Ive lost ALL confidence in CGC - UPDATE on page 221 2 2

[ComicConnoisseur]

I have noticed that anyone who has anything to do with the money that CGC brings in posts in noncomittal ways and is vague.

.

 

That's not entirely true.

 

I have something to do with the money that CGC brings in, having a good chunk of my income from slabbed books, and I have posted very committed and very specific posts.

 

I don't want CGC to fail. I want them to get better. Right now, they lack the incentive to do that.

+1,000,000

Edited April 7, 2014 by ComicConnoisseur

[slym2none]

OK, so I haven't kept up with this thread for the past 100+ pages, should I go back and read all the newest stuff?

 

I could get another good 50 or so posts out of it...

 

 

 

 

-slym ( :: )

[MatterEaterLad]

I think the bigger problem is saying a book is restored and in reality it is not. If that is the case.

 

That's what it sounds like to me, which is sad.

 

The book was expertly graded blue TWICE...purple ONCE...and then decreed to be purple after this all blew up.

 

[MatterEaterLad]

I'm guessing if that 7.0 Purple had been Blue, the book would've never darkened CGC's door again ever. Surely players have a sense of when a playing piece is 'tapped out'.

 

But any wiggle room left at all, somebody will give it a go.

 

My point is, the "players" who play that way...not the occasional reslaber for some specific reason person...base their model on the fact that they DON'T think CGC is consistent..

 

So what kind of confidence did they have to begin with? They were confident that they would not be consistent? If you are not perfectly consistent with grading, how can you be expected to be perfectly consistent detecting restoration?

 

A good friend of mine says he will buy CGC books when he finds them...(he bids on eBay) because he's sure that the page count is correct.

 

He's confident.

 

Anyway, I think we got a pretty good answer. They messed up. There is no other answer. Maybe this time it was a bigger than slightly mess up, it's bound to happen...just a lost gamble.

 

I'm going to look forward to next Friday's thread;)

 

Yep. People who play the resub game are gambling and depending on CGCs variance. As a collector, that degree of variance (as far as resto check) seems too high for my tastes.

 

 

[Lost]

Restoration can't be detected reliably. Accept it and move along. Nothing to see here....

 

Most restoration can be detected reliably by people who have studied restoration. Reliably does not mean 100% as there is a human factor involved.

 

I can sometimes tell if a book is restored from 4 feet away. Sometimes I need a loop to confirm what I think might have been done to a book. Once in awhile I miss something.

 

If you are looking for perfection, then, yes, move along. The only place it exists is Fantasy Land.

 

Many collectors learn from reading the boards, so there is always something to see here......

 

my tongue was firmly in cheek for the number of people who apparently can't accept missed restoration and human error in this thread and thus get off the cgc criticism and move on from this thread ...not the boards

 

You're missing the point. As has been noted before, many people, especially those who put down large sums of money for comics, have educated themselves in restoration and grading. The problem comes when a potential buyer cannot examine a book for themselves, using their own education (whatever level it may be) to decide if the book is restored or not.

 

In that regard, CGC (and any other grading company worth anything; currently none) HAS to be near-perfect in detecting it, because by encasing it, they've (mostly) removed the ability for the buyer to investigate on his own.

 

It's not about making mistakes. No one that I have seen has ever said "CGC must be perfect, always, period." It's about how you go about fixing those mistakes. And if CGC makes such a mistake, they must be prepared to rigorously confront it and resolve it to the satisfaction of all parties involved, precisely because every buyer must (nearly always) accept CGC's word that a book isn't or is restored. There are literally millions (if not billions) of dollars resting on that reputation.

 

It is, after all, why they've been paid to do what they do for the last 15 years. For all the thousands upon thousands of books that people have paid them to grade, part of that is "mistake insurance."

 

It is the way that CGC addresses these situations that is being criticized, not that the situations exist.

 

They don't have to address it. They cover themselves on the certification notice. And I quote....

 

"A good faith effort is made to detect restoration, but CGC does not warrant the process or the results."

 

Warrant = Guarantee.

 

 

 

 

 

[porky]

Restoration can't be detected reliably. Accept it and move along. Nothing to see here....

 

Most restoration can be detected reliably by people who have studied restoration. Reliably does not mean 100% as there is a human factor involved.

 

I can sometimes tell if a book is restored from 4 feet away. Sometimes I need a loop to confirm what I think might have been done to a book. Once in awhile I miss something.

 

If you are looking for perfection, then, yes, move along. The only place it exists is Fantasy Land.

 

Many collectors learn from reading the boards, so there is always something to see here......

 

my tongue was firmly in cheek for the number of people who apparently can't accept missed restoration and human error in this thread and thus get off the cgc criticism and move on from this thread ...not the boards

 

You're missing the point. As has been noted before, many people, especially those who put down large sums of money for comics, have educated themselves in restoration and grading. The problem comes when a potential buyer cannot examine a book for themselves, using their own education (whatever level it may be) to decide if the book is restored or not.

 

In that regard, CGC (and any other grading company worth anything; currently none) HAS to be near-perfect in detecting it, because by encasing it, they've (mostly) removed the ability for the buyer to investigate on his own.

 

It's not about making mistakes. No one that I have seen has ever said "CGC must be perfect, always, period." It's about how you go about fixing those mistakes. And if CGC makes such a mistake, they must be prepared to rigorously confront it and resolve it to the satisfaction of all parties involved, precisely because every buyer must (nearly always) accept CGC's word that a book isn't or is restored. There are literally millions (if not billions) of dollars resting on that reputation.

 

It is, after all, why they've been paid to do what they do for the last 15 years. For all the thousands upon thousands of books that people have paid them to grade, part of that is "mistake insurance."

 

It is the way that CGC addresses these situations that is being criticized, not that the situations exist.

 

They don't have to address it. They cover themselves on the certification notice. And I quote....

 

"A good faith effort is made to detect restoration, but CGC does not warrant the process or the results."

 

Warrant = Guarantee.

 

 

 

 

 

if they can 100% detect resto with every eye in the house on one trip through and miss it on at least one (probably two) occasions when they couldn't be bothered to look closely enough, is that *really* a good faith effort?

[DR.X]

The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency.

 

I don't think I agree with that Bob. How many times have books been cracked, pressed, pounded, resubbed, cracked, pressed and pounded again in an attempt for a grade bump.

[Bomber-Bob]

The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency.

 

I don't think I agree with that Bob. How many times have books been cracked, pressed, pounded, resubbed, cracked, pressed and pounded again in an attempt for a grade bump.

 

You are correct, manipulation of the book does change what the CGC graders are looking at. When I wrote that, I was thinking of straight resubs, what Spider-Dan does. In that case he is simply counting on a change of opinion on the identical book. I always thought the big grade bumps on resubs were a result of pressing. Dan's business model shows us that's not true. His straight resubs get bumps.

[Moondog]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

[chrisco37]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

(thumbs u

 

Also, as the years have gone by, you hear people talking about tighter and looser grading periods. People that know how to play the game will buy in the tight periods and sub/resub in the loose periods.

[kav]

Label should say 'Graded in loose period'.

Or someone could start a chart showing periods so you could compare for comic you're considering buying.

[Jeffro.]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

Actually, CPR exists because CGC does not consider it to be restoration. This whole CPR issue would be a near non-factor had CGC done things differently from the beginning

[mysterio]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

Actually, CPR exists because CGC does not consider it to be restoration. This whole CPR issue would be a near non-factor had CGC done things differently from the beginning

 

And, as the OP has said, he wasn't CPRing the book. It was a simple CR with no press in the middle, because he thought the book warranted a straight upgrade. This doesn't negate the points about CPRing made above, but I thought that it was a pertinent fact to bring back up in the context of these comments. CR is a gamble on inconsistency, and moreso (I think) than a CPR where you are hedging your bets on a bump a bit more.

[comicwiz]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

Same here. As much as I see Sharon's point, there are situations where people resubmit for reasons other than upgrading. Two that I'm recalling from my own experiences. One was an old label that had a warped edge on the inner well that continued to spread inward, and toward the top outer edge. In order to have it reholdered in a new well, it needed to be regraded. I didn't mind so much because the book was already nearing 7 years sitting in the slab and I had wanted to have the microchamber paper removed and a new one inserted (as CGC itself announced that the microchamber paper should be replaced after 7 years). Another was a newly slabbed book were again the inner well was warped, and this time it was near the spine of a very expensive book, so I removed it myself as I didn't feel comfortable having the book in the slab one second longer than the time it took to liberate it, and I resubbed it raw. I was told both times that inner well warping does happen during the seal process.

 

I can't imagine too many people who were dealing with the puddling inner well problem that surfaced in recent months are going to be happy seeing their books in those slabs, and are likely going to be resubbing them. Again, being it's an inner well issue, those are books which will need to be regraded.

 

I don't see CPR or CR being the only situations where books are going to be resubbed/regraded, and blue/purple changes aren't something that any person should just accept as an inconsistency issue with in CGC's grading.

[mysterio]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

Same here. As much as I see Sharon's point, there are situations where people resubmit for reasons other than upgrading. Two that I'm recalling from my own experiences. One was an old label that had a warped edge on the inner well that continued to spread inward, and toward the top outer edge. In order to have it reholdered in a new well, it needed to be regraded. I didn't mind so much because the book was already nearing 7 years sitting in the slab and I had wanted to have the microchamber paper removed and a new one inserted (as CGC itself announced that the microchamber paper should be replaced after 7 years). Another was a newly slabbed book were again the inner well was warped, and this time it was near the spine of a very expensive book, so I removed it myself as I didn't feel comfortable having the book in the slab one second longer than the time it took to liberate it, and I resubbed it raw. I was told both times that inner well warping does happen during the seal process.

 

I can't imagine too many people who were dealing with the puddling inner well problem that surfaced in recent months are going to be happy seeing their books in those slabs, and are likely going to be resubbing them. Again, being it's an inner well issue, those are books which will need to be regraded.

 

Why would an inner well issue require regrading? If you send them the book intact within the case it should be a simple reholder (unless that refers to just the outer case, I've never done one). In any event, if you spend the money to ship the book back to them, and spend the money on the reholder, I can't see why they would require a regrade to fix something like puddling or warping of the inner well that they admit is a real phenomenon. As consumers of their products we should get cases we can be happy with, especially if we pay for a reholder, and that shouldn't require the additional risk and expense of a regrade.

[skypinkblu]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

I think that depends on who you are listening to Gary. I find they are always a little different than the way I grade. For example, I saw a 7.0 posted on one of the sales threads with a corner chip that must be at least 1/4 inch on the two edges... Roy posted a short time ago about how strict CGC is. I think they are just slightly inconsistent but not perfect as far as HOW they are inconsistent.

 

I also think CPR is a different kind of gamble than a straight CR. As someone else mentioned, you are hedging your bets by pressing the book first.

 

BTW, I don't think it's "nothing" that the company had blue/purple/blue labels...but we also don't have a clue as to what might have been done to the book in-between.

 

Dan says he was not the resubmitter. We don't KNOW who that person was. As I mentioned before I have heard of people taking trimmed/micro trimmed books and roughing up the edges with nail files (or something else) and adding dirt.

 

I consider myself very naive regarding this type of knowledge, I know very little about things that are done to books, how they are done...so if I've heard of it, it must be kind of common.

 

So who knows...unless CGC gets the book back and tells us, we may never know.

 

[comicwiz]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

Same here. As much as I see Sharon's point, there are situations where people resubmit for reasons other than upgrading. Two that I'm recalling from my own experiences. One was an old label that had a warped edge on the inner well that continued to spread inward, and toward the top outer edge. In order to have it reholdered in a new well, it needed to be regraded. I didn't mind so much because the book was already nearing 7 years sitting in the slab and I had wanted to have the microchamber paper removed and a new one inserted (as CGC itself announced that the microchamber paper should be replaced after 7 years). Another was a newly slabbed book were again the inner well was warped, and this time it was near the spine of a very expensive book, so I removed it myself as I didn't feel comfortable having the book in the slab one second longer than the time it took to liberate it, and I resubbed it raw. I was told both times that inner well warping does happen during the seal process.

 

I can't imagine too many people who were dealing with the puddling inner well problem that surfaced in recent months are going to be happy seeing their books in those slabs, and are likely going to be resubbing them. Again, being it's an inner well issue, those are books which will need to be regraded.

 

Why would an inner well issue require regrading?

 

I can't speak on whether some instances of inner well puddling could cause damage, but in my situation, it was a $3K book with a inner well bending right near the middle spine area of the book. I cracked it out and resubbed it raw, feeling a lot less worried about the bend spreading during shipment, and faring a better chance of the book arriving undamaged packed in the manner I use to ship raw books. I was told in that situation (as well as the other one) the book needed to be regraded.

[Bomber-Bob]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

Gary, I totally agree with you. CGC does not grade as strictly as in the past. I actually attribute this to Haspel and I mean this as a compliment to him. I think consistent, tight grading is good for the industry. It adds more value for the buyer in the open marketplace, giving the CGC product a good name. Seeing an overgraded, fugly book in a CGC slab makes them look bad.

[mysterio]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

Same here. As much as I see Sharon's point, there are situations where people resubmit for reasons other than upgrading. Two that I'm recalling from my own experiences. One was an old label that had a warped edge on the inner well that continued to spread inward, and toward the top outer edge. In order to have it reholdered in a new well, it needed to be regraded. I didn't mind so much because the book was already nearing 7 years sitting in the slab and I had wanted to have the microchamber paper removed and a new one inserted (as CGC itself announced that the microchamber paper should be replaced after 7 years). Another was a newly slabbed book were again the inner well was warped, and this time it was near the spine of a very expensive book, so I removed it myself as I didn't feel comfortable having the book in the slab one second longer than the time it took to liberate it, and I resubbed it raw. I was told both times that inner well warping does happen during the seal process.

 

I can't imagine too many people who were dealing with the puddling inner well problem that surfaced in recent months are going to be happy seeing their books in those slabs, and are likely going to be resubbing them. Again, being it's an inner well issue, those are books which will need to be regraded.

 

Why would an inner well issue require regrading?

 

I can't speak on whether some instances of inner well puddling could cause damage, but in my situation, it was a $3K book with a inner well bending right near the middle spine area of the book. I cracked it out and resubbed it raw, feeling a lot less worried about the bend spreading during shipment, and faring a better chance of the book arriving undamaged packed in the manner I use to ship raw books. I was told in that situation (as well as the other one) the book needed to be regraded.

 

I can't speak to whether or not the puddling can/will cause damage either. I just find it odd that a company would force you to spend money on a regrade because of an inner well that had the potential to cause damage to the book it was supposed to protect. That is a QC issue, period. It is bad enough to have to spend the reholder fee, but a complete regrade just seems a bit outrageous to me, especially on a $3K book that probably needed to go with very expensive walkthrough service.

 

Now in the case where you cracked the book yourself of course it would need to be regraded. But if you did send a book back to them in the original holder and they still insisted on a regrade to fix issues with the inner well that would be a problem IMO.

[batman_fan]

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics.

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

 

Actually, CPR exists because CGC does not consider it to be restoration. This whole CPR issue would be a near non-factor had CGC done things differently from the beginning

 

Sadly that boat has long left the dock never to return. These days, I would just be happy if they graded the book in front of them and didn't try to assume whether defects were production related or not, you know, basically grade according to how people use to and in many cases still grade. (thumbs u