CGC Comments Regarding the JIM 83

[rjpb]

Sub crease in a Fine:

 

http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7093&lotNo=91378

 

 

Didn't you get the memo that CGC has decided to market test comporting its standards with "ebay grading".

 

 

[Davenport]

Equally confusing was... that the better looking one must grade higher as 10 out of 10 people would pick the 9.4 looking one, for the exact same price, every time?

 

Is grading tied to purchasing behaviors? Or "independent" of retailing influences?

"Only what's in front of you" vs. "based on how buyer's react".

 

Sometimes it seems grading is just... unknowable. Like a language you can never learn.

 

It makes sense to me. If you have a book with a sub crease plus 9 other defects that grades 4.0, shouldn't a book with a sub crease and no other defects grade higher?

Isn't that why they invented the Qualified label? So a higher grade can be given and an unusual defect highlighted?

 

I've always hated the qualified label. Grade the book, not what it would be if it didn't have a particular defect.

I think that's what Flaming Telepath is saying too. Just grade the book, and let those involved with mutual transacting sort out why a 'ceiling' was reached, what it means and how it might affect pricing.

Grader's grade, the market does it's thing. Less confusion.

[Crimebuster]

Sub crease in a Fine:

 

http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7093&lotNo=91378

 

 

 

That's just flat out wrong.

[nearmint]

Equally confusing was... that the better looking one must grade higher as 10 out of 10 people would pick the 9.4 looking one, for the exact same price, every time?

 

Is grading tied to purchasing behaviors? Or "independent" of retailing influences?

"Only what's in front of you" vs. "based on how buyer's react".

 

Sometimes it seems grading is just... unknowable. Like a language you can never learn.

 

It makes sense to me. If you have a book with a sub crease plus 9 other defects that grades 4.0, shouldn't a book with a sub crease and no other defects grade higher?

Isn't that why they invented the Qualified label? So a higher grade can be given and an unusual defect highlighted?

 

I've always hated the qualified label. Grade the book, not what it would be if it didn't have a particular defect.

I think that's what Flaming Telepath is saying too. Just grade the book, and let those involved with mutual transacting sort out why a 'ceiling' was reached, what it means and how it might affect pricing.

Grader's grade, the market does it's thing. Less confusion.

 

But I still see Steve's point. You have to grade the whole book, not just the sub crease.

[VintageComics]

Sub crease in a Fine:

 

http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7093&lotNo=91378

 

 

 

That's just flat out wrong.

 

I agree that acc. to strict OSPG rules it's not a Fine but it is a textbook case of a CGC 6.0. Books looks nicer but has a book length crease in one cover.

 

 

 

 

[mrmyst]

Equally confusing was... that the better looking one must grade higher as 10 out of 10 people would pick the 9.4 looking one, for the exact same price, every time?

 

Is grading tied to purchasing behaviors? Or "independent" of retailing influences?

"Only what's in front of you" vs. "based on how buyer's react".

 

Sometimes it seems grading is just... unknowable. Like a language you can never learn.

 

It makes sense to me. If you have a book with a sub crease plus 9 other defects that grades 4.0, shouldn't a book with a sub crease and no other defects grade higher?

 

yes

[VintageComics]

Equally confusing was... that the better looking one must grade higher as 10 out of 10 people would pick the 9.4 looking one, for the exact same price, every time?

 

Is grading tied to purchasing behaviors? Or "independent" of retailing influences?

"Only what's in front of you" vs. "based on how buyer's react".

 

Sometimes it seems grading is just... unknowable. Like a language you can never learn.

 

It makes sense to me. If you have a book with a sub crease plus 9 other defects that grades 4.0, shouldn't a book with a sub crease and no other defects grade higher?

Isn't that why they invented the Qualified label? So a higher grade can be given and an unusual defect highlighted?

 

I've always hated the qualified label. Grade the book, not what it would be if it didn't have a particular defect.

I think that's what Flaming Telepath is saying too. Just grade the book, and let those involved with mutual transacting sort out why a 'ceiling' was reached, what it means and how it might affect pricing.

Grader's grade, the market does it's thing. Less confusion.

 

But I still see Steve's point. You have to grade the whole book, not just the sub crease.

 

As do I.

 

A VF/NM with a book length crease on one cover compared to a 'classic VG with multiple creases and tears and surface wear are not in the same ball park.

 

While rules are neccesary, and classic OSPG designations are...well, classic and more or less the foundation of the hobby's grading system, rules will change as they can't possibly cover every scenario all the time.

 

I fully understand the rationale for grading a book higher.

 

 

 

[Davenport]

Equally confusing was... that the better looking one must grade higher as 10 out of 10 people would pick the 9.4 looking one, for the exact same price, every time?

 

Is grading tied to purchasing behaviors? Or "independent" of retailing influences?

"Only what's in front of you" vs. "based on how buyer's react".

 

Sometimes it seems grading is just... unknowable. Like a language you can never learn.

 

It makes sense to me. If you have a book with a sub crease plus 9 other defects that grades 4.0, shouldn't a book with a sub crease and no other defects grade higher?

Isn't that why they invented the Qualified label? So a higher grade can be given and an unusual defect highlighted?

 

I've always hated the qualified label. Grade the book, not what it would be if it didn't have a particular defect.

I think that's what Flaming Telepath is saying too. Just grade the book, and let those involved with mutual transacting sort out why a 'ceiling' was reached, what it means and how it might affect pricing.

Grader's grade, the market does it's thing. Less confusion.

 

But I still see Steve's point. You have to grade the whole book, not just the sub crease.

 

As do I.

 

A VF/NM with a book length crease on one cover compared to a 'classic VG with multiple creases and tears and surface wear are not in the same ball park.

 

While rules are neccesary, and classic OSPG designations are...well, classic and more or less the foundation of the hobby's grading system, rules will change as they can't possibly cover every scenario all the time.

 

I fully understand the rationale for grading a book higher.

 

So does CGC. And they created a remedy specifically for those situations. But many don't care for that piece of their System, and so it goes...

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

So what about an ad page missing on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

Or a coupon clipped on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

I'm assuming that these could now grade as high as - oh, I don't know - 8.0? 6.0? 7.0?

 

And we're not talking 'use the Qualified Label', as we're actually grading the book, not copping out.

[VintageComics]

So does CGC. And they created a remedy specifically for those situations. But many don't care for that part of their System, and so it goes...

 

 

So maybe using that mentality CGC should have just gone back to the reliable Good / Fine / Mint system and put anything that doesn't fit into those 3 grades into a Qualified label.

 

Disagreements are as much bolstered by personality as facts.

 

The fact is that over time rules change/evolve to allow better coverage of all situations, in much the same way that OSPG evolved from G/F/M to the G/VG/F/VF/VFNM/NM- system we have now.

 

It happens out in the real world, it may as well happen in our fictional one.

 

 

 

 

[CKB]

So what about an ad page missing on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

Or a coupon clipped on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

I'm assuming that these could now grade as high as - oh, I don't know - 8.0? 6.0? 7.0?

 

And we're not talking 'use the Qualified Label', as we're actually grading the book, not copping out.

 

I think you have conflated two things that are handled differently.

 

First you have an objective defect - either the book is complete or it is not. On the universal scale that probably has a ceiling grade. it certainly does on the Overstreet scale.

 

The book length crease is a subjective thing - not all book length creases are created equal.

 

I realize it is more complicated than that, but I can't see taking the subjectivity (the "goodness" of the thing you are trying to describe with a numerical grade) out of condition determinations completely.

 

[VintageComics]

 

The book length crease is a subjective thing - not all book length creases are created equal.

 

 

Bingo.

[rjpb]

Qualified grades can be confusing, and perhaps overused by CGC, but I don't really have an issue with them. There are flaws that would severely limit a "universal" grade to the point that the condition of the rest of the comic becomes almost irrelevant to the grade assessment. A high grade appearing book with a missing centerfold may technically be a .5, but is it really accurate to give it the same grade as a total beater also missing the centerfold? Sure, the marketplace will probably shake out the difference, but is just as likely to with a qualified grade as well.

[VintageComics]

Qualified grades can be confusing, and perhaps overused by CGC, but I don't really have an issue with them. There are flaws that would severely limit a "universal" grade to the point that the condition of the rest of the comic becomes almost irrelevant to the grade assessment. A high grade appearing book with a missing centerfold may technically be a .5, but is it really accurate to give it the same grade as a total beater also missing the centerfold? Sure, the marketplace will probably shake out the difference, but is just as likely to with a qualified grade as well.

 

Many don't have a problem with a qualified grade. I think the disagreement that most have though, is how the qualified grade is used - in respect to what should and shouldn't be in a qualified grade.

 

For example, should a VF/NM book with a book length crease be graded a strict VG, a CGC 6.0/6.5 or a qualified VF/NM?

 

3 different opinions (at least 3 ) with varying degrees of support.

 

I personally believe that the CGC 6.0/6.5 grade is a smart choice but also understand why some people prefer a strict VG grade (or a strict Qualfied VF/NM).

 

Change is hard but it happens. Otherwise, like I said we'd still be grading everything Good / Fine / Mint.

 

 

 

 

[nearmint]

So what about an ad page missing on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

Or a coupon clipped on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

I'm assuming that these could now grade as high as - oh, I don't know - 8.0? 6.0? 7.0?

 

And we're not talking 'use the Qualified Label', as we're actually grading the book, not copping out.

 

Steve covered that in his last post, and I agree with him...

 

I don't think you can just say that a certain defect, such as a sub crease, must not be allowed in a higher grade than 4.0, unless it's a very high grade like 8.0. The look of the book, when it comes to grading, is very important. Now a book with a missing back cover or a centerfold would be a 0.5 and I don't think anyone would disagree.

[Davenport]

Qualified grades can be confusing, and perhaps overused by CGC, but I don't really have an issue with them. There are flaws that would severely limit a "universal" grade to the point that the condition of the rest of the comic becomes almost irrelevant to the grade assessment. A high grade appearing book with a missing centerfold may technically be a .5, but is it really accurate to give it the same grade as a total beater also missing the centerfold? Sure, the marketplace will probably shake out the difference, but is just as likely to with a qualified grade as well.

And doesn't the System allow a submitter to opt out and take the hit? Except, you know, that hit may be 'not fair' subjectively, so maybe raise the ceiling a bit considering, you know, making it a little less not fair...

 

Con. Fus. Ing.

[VintageComics]

Con. Fus. Ing.

 

Setting VCR clocks is confusing if you don't know how to do it. We should just stick to sundials and analog watches.

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

So what about an ad page missing on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

Or a coupon clipped on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

I'm assuming that these could now grade as high as - oh, I don't know - 8.0? 6.0? 7.0?

 

And we're not talking 'use the Qualified Label', as we're actually grading the book, not copping out.

 

Steve covered that in his last post, and I agree with him...

 

I don't think you can just say that a certain defect, such as a sub crease, must not be allowed in a higher grade than 4.0, unless it's a very high grade like 8.0. The look of the book, when it comes to grading, is very important. Now a book with a missing back cover or a centerfold would be a 0.5 and I don't think anyone would disagree.

 

But why?

 

Two specific flaws.

 

One with an immovable ceiling on the grade.

 

One without.

 

But both will be displayed on books that can otherwise differ greatly?

[nearmint]

So what about an ad page missing on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

Or a coupon clipped on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

I'm assuming that these could now grade as high as - oh, I don't know - 8.0? 6.0? 7.0?

 

And we're not talking 'use the Qualified Label', as we're actually grading the book, not copping out.

 

Steve covered that in his last post, and I agree with him...

 

I don't think you can just say that a certain defect, such as a sub crease, must not be allowed in a higher grade than 4.0, unless it's a very high grade like 8.0. The look of the book, when it comes to grading, is very important. Now a book with a missing back cover or a centerfold would be a 0.5 and I don't think anyone would disagree.

 

But why?

 

Two specific flaws.

 

One with an immovable ceiling on the grade.

 

One without.

 

But both will be displayed on books that can otherwise differ greatly?

 

Because there's an enormous difference between a book with pages missing and a book with a crease.

[VintageComics]

So what about an ad page missing on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

Or a coupon clipped on an otherwise 9.6 book?

 

I'm assuming that these could now grade as high as - oh, I don't know - 8.0? 6.0? 7.0?

 

And we're not talking 'use the Qualified Label', as we're actually grading the book, not copping out.

 

Steve covered that in his last post, and I agree with him...

 

I don't think you can just say that a certain defect, such as a sub crease, must not be allowed in a higher grade than 4.0, unless it's a very high grade like 8.0. The look of the book, when it comes to grading, is very important. Now a book with a missing back cover or a centerfold would be a 0.5 and I don't think anyone would disagree.

 

But why?

 

Two specific flaws.

 

One with an immovable ceiling on the grade.

 

One without.

 

But both will be displayed on books that can otherwise differ greatly?

 

Because there's an enormous difference between a book with pages missing and a book with a crease.

 

And because a person holding the book in hand 9 times out of 10 will not understand the reasoning of why both books are the same grade when one obviously looks much better than the other.

 

It was easy to create cut-off grades when there were only 3 grades to choose from and comics were worth under $100.

 

We're in an era where that's not enough. Values vary by 5 and 6 figures, society can accept more detail and the grade needs to fairly represent what the book looks like - or at least closely interpret it.