Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[mysterio]

For this thread it seems to boil down to a single question...

 

How will CGC de-incentivize‎ damaging books to get better grade-labels?

 

Quoted for accuracy.

[Bomber-Bob]

For this thread it seems to boil down to a single question...

 

How will CGC de-incentivize‎ damaging books to get better grade-labels?

 

Quoted for accuracy.

 

Though worded a bit awkwardly, it is a very valid point that encompasses most of our problems. CGC, including CCS, should step up as curators, protectors of the hobby so to speak. Seeing these fugly, manipulated books, submitted by big money collectors, and rewarded with uber grades sees many of us disgusted with the state of the hobby.

[Reversed-migration]

For this thread it seems to boil down to a single question...

 

How will CGC de-incentivize‎ damaging books to get better grade-labels?

(assuming they would want to)

 

Lots of details around how damage manifests, adding faux-spine booklength creases, maverick staples and paper tearing, 'shrunken' cover effect., but the reason is singular: There's a potential payoff from CGC for the effort.

 

Or, to put it a bit more to the point...

 

When will CGC value their reputation and the long-term health of the hobby more than their bottom line?

 

That's a rhetorical question, right?

[jimjum12]

hahahahaha

 

I would also like for CGC to pay my rent!

I would also like for CCS to give me a cold Dr Pepper right now

I would like to see CGC not grade so harsh on defects on my books

 

We're trying to accomplish something here. Productive comments would be appreciated.

 

.... I'd like to take a minute to apologize for some of my wisea$$ comments earlier in the thread. I realize how inportant this is to many of you and your concerns are certainly valid. It may be a subconscious case of "sour grapes" with me as I can't afford these types of books anyway. One thing that stands out to me is that CGC may have placed themselves between a rock and a hard place here. A customer requests a service they provide with CCS and even though the course requested may not be a good move for said book, can they really refuse to provide the service ? I'm sure this will be resolved to the satisfaction of most. CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[drbanner]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

[Bomber-Bob]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

 

Borock and Haspel seemed to make a good team for CGC. With Borock handling the PR and Haspel doing the heavy grading things certainly seemed better back then. I remember, upon submitting some Pedigree books and waiting a long time, I was told that Haspel had to personally inspect and validate every Pedigree. Nowdays, all you have to do is put the pedigree name on the label and they give it to you.

[pickycollector]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

Is there a known date in CGC history to differenciate between Borock/Haspel period and the period after ?

[drbanner]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

Is there a known date in CGC history to differenciate between Borock/Haspel period and the period after ?

Sure, qualitatively the timeline looks like this:

 

Borock + Haspel = Golden Age

Haspel Only = Silver Age

Haspel Hiatus = Dark Age

Haspel Returns = Renaissance

Haspel Leaves = The Age of Chaos and Anarchy

 

I'm not sure of the exact dates, so someone else will have to provide an accurate temporal resolution of these ages.

[AlexanderM]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

 

Borock and Haspel seemed to make a good team for CGC. With Borock handling the PR and Haspel doing the heavy grading things certainly seemed better back then. I remember, upon submitting some Pedigree books and waiting a long time, I was told that Haspel had to personally inspect and validate every Pedigree. Nowdays, all you have to do is put the pedigree name on the label and they give it to you.

 

But CGC itself does not prep books for grading, but (having read only a third of the pages in this loooong thread...) does CGC have an affiliated company that does this?

[drbanner]

But CGC itself does not prep books for grading...

[ComicConnoisseur]

FYI, I have FINALLY read through the entire thread. I will be speaking with CGC/CCS this week to ascertain where things stand.

 

In the meantime, to facilitate any discussions I might have it would be helpful for those who believe there are questions outstanding to specifically list what they would like to see answered.

 

I will post a follow-up in the thread after the appropriate conversations.

I know this is a long shot, but how about CGC doing away with digital increments of 9?

An example instead of having 9.2, 9.4,9.6,9.8, just have instead 9.0, 9.5 and 10. Why? because I think this would slow down the amount of controversial techniques done to the comic books that seemed to be unpopular.

Also, what are the chances of RFID technology being implemented on the slabs or comic book themselves, so we can track them better?

Lastly if I buy a blue label CGC comic book with tape on the cover, and then crack it to resub would it come back a lower grade, qualified grade or plod?

thank you for your time.

sincerely CC

 

[Foolkiller]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

 

You're kidding right?

[drbanner]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

You're kidding right?

No, kidding about what?

[AlexanderM]

FYI, I have FINALLY read through the entire thread. I will be speaking with CGC/CCS this week to ascertain where things stand.

 

In the meantime, to facilitate any discussions I might have it would be helpful for those who believe there are questions outstanding to specifically list what they would like to see answered.

 

I will post a follow-up in the thread after the appropriate conversations.

I know this is a long shot, but how about CGC doing away with digital increments of 9?

An example instead of having 9.2, 9.4,9.6,9.8, just have instead 9.0, 9.5 and 10. Why? because I think this would slow down the amount of controversial techniques done to the comic books that seemed to be unpopular.

Also, what are the chances of RFID technology being implemented on the slabs or comic book themselves, so we can track them better?

Lastly if I buy a blue label CGC comic book with tape on the cover, and then crack it to resub would it come back a lower grade, qualified grade or plod?

thank you for your time.

sincerely CC

 

I think RFID is a good idea.

[AlexanderM]

But CGC itself does not prep books for grading...

 

Tell me

[jimjum12]

FYI, I have FINALLY read through the entire thread. I will be speaking with CGC/CCS this week to ascertain where things stand.

 

In the meantime, to facilitate any discussions I might have it would be helpful for those who believe there are questions outstanding to specifically list what they would like to see answered.

 

I will post a follow-up in the thread after the appropriate conversations.

I know this is a long shot, but how about CGC doing away with digital increments of 9?

An example instead of having 9.2, 9.4,9.6,9.8, just have instead 9.0, 9.5 and 10. Why? because I think this would slow down the amount of controversial techniques done to the comic books that seemed to be unpopular.

Also, what are the chances of RFID technology being implemented on the slabs or comic book themselves, so we can track them better?

Lastly if I buy a blue label CGC comic book with tape on the cover, and then crack it to resub would it come back a lower grade, qualified grade or plod?

thank you for your time.

sincerely CC

 

I think RFID is a good idea.

 

...... having 9.0/9.5/10.0 splits is not a good idea. Grading a 9.0 and a 9.4 at the same level might also generate even more efforts at upgrading. Plus it defeats the purpose of accurate grading. Steve Borock once told me that one of his original regrets was not having a tier between 8.5 and 9.0 ...... as SO many books were significantly nicer than 8.5, yet not nice enough to make 9.0. It's great for a buyer, but very unfair to the seller. You'll notice the disparity in opinion by looking at what complaints are made about different grading "periods"...... the buyers want tough grading so they get more than what they're paying for and the sellers want it looser so they don't get reamed when trying to recoup their investments. Never ending Yin and Yang. As a person who does both, I just want accuracy so I don't lose out and also don't have to feel apologetic during a sale. CGC still grades tighter than most dealers..... but it's not good for the hobby to have clearly superior examples residing in the same grade. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[mysterio]

FYI, I have FINALLY read through the entire thread. I will be speaking with CGC/CCS this week to ascertain where things stand.

 

In the meantime, to facilitate any discussions I might have it would be helpful for those who believe there are questions outstanding to specifically list what they would like to see answered.

 

I will post a follow-up in the thread after the appropriate conversations.

I know this is a long shot, but how about CGC doing away with digital increments of 9?

An example instead of having 9.2, 9.4,9.6,9.8, just have instead 9.0, 9.5 and 10. Why? because I think this would slow down the amount of controversial techniques done to the comic books that seemed to be unpopular.

Also, what are the chances of RFID technology being implemented on the slabs or comic book themselves, so we can track them better?

Lastly if I buy a blue label CGC comic book with tape on the cover, and then crack it to resub would it come back a lower grade, qualified grade or plod?

thank you for your time.

sincerely CC

 

I think RFID is a good idea.

 

...... having 9.0/9.5/10.0 splits is not a good idea. Grading a 9.0 and a 9.4 at the same level might also generate even more efforts at upgrading. Plus it defeats the purpose of accurate grading. Steve Borock once told me that one of his original regrets was not having a tier between 8.5 and 9.0 ...... as SO many books were significantly nicer than 8.5, yet not nice enough to make 9.0. It's great for a buyer, but very unfair to the seller. You'll notice the disparity in opinion y looking at what complaints are made about different grading "periods"...... the buyers want tough grading so they get more than what they're paying for and the sellers want it looser so they don't get reamed when trying to recoup their investments. Never ending Yin and Yang. As a person who does both, I just want accuracy so I don't loose out and also don't have to feel apologetic during a sale. CGC still grades tighter than most dealers..... but it's not good for the hobby to have clearly superior examples resibing in the same grade. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

I don't mind the decimals above 9.0, but it always bothered me that there were also smaller decimals below 2.0 but none for any higher grades (1.5 and 1.8, but no 2.8 or 3.8?). I am sure they could easily do .3 and .7, or .25 and .75 if it would fit on the label, for those "tweeners" that would be better than an 8.0 but not quite an 8.5, or the same above 8.5 but not quite a 9.0, etc. At any grade level these would make sense, and would get closer to a true 100 point scale that a lot of people like.

[ComicConnoisseur]

FYI, I have FINALLY read through the entire thread. I will be speaking with CGC/CCS this week to ascertain where things stand.

 

In the meantime, to facilitate any discussions I might have it would be helpful for those who believe there are questions outstanding to specifically list what they would like to see answered.

 

I will post a follow-up in the thread after the appropriate conversations.

I know this is a long shot, but how about CGC doing away with digital increments of 9?

An example instead of having 9.2, 9.4,9.6,9.8, just have instead 9.0, 9.5 and 10. Why? because I think this would slow down the amount of controversial techniques done to the comic books that seemed to be unpopular.

Also, what are the chances of RFID technology being implemented on the slabs or comic book themselves, so we can track them better?

Lastly if I buy a blue label CGC comic book with tape on the cover, and then crack it to resub would it come back a lower grade, qualified grade or plod?

thank you for your time.

sincerely CC

 

I think RFID is a good idea.

 

...... having 9.0/9.5/10.0 splits is not a good idea. Grading a 9.0 and a 9.4 at the same level might also generate even more efforts at upgrading. Plus it defeats the purpose of accurate grading. Steve Borock once told me that one of his original regrets was not having a tier between 8.5 and 9.0 ...... as SO many books were significantly nicer than 8.5, yet not nice enough to make 9.0. It's great for a buyer, but very unfair to the seller. You'll notice the disparity in opinion y looking at what complaints are made about different grading "periods"...... the buyers want tough grading so they get more than what they're paying for and the sellers want it looser so they don't get reamed when trying to recoup their investments. Never ending Yin and Yang. As a person who does both, I just want accuracy so I don't loose out and also don't have to feel apologetic during a sale. CGC still grades tighter than most dealers..... but it's not good for the hobby to have clearly superior examples resibing in the same grade. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

How come there is no 8.2, 8.4, 8.6 or 8.8 then?

[Foolkiller]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

You're kidding right?

No, kidding about what?

 

Having an internal pressing company was one of the things that Borock wanted to institute. He calls it one of his greatest regrets that they caved to the pressure and didn't do it years ago. This was always part of the business model to one day have this.

 

Haspel still works at CGC as a part time grader and consultant.

[AlexanderM]

CGC has certainly weathered their share of storms in the past.

Yes, they did...when Borock and Haspel worked there and they didn't charge for graders notes and they weren't in the business of pressing books and "fixing 'em up" and then deciding how good a job they did and what color label to award their own work. CGC was a way different company back then.

You're kidding right?

No, kidding about what?

 

Having an internal pressing company was one of the things that Borock wanted to institute. He calls it one of his greatest regrets that they caved to the pressure and didn't do it years ago. This was always part of the business model to one day have this.

 

Haspel still works at CGC as a part time grader and consultant.

 

"Internal pressing company"? When looking on CGC web page I don't see this. I can email CGC and ask, but I'm sure some information is in this thread. It has just become very long now.

 

Is this company in CGC or does it have its own website?