have a reputation for swinging between tight and loose grading time periods, almost like a pendulum sometimes?  Was it the early part of 2017? 

Or early/mid summer of 2016

[paul747]

So you only had one pressed or all pressed?

[ProcessedMeatMan]

3 minutes ago, paul747 said:

So you only had one pressed or all pressed?

I have everything pressed now. Of the old CBCS books, only the Daredevil was pressed. 

Sorry for hijacking the thread gang!

[Get Marwood & I]

3 minutes ago, ProcessedMeatMan said:

I have everything pressed now. Of the old CBCS books, only the Daredevil was pressed. 

Sorry for hijacking the thread gang!

 

Don't be sorry! We're talking about comics nicely.  It's all good ?

[comicquant]

8 minutes ago, ProcessedMeatMan said:

I have everything pressed now. Of the old CBCS books, only the Daredevil was pressed. 

Sorry for hijacking the thread gang!

 

5 minutes ago, Marwood & I said:

 

Don't be sorry! We're talking about comics nicely.  It's all good ?

Agreed, this was a welcomed tangent.  Trust me.

[lou_fine]

10 minutes ago, ProcessedMeatMan said:

15 minutes ago, paul747 said:

So you only had one pressed or all pressed?

I have everything pressed now. Of the old CBCS books, only the Daredevil was pressed. 

Well, if none of the old books, except for the Daredevil 158 were originally pressed, maybe it's the pressing that accounts in large part for the increase in the grades as it sounds like the rest of them were pressed prior to grading by CGC. 

Or am I missing something in the timeline here? 

Edited March 31, 2017 by lou_fine

[Bomber-Bob]

5 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

Well, if none of the old books, except for the Daredevil 158 were originally pressed, maybe it's the pressing that accounts in large part for the increase in the grades as it sounds like the rest of them were pressed prior to grading by CGC. 

Or am I missing something in the timeline here? 

Lou, you have it backwards, only the Daredevil was pressed prior to submission to CGC = pressing was not a factor.

[lou_fine]

4 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

10 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

Well, if none of the old books, except for the Daredevil 158 were originally pressed, maybe it's the pressing that accounts in large part for the increase in the grades as it sounds like the rest of them were pressed prior to grading by CGC. 

Or am I missing something in the timeline here? 

Lou, you have it backwards, only the Daredevil was pressed prior to submission to CGC = pressing was not a factor.

Yes, I was confused by his later statement that it was the presser at CGC that cracked out the books for him.

I guess somebody at CGC has to do it for the client, so I guess the presser would have more expertise than anybody else. 

[lou_fine]

48 minutes ago, comicquant said:

55 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

May I ask the time period these were graded by CGC, as they kind of have a reputation for swinging between tight and loose grading time periods, almost like a pendulum sometimes?  Was it the early part of 2017? 

Or early/mid summer of 2016

From the serial number on the TOS 52, looks like that book was graded on February 2 of 2017.  Looks like he got the ST 1 and the TOS 57 plus a few other books graded on the same day. 

Not sure about books from other ages such as the ones listed here, but it would appear that GA books graded in the early part of 2017 appears to be graded a bit looser than the extreme tight grading which they endured in the summer and fall months of 2016. 

Edited March 31, 2017 by lou_fine

[Drummy]

Given how close those grades are, I'm not sure we can see a reliable pattern developing here for the two companies overall.  CBCS and CGC have always been a half-grade apart in the half-dozen books I've submitted, and CGC was one notch tougher on 4 of the 6.  They seem to handle grading quite similarly, which makes sense given Borock's involvement in both companies.

What I did notice was the paper change on the TOS 52 from "white" to "off-white", which does reflect my experience that CBCS is more lenient on page quality across the board.  I see a lot more CBCS books with "white pages" than CGC...but I warn you now not to resubmit any white-paged beauties since they are very likely to come back oww instead (perhaps to encourage you to submit the book YET AGAIN!) 

Thanks for sharing your experiences,

Dan 

[comicquant]

41 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

From the serial number on the TOS 52, looks like that book was graded on February 2 of 2017.  Looks like he got the ST 1 and the TOS 57 plus a few other books graded on the same day. 

Not sure about books from other ages such as the ones listed here, but it would appear that GA books graded in the early part of 2017 appears to be graded a bit looser than the extreme tight grading which they endured in the summer and fall months of 2016. 

August through December of 2016 was just brutal for SA/BA books but I had a few moderns come back higher than I expected during those times.  May through July of 2016 is when I experienced some of the loosest SA/BA grading I've ever seen come out of CGC.  To the point I won't buy books graded during those months.  There are several examples on dealer sites I frequent of books graded in June that are (In my opinion of course) 2, 3 and 4 bumps too high.  The dealers obviously submit in large batches because this particular dealer has a bunch graded that month which all seem over graded.  There's another who had a bunch graded in August and almost every one of them seems to be under graded by a couple of bumps.  I feel the "mechanical error" of the version 1.0 of the new case increased CGC's workload to the point where they either rushed things out the door to catch up or the brought in adjunct graders.  Either way I feel this could be the reason for the loose grading during those particular months.  All of this is speculation of course, but the shoe fits.

  

Edited March 31, 2017 by comicquant

[Jaydogrules]

1 hour ago, Marwood & I said:

 

Different page qualities too I see.

-J.

[comicquant]

4 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

-J.

[Get Marwood & I]