Pretty Marvels of the Day

[sfilosa]

I still think it would be in the best interests of the hobby if CGC were more forthcoming with criteria they consider for a pedigree designation (and, while we are at it, their grading criteria as well).

 

My guess is other than what CGC says on the back of their LABEL, they are not going to put in guaranteed writing any other criteria.

 

Just my guess.

[burntboy]

well, yesterday i decided to go into my best DC boxes and cull out 90 candidates for CGC submission. (3 - 30 limit subs).

 

probably 25 books from 1962, 35 from 1963 and 30 from 1964. if my grading skills have progressed to where i'm somewhat competent, i'm guessing that 80+% of these books will grade out at 9.0+ and have a minimum of o/w pgs.

 

titles include WW, MIS, Aquaman, Flash, B&B, Showcase, Green Lantern, Superman, Batman, JLA, Atom, Sea Devils, Metal Men & Hawkman.

 

we'll just have to wait 4 months to see if i'm right

[namisgr]

My guess is other than what CGC says on the back of their LABEL, they are not going to put in guaranteed writing any other criteria.

 

What I meant, Steve, and did a poor job of explaining, is that collectors would benefit from detailed explanation of the grading criteria used by CGC to derive their grades. While I realize the company claims already to do so through their contribution to the grading section of Overstreet, I think there is still too much wobble in these "definitions" to foster more reliable "pre-slabbing grading" by the collecting community (myself included).

 

Good luck, Burnt, with all of those DCs! May CGC enter a phase of unusual leniency...

[divad]

well, yesterday i decided to go into my best DC boxes and cull out 90 candidates for CGC submission. (3 - 30 limit subs).

 

probably 25 books from 1962, 35 from 1963 and 30 from 1964. if my grading skills have progressed to where i'm somewhat competent, i'm guessing that 80+% of these books will grade out at 9.0+ and have a minimum of o/w pgs.

 

titles include WW, MIS, Aquaman, Flash, B&B, Showcase, Green Lantern, Superman, Batman, JLA, Atom, Sea Devils, Metal Men & Hawkman.

 

we'll just have to wait 4 months to see if i'm right

 

tick-tock

[sfilosa]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

My guess is other than what CGC says on the back of their LABEL, they are not going to put in guaranteed writing any other criteria.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

What I meant, Steve, and did a poor job of explaining, is that collectors would benefit from detailed explanation of the grading criteria used by CGC to derive their grades. While I realize the company claims already to do so through their contribution to the grading section of Overstreet, I think there is still too much wobble in these "definitions" to foster more reliable "pre-slabbing grading" by the collecting community (myself included).

 

I understand exactly what you meant. I'm just saying that for every actual CRITERIA they would set in writing, there would probably be an exception to it. If they said you can't have a 1" corner crease on a book graded above 9.0, what happens if the crease was EXTREMELY LIGHT and there were no other defects.

 

See my point. There are so many variables, why would they want to put down in writing how every defect is factored into the grade?

[tth2]

it's pretty bogus that the Golden and Silver Age collectors have decided that Bronze Age collectors are not "allowed" to have any pedigree collections.

 

Dr B, it's not prejudice against late SA or BA (or Copper or Modern). It's simply getting to the essence of what a pedigree is, and in my opinion one of the distinguishing traits of a true pedigree is its reflection of unique/eccentric behavior, as Pedigreeman and I were discussing.

 

If you go back to GA and early SA, if a book is in NM or better, there are pretty good odds that it's a pedigree, and the result of some pretty unusual collecting habits. If you go to 1965 and later, there are so many copies of a lot of books in NM or better, that the odds are that any particular NM issue is NOT from a pedigree. If you see a 9.6 book from 1968, do you automatically ask "Is this from a pedigree?" If the answer is no, does this surprise you? Probably not. When I see a NM or better book from pre-1964, I always wonder whether it's from a pedigree, and am usually surprised if it's not. Put another way, OOs of huge collections in the post-1965 era were not unique in their behavior, except maybe in terms of the scale that they were doing things.

[tth2]

I know of at least 4 pedigree designations for collections surfacing after the advent of CGC: Lost Valley, Vancouver, Don and Maggie Thompson, Diamond Run. I'm not certain, but the Oakland ped may qualify as well.

 

I have to admit I never heard of Diamond Run until Bob was selling the DR 9.4 AF 15, but that was so early in the CGC life cycle that I'm thinking the pedigree must have been known already. Oakland definitely existed before CGC, Vince was publicizing it when he was still solo.

[Forbush-Man]

So if such a thing as a post-1965 pedigree collection exists, the Oakland is one of the best, and if it doesn't...it's pretty bogus that the Golden and Silver Age collectors have decided that Bronze Age collectors are not "allowed" to have any pedigree collections.

 

Thank you Dr. for saying what several of us BA collectors were thinking.

 

 

A pedigree collection requires long runs of books purchased from the stands, so pedigree collections should'nt be limited to any particular age of books. Therefore Bronze age original owner collections should qualify,..........right?!?

[drdonaldblake]

totally agree with tim here

 

the oaklands got a gift pedigree designation from cgc- ho wmany other oakland type colelctions are out there unslabbed??- OO runs of late 1960's to mid 70;s marvels and dc's are plentiful , 2000-3000 nm/nm+ late 60's, early 70's books- so what???

 

if oakland got a pedigree then why didnt the golden state collection or for that matter the edenwald books?

[Forbush-Man]

I know of at least 4 pedigree designations for collections surfacing after the advent of CGC: Lost Valley, Vancouver, Don and Maggie Thompson, Diamond Run. I'm not certain, but the Oakland ped may qualify as well.

 

I have to admit I never heard of Diamond Run until Bob was selling the DR 9.4 AF 15, but that was so early in the CGC life cycle that I'm thinking the pedigree must have been known already. Oakland definitely existed before CGC, Vince was publicizing it when he was still solo.

 

And I believe Doug Suplia has a collection he calls Manitoba (sp?) too. If I recall correctly, these were late Silver to Bronze age books.

 

Here's a question for you:

 

Is it perhaps appropriate to say that somewhere around, let's say 1976 or later, due to comic hoarding, the statis of "Pedigree" is no longer valid?

[tth2]

if oakland got a pedigree then why didnt the golden state collection or for that matter the edenwald books?

 

Different issue, Ben. As I understand it, GS did not get the designation because of Dan Greenhalgh's poor record keeping. Edenwald was for another reason, maybe because they're not all OO?

[tth2]

Here's a question for you:

 

Is it perhaps appropriate to say that somewhere around, let's say 1976 or later, due to comic hoarding, the statis of "Pedigree" is no longer valid?

 

If you're asking whether pedigree status should ever be conferred upon a collection consisting of mostly post-1976 books, my answer of course would be no. And as discussed earlier, I would use a much earlier cut-off date (1964 or 1965).

 

But if you're asking whether post-1976 (or another date) book from a "legit SA pedigree" such as a Pacific Coast or Western Penn should not be granted pedigree status, that's a very interesting question.

 

On the one hand, for reasons discussed here, there's nothing "unique" about the late-60s and BA books in that pedigree, so why should they continue to get recognized as a pedigree when collections that started after 1966 shouldn't?

 

On the other hand, they do come from the same collection that produced the high grade early SA books, and should be recognized as such, if for no other reason than continuity's sake. And as far as I know, the OOs of several pedigrees, including PC and Boston, are still alive and kicking and perhaps adding to the collections every day (Pacific Coast Spawn #1, anyone?). We have certainly seen a lot of Western Penn BA books on the market.

 

This would be a much easier question if pedigree status wasn't awarded unless the OO had passed on already, huh? I guess I lean towards continuing to give pedigree designation to later books from a pedigree collection, although the thought of a PC or Western Penn Spawn #1 or Wildcats #1 really bugs the hell out of me.

 

My guess is that CGC have already implemented some kind of cut-off. Does anyone know the latest date seen thus far for a pedigree book?

[drbanner]

the oaklands got a gift pedigree designation from cgc- ho wmany other oakland type colelctions are out there unslabbed??- OO runs of late 1960's to mid 70;s marvels and dc's are plentiful , 2000-3000 nm/nm+ late 60's, early 70's books- so what???

 

Do you collect late silver/early bronze DC's? If you did, you would realize that high grade OO runs of late 1960's to mid 70's dc's are NOT plentiful. Just imagine the frenzy that would accompany the discovery of a new collection that had the books listed below...many would be the highest CGC graded copies!

 

All Star Western 10 NM+

Batman 232 NM+

Batman 237 NM+

Challengers of the Unknown 74 NM

D.C. 100 Page Super Spectacular 5 NM-

Dark Mansions of Forbidden Love 1 NM

Detective 400 NM

Doom Patrol 121 NM+

Flash 175 NM

Ghosts 1 NM

Hot Wheels 1 NM+

House of Mystery 174 NM-

House of Secrets 92 VF/NM

Star Spangled War Stories 151 NM

Weird War Tales 1 NM

Witching Hour 1 NM

[tth2]

Sorry Dr B, but are you kidding me? These books are unique in high grade? I just went to the census and randomly selected a few books that you mentioned:

 

All Star Western 10: 5 9.6s, 9 9.4s

Flash 175: 1 9.8, 1 9.6, 8 9.4s

Ghosts 1: 1 9.6, 7 9.4s

House of Secrets 92: 7 9.6s, 12 9.4s

Star Spangled War Stories 151: 1 9.8, 1 9.6, 5 9.4

 

Just from this group, there are multiple copies in 9.6 or better for each issue except for Ghosts 1, and at least 5 9.4s of each issue, with as many as 12 9.4s for HOS 92. Not exactly the kind of scarcity in high grade that would make a pedigree stand out in this era.

[drbanner]

Look, if you want to argue against identifying post-1965 collections as pedigrees as a rule, that's one thing, but you certainly can't discount the Oakland collection as a pedigree for not having the breadth and depth of high grade books exemplary of any of the other pedigrees.

[tth2]

Look, if you want to argue against identifying post-1965 collections as pedigrees as a rule, that's one thing, but you certainly can't discount the Oakland collection as a pedigree for not having the breadth and depth of high grade books exemplary of any of the other pedigrees.

 

You`re right, I would disqualify it on the basis of it being primarily a post-1965 collection. Don`t get me wrong, I am in no way disparaging books from that collection (or Boston, Golden State, BA Winnipegs, etc.). The books from these collections are fantastic, and worthy of being in any serious high end collector`s collection.

[drbanner]

The books from these collections are fantastic, and worthy of being in any serious high end collector`s collection.

 

I know...