FF 3

[FFB]

 

Think about all of the books you see next to each other on the shelves at a comic store. It is very, very common for books printed and shipped together one right after another to vary a lot with respect to wraps -- and that's with the far-improved printing and binding technology in use today.

 

But my point is.....if you overlay the 9.8 on top of the 9.4 in a scan, there is definitely "less book" there. I'm not talking about the wrap as much as I am about the actual dimensions of the book. Could they differ that much on books that were, at least theoretically cut at the same time?

 

Take a look at the image below. What you are looking at is the 9.8, laid right on top of the scan of the 9.4. The 9.8 was giving a greenish cast so that you could see where the 9.4 extended beyond.....quite a bit on the upper half of the right side and a little edge at the bottom. There is no equivalent difference in overlap on the spineside edges. I did a very precise alignment of the artwork on the covers. Very precise.

 

Now this is just for scholarly scientific research. Can two books differ this much so close in a run? The 9.8 is decidedly more narrow in my opinion. I could buy that quite easily in two disparate copies of the same book, but these are two twin books from a pedigree collection.

 

And yes, I thought about the risk of altering a 9.4 to grab a higher grade....it wouldn't be me, that's for sure.

 

That's a cool little trick there, Brad. But to answer your question, I think it's quite common for silver age books to vary in size. All of the books from that run were cut at roughly the same time in stacks on the same machines, just like every other silver age Marvel from that era. I don't think that a minor size variance like that between two books is significant. If you take a stack of several books and put them in a guillotine cutter and chop down, there will be slight variances among the different edges because the books can shift a little bit in the stack.

 

And this all assumes that these two books were cut in the same stack. We can't possibly know whether that was the case. But we do know from past experience that size differences among the same book are very common for books from that era.

[uclapeterg]

How many Pacific Coast copies are there of DD2?

[skybolt]

I suggest that from now on everyone on these boards create high resolution scans of books they own and keep them on record. I've still kept all the front and back cover scans of CGC books I've sold over the past 2 years. If these people keep getting caught then maybe they'll stop, or hopefully leave the hobby for good.

[arexcrooke]

I suggest that from now on everyone on these boards create high resolution scans of books they own and keep them on record. I've still kept all the front and back cover scans of CGC books I've sold over the past 2 years. If these people keep getting caught then maybe they'll stop, or hopefully leave the hobby for good.

Or more likely, continue to do the things that they have been doing, as there really is no way to stop the things that are going on.

just my 2 cents.

[FFB]

The CGC grade and restoration check are simply an opinion as to the grade and existence of restoration -- just like when you buy a raw book from Metropolis that Vinny says is a 9.4 unrestored. If the owner later determines conclusively that the book was trimmed, knowingly selling it in a CGC slab without disclosing the restoration is no different than selling the raw book from Metro without disclosing restoration that was later found to exist. Either way, the restoration needs to be disclosed when selling it and it is unlawful (not to mention unethical) not to disclose it to a prospective purchaser because the existence of restoration is a material fact that affects the value of the item.

 

Agreed, hence my indicating that the person should turn back towards the person they bought the book from and ask if they knew of the, say, trim job. I agree that CGC is only providing an opinion backed by its reputation, reputation that will suffer if more of these instances are unearthed. I seriously doubt that CGC did anything unsavory but simply missed a very hard to detect alteration to the comic.

 

However, considering a lot of eBay sellers and some dealers have a no return policy on slabs, what would you suggest Steve do in this instance? Take the loss and since the book is unacceptable in his collection, resell it with full disclosure of what his knowledge and expertise tells him? What other avenues does he have for making him whole in this situation since he received a sub-par "product" in this transaction?

 

I would suggest that any owner in this situation show the evidence to CGC and ask CGC to make it right. CGC has always done so in the past (with more expensive books than this one) and I have no reason to believe that they'd do otherwise in this situation.

[FFB]

How many Pacific Coast copies are there of DD2?

 

Filosa already said that there were two copies (confirmed by Doug Schmell).

[uclapeterg]

How many Pacific Coast copies are there of DD2?

 

Filosa already said that there were two copies (confirmed by Doug Schmell).

 

I guess it got lost in all the gobbily-gook.

[skybolt]

The CGC grade and restoration check are simply an opinion as to the grade and existence of restoration -- just like when you buy a raw book from Metropolis that Vinny says is a 9.4 unrestored. If the owner later determines conclusively that the book was trimmed, knowingly selling it in a CGC slab without disclosing the restoration is no different than selling the raw book from Metro without disclosing restoration that was later found to exist. Either way, the restoration needs to be disclosed when selling it and it is unlawful (not to mention unethical) not to disclose it to a prospective purchaser because the existence of restoration is a material fact that affects the value of the item.

 

Agreed, hence my indicating that the person should turn back towards the person they bought the book from and ask if they knew of the, say, trim job. I agree that CGC is only providing an opinion backed by its reputation, reputation that will suffer if more of these instances are unearthed. I seriously doubt that CGC did anything unsavory but simply missed a very hard to detect alteration to the comic.

 

However, considering a lot of eBay sellers and some dealers have a no return policy on slabs, what would you suggest Steve do in this instance? Take the loss and since the book is unacceptable in his collection, resell it with full disclosure of what his knowledge and expertise tells him? What other avenues does he have for making him whole in this situation since he received a sub-par "product" in this transaction?

 

I would suggest that any owner in this situation show the evidence to CGC and ask CGC to make it right. CGC has always done so in the past (with more expensive books than this one) and I have no reason to believe that they'd do otherwise in this situation.

 

FFB, would CGC's insurance company pay for something like this?

 

I know that if our engineering firm makes a design error that results in the client suing us, then our insurance would pay for some of the loss. Obviously our premiums would go up in this situation, or if the amount is too large the insurance company will pack up and leave.

[FFB]

FFB, would CGC's insurance company pay for something like this?

 

I know that if our engineering firm makes a design error that results in the client suing us, then our insurance would pay for some of the loss. Obviously our premiums would go up in this situation, or if the amount is too large the insurance company will pack up and leave.

 

I don't know. I'd have to see the insurance policy.

[Red Hook]

I have scans of three GR copies of Daredevil 11....I can tell already that the wraps vary (no arguing there), .....when I get the larger versions together I will layer them the way I did the DD2's to see how they vary cut wise. But now....the Red one must rest.

[Silver Surfer]

CGC should draw the line and not accept anymore submissions from people who trim their books and try to pass them off as unrestored. If I owned a company and knew someone was using my business to perpetrate fraud, then that person would be banished (among other things). This is getting ridiculous......what's next, laser color touch and spine reinforcement?!

 

Unless I'm missing something, I'd assume that if CGC refused to do business with anybody, all that guy would need to do is to get somebody else to submit for him on his behalf. Same thing could be done when selling the books if necessary.

 

If that other person is willing to put their reputation at stake then they can take that chance. However, if CGC draws the line and says fraudulent acts like this will not be tolerated, then hopefully people will think twice before pulling something like this. The way things are preceived now is that if you can get it past CGC then great for you, otherwise, CGC will just slap you with a PLOD for your troubles.

 

At the very least they should come out and say that this sort of business cannot be tolerated, then if someone is caught in the act, they won't use the excuse of "well, I didn't know I was doing anything wrong.....I thought CGC accepted minor trimming just like pressing."

 

Or maybe CGC should become more responsible and accountable for their own business before they begin to judge others. They don't seem to be too concerned with conflicts of interest, proper disclosure, etc.

[Aman619]

Here's another general question......assuming that the two (are there only two?) PC copies of this book were purchased at the same time and place.....and arrived in the same bundle......wouldn't you expect that two books whose spine sides so closely aligned would exhibit a very similar cut on the right edge too. Or would book sizes vary that much on books produced at the same time off the presses?

 

thats easy and has peobably been answered alreday. YES! Just look at copies in any LCS... Theyre all different from one book to the next. Comics printing is the asss end of publishig as far as standards go. Always has been..

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

 

As I mentioned early in the thread, early Marvels are known for not being uniformally cut and discrepancies abound in trim and size.

[Aman619]

I suggest that from now on everyone on these boards create high resolution scans of books they own and keep them on record. I've still kept all the front and back cover scans of CGC books I've sold over the past 2 years. If these people keep getting caught then maybe they'll stop, or hopefully leave the hobby for good.

Or more likely, continue to do the things that they have been doing, as there really is no way to stop the things that are going on.

just my 2 cents.

 

true. But we here can take steps to protect ourselves cant we? Maintaining a visual database would be a mighty good first step. If we cant save the whole world, we can start by a life, one life at a time. With the added benefit that we would be banding together to help each other first. ANybody wants to join up, the more the merrier.

[Aman619]

I cant believe there were no posts after mine 4 hours ago!!

 

this thread was humming all day before this.... what happened?

[Rip]

Site was down

[Aman619]

ahhhhh.. thanx..

[tth2]

Give it up, Steve. CGC apparently missed a call on the slight trim job. It was a mistake and mistakes happen. Even Susan Cicconi says in her article in the grading guide that trimming can be virtually impossible to detect, because every book is trimmed on all three sides during manufacture.

 

In any event, now that it's apparent, it needs to be disclosed. Comparing this to an apparent overgrade is ridiculous. Grading is somewhat subjective; the existence of aftermarket trim is not, especially when you've got before and after scans proving that a book was trimmed.

 

I accept that CGC can miss a trim job when a trim job is done very skillfully and the amount removed is very slight. But to say that someone could still sell the book as unrestored when the person knows otherwise is just not right.

CGC's culpability is the least of my concerns here. As you and others have pointed out, their ability to detect restoration is not infallible, although perhaps they need to start including a little research in their restoration detections techniques, in addition to just performing an inspection of the book.

 

My greater concern is that a well known, albeit controversial dealer, has now crossed the line from performing a method of improvement not considered restoration by CGC to systematically tampering with books using a method that is considered restoration by anyone associated with the hobby. Considering how many pages of threads the pressing accusations against Jason Ewert previously generated, and how many threads the accusations against Danny Dupcheck/Hammer previously generated, I'm kind of stunned by the almost complete absence of outrage directed here towards Ewert and his cohort in crime, Tom Brulato.

 

The thing I can't figure out is Brulato. The guy's collection has skyrocketed in value with the advent of CGC. And, he's clearly been able to turn it into a revenue generating business too. So he of all people has a vested interest in preserving the reputation of CGC. Why would he now intentionally set out to bring everything crashing down?

[Rip]

Do we know for certain that Ewert/Brulato submitted the books?

[tth2]

As a CPA Firm auditing a company, they RELY on Management for the F/S (this is spelled out specifically in their audit report). It's there job to either agree or disagree with the companies records. A CPA Firm is like CGC (basically giving a good housekeeping seal of approval).

 

Now I, the investor, buy stock in a company. Then I find out that the audit firm didn't do their job. I sue the COMPANY and CPA FIRM.

 

I DO NOT SUE the person that SOLD me the STOCK. Even if I felt that he/she had knowledge that the F/S were not what they were made out to be.

Steve, the problem with your analogy is you're comparing apples and oranges. The stock transaction you're talking about is a trade in public stock, which passes through middle men (the broker, and clearing systems), and because of the fungible nature of stock it's almost impossible to tell with any specific transaction who is the buyer and who is the seller. In fact, in the trade you're talking about, you probably never even directly owned the stock being traded, you simply had beneficial ownership of stock that was actually registered in a depositary's name. The transaction you actually engaged in was really just an electronic debit in the depositary's books. Contrast this with the sale of a tainted book, in which you're doing a one-to-one sale.

 

A better analogy would be where you hold the shares of a privately held company which is now being purchased, and the seller has done his due diligence including relying on the audited accounts signed off on by a CPA firm. Now, the sale by you to the buyer is direct, and I can guarantee that if it turns out the accounts were fraudulent, the buyer might be suing the target company, he might be suing the accounting firm, and he MOST DEFINITELY will be suing you.