Will CGC make an official statement?

[A.Romeo]

Will it really make that much of a difference in anyones mind if its one letter or number over the other?

 

Yes.

 

+1

 

We may not be accustomed to the ins and outs of the new labels yet, but that is like asking if anyone will notice a difference between slight restoration or extensive restoration.

 

There are very few books I would ever consider buying a PLOD of. Someday when I become rich and famous sure I'll go for a PLOD AF15, Hulk 1, etc, etc. But for the most part if its PLOD its PLOD for me whether its a level A or Level C. Now, having the graders notes listed would definitely help me have a clearer conscience about buying a restored book based upon the type of restoration done. Plus adding graders notes for free to the public helps hold those Accountable for what they are grading as well and adds to credibility. I can also see the other side and do your point yes a grading system is simpler, I just prefer the longer notes version.

 

Side Note: IF all the labels were the same color and just had listed what the type of resto that was done on them, I would be more inclined to buy a restored book I think. Its something about that Purple color...

[Tom473]

I have to admit I'm a little surprised to find this thread still here. If this means the CGC mods have decided to be less overbearing in censoring of posts/threads and allow collectors to openly voice opinions and talk things through regarding changes in the graded comics community, it is a welcome change. It will only be natural for both companies to be discussed in context of one another at times, and I can also understand CGC not allowing use of their boards for blatant advertising of competitors. Whether the thread not going poof yet is just an oversight or a nice gesture to let boardies air concerns,

I it.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Will it really make that much of a difference in anyones mind if its one letter or number over the other?

 

Yes.

 

+1

 

We may not be accustomed to the ins and outs of the new labels yet, but that is like asking if anyone will notice a difference between slight restoration or extensive restoration.

 

There are very few books I would ever consider buying a PLOD of. Someday when I become rich and famous sure I'll go for a PLOD AF15, Hulk 1, etc, etc. But for the most part if its PLOD its PLOD for me whether its a level A or Level C. Now, having the graders notes listed would definitely help me have a clearer conscience about buying a restored book based upon the type of restoration done. Plus adding graders notes for free to the public helps hold those Accountable for what they are grading as well and adds to credibility. I can also see the other side and do your point yes a grading system is simpler, I just prefer the longer notes version.

 

Side Note: IF all the labels were the same color and just had listed what the type of resto that was done on them, I would be more inclined to buy a restored book I think. Its something about that Purple color...

 

There many, many, many, MANY books that I desire to own that I will never have the opportunity to if the book is unrestored. Mostly Detective #27, 29, 31, 33, and 38.

 

I would far rather have a decent restored mid-grade-ish Tec 33, rather than the .5-1.0 that an unrestored copy would sell for.

[VintageComics]

I am going to tickle you.

 

***you have a restraining order against this user***

[dupont2005]

If I were looking to buy a key I'd probably rather have a well done restored in a higher grade than a copy that would disintegrate if I touched it for the same price.

[thirdgreenham]

Will it really make that much of a difference in anyones mind if its one letter or number over the other?

 

Yes.

 

+1

 

We may not be accustomed to the ins and outs of the new labels yet, but that is like asking if anyone will notice a difference between slight restoration or extensive restoration.

 

There are very few books I would ever consider buying a PLOD of. Someday when I become rich and famous sure I'll go for a PLOD AF15, Hulk 1, etc, etc. But for the most part if its PLOD its PLOD for me whether its a level A or Level C. Now, having the graders notes listed would definitely help me have a clearer conscience about buying a restored book based upon the type of restoration done. Plus adding graders notes for free to the public helps hold those Accountable for what they are grading as well and adds to credibility. I can also see the other side and do your point yes a grading system is simpler, I just prefer the longer notes version.

 

Side Note: IF all the labels were the same color and just had listed what the type of resto that was done on them, I would be more inclined to buy a restored book I think. Its something about that Purple color...

 

There many, many, many, MANY books that I desire to own that I will never have the opportunity to if the book is unrestored. Mostly Detective #27, 29, 31, 33, and 38.

 

I would far rather have a decent restored mid-grade-ish Tec 33, rather than the .5-1.0 that an unrestored copy would sell for.

 

Damn, that's too bad. Cause I've got #30, 32, 35, and 36.

[joeypost]

Will it really make that much of a difference in anyones mind if its one letter or number over the other?

 

Yes.

 

+1

 

We may not be accustomed to the ins and outs of the new labels yet, but that is like asking if anyone will notice a difference between slight restoration or extensive restoration.

 

There are very few books I would ever consider buying a PLOD of. Someday when I become rich and famous sure I'll go for a PLOD AF15, Hulk 1, etc, etc. But for the most part if its PLOD its PLOD for me whether its a level A or Level C. Now, having the graders notes listed would definitely help me have a clearer conscience about buying a restored book based upon the type of restoration done. Plus adding graders notes for free to the public helps hold those Accountable for what they are grading as well and adds to credibility. I can also see the other side and do your point yes a grading system is simpler, I just prefer the longer notes version.

 

Side Note: IF all the labels were the same color and just had listed what the type of resto that was done on them, I would be more inclined to buy a restored book I think. Its something about that Purple color...

 

I cannot see myself buying a PLOD book.

[Tom473]

Will it really make that much of a difference in anyones mind if its one letter or number over the other?

 

Yes.

 

+1

 

We may not be accustomed to the ins and outs of the new labels yet, but that is like asking if anyone will notice a difference between slight restoration or extensive restoration.

 

There are very few books I would ever consider buying a PLOD of. Someday when I become rich and famous sure I'll go for a PLOD AF15, Hulk 1, etc, etc. But for the most part if its PLOD its PLOD for me whether its a level A or Level C. Now, having the graders notes listed would definitely help me have a clearer conscience about buying a restored book based upon the type of restoration done. Plus adding graders notes for free to the public helps hold those Accountable for what they are grading as well and adds to credibility. I can also see the other side and do your point yes a grading system is simpler, I just prefer the longer notes version.

 

Side Note: IF all the labels were the same color and just had listed what the type of resto that was done on them, I would be more inclined to buy a restored book I think. Its something about that Purple color...

 

I cannot see myself buying a PLOD book.

 

I could buy a PLOD if it were a valuable key well outside my means in universal in a similar grade, but I really don't like the stigma of the purple label. Although, as long as it has demonstrated its ability to hold vaLue even as a PLOD, I would consider it.

[SquareChaos]

I just noticed the update over in SS that you can not be a facilitator for CGC and a competitor?

 

Who would that impact? I am not following.

 

In the end, Joey can still submit books.

 

Well, I'll tell you one thing... it isn't a good thing for the consumer. That sort of change (if true) is escalating this into a turf war. They're basically threatening independent / non-CGC employees livelihood if those people choose to play a few games with the other team on the weekends.

 

So, basically, "it is us or them - choose."

[Buzzetta]

I only see one company choosing...

 

Not like Matt Nelson was ever submitting pressed books for PGX since his services were acquired by CGC.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Will it really make that much of a difference in anyones mind if its one letter or number over the other?

 

Yes.

 

+1

 

We may not be accustomed to the ins and outs of the new labels yet, but that is like asking if anyone will notice a difference between slight restoration or extensive restoration.

 

There are very few books I would ever consider buying a PLOD of. Someday when I become rich and famous sure I'll go for a PLOD AF15, Hulk 1, etc, etc. But for the most part if its PLOD its PLOD for me whether its a level A or Level C. Now, having the graders notes listed would definitely help me have a clearer conscience about buying a restored book based upon the type of restoration done. Plus adding graders notes for free to the public helps hold those Accountable for what they are grading as well and adds to credibility. I can also see the other side and do your point yes a grading system is simpler, I just prefer the longer notes version.

 

Side Note: IF all the labels were the same color and just had listed what the type of resto that was done on them, I would be more inclined to buy a restored book I think. Its something about that Purple color...

 

There many, many, many, MANY books that I desire to own that I will never have the opportunity to if the book is unrestored. Mostly Detective #27, 29, 31, 33, and 38.

 

I would far rather have a decent restored mid-grade-ish Tec 33, rather than the .5-1.0 that an unrestored copy would sell for.

 

Damn, that's too bad. Cause I've got #30, 32, 35, and 36.

 

Drek.

[RockMyAmadeus]

PS. Those of you who hate PLOD books, please continue to hate them. In fact, those who are on the fence should hate them, too.

 

That way they stay cheap.

 

[ChrisInBaltimore]

PS. Those of you who hate PLOD books, please continue to hate them. In fact, those who are on the fence should hate them, too.

 

That way they stay cheap.

 

 

+1

 

PLODs are a poor mans way to acquire grails. Hate away haters.

[Gotham Kid]

PS. Those of you who hate PLOD books, please continue to hate them. In fact, those who are on the fence should hate them, too.

 

That way they stay cheap.

 

 

(thumbs u

[comix4fun]

I just noticed the update over in SS that you can not be a facilitator for CGC and a competitor?

 

Who would that impact? I am not following.

 

In the end, Joey can still submit books.

 

Well, I'll tell you one thing... it isn't a good thing for the consumer. That sort of change (if true) is escalating this into a turf war. They're basically threatening independent / non-CGC employees livelihood if those people choose to play a few games with the other team on the weekends.

 

So, basically, "it is us or them - choose."

 

 

Not really. When it comes to the SS program CGC has a very specific process whereby a direct or contract employee of CGC has to actually physically witness the signature as it's completed. The other company has made note that they will accept previously signed books, by other companies, for their signature program.

 

Given the length that CGC has gone to clearly identify the parameters of their program (only witnessing, no handwriting analysis or certification after the fact) they seem to want to avoid any confusion of a brand and product that they have spent nearly a decade working to hone.

 

Simply put, if someone is facilitating for more than one signature program at the same time (PGX has one too) the customer may equate the signature services as the same, given that they are dealing with one representative across companies, when the services and products are not the same.

 

Also that post was almost 2 months old. Given the amount of PGX Signature books proliferating Ebay and other venues it was a statement and a stance that needed to be made. The SS program is only as good as the safeguards that protect the integrity of the signature process and the perception of the SS consuming public at large.

[Buzzetta]

 

Given the length that CGC has gone to clearly identify the parameters of their program (only witnessing, no handwriting analysis or certification after the fact) they seem to want to avoid any confusion of a brand and product that they have spent nearly a decade working to hone.

 

I've never understood why they should be so rigid with their SS program when there are and will always be large holes through their 'witness program'. Unless it is a private signing where a CGC rep, witness or facilitator sits with the talent there are some major problems.

 

Here is a personal example:

I commissioned two sketches on blanks last year on a Thursday. On Sunday, I picked them up with a CGC SS Witness. That person walked with me to the artist's table, where I picked up the sketches then walked back to the CGC processing area. The books were processed, slabbed and returned to me noting "sketch and signed by X" Who is to say that the artist actually did the sketch? What did CGC actually witness? Babe Ruth used to hand off a lot of mailed requests for his signatures to his wife to handle.

 

 

 

 

[comix4fun]

 

Given the length that CGC has gone to clearly identify the parameters of their program (only witnessing, no handwriting analysis or certification after the fact) they seem to want to avoid any confusion of a brand and product that they have spent nearly a decade working to hone.

 

I've never understood why they should be so rigid with their SS program when there are and will always be large holes through their 'witness program'. Unless it is a private signing where a CGC rep, witness or facilitator sits with the talent there are some major problems.

 

Here is a personal example:

I commissioned two sketches on blanks last year on a Thursday. On Sunday, I picked them up with a CGC SS Witness. That person walked with me to the artist's table, where I picked up the sketches then walked back to the CGC processing area. The books were processed, slabbed and returned to me noting "sketch and signed by X" Who is to say that the artist actually did the sketch? What did CGC actually witness? Babe Ruth used to hand off a lot of mailed requests for his signatures to his wife to handle.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's not a hole. That's a chain of custody. Picking up the sketch directly from the artist/creator, the source, can hardly be called a hole.

 

Several artists/creators actually sign statements as to what they signed or sketched, especially when mailing in to CGC.

 

That's all to maintain the chain of custody.

[Tom473]

I just noticed the update over in SS that you can not be a facilitator for CGC and a competitor?

 

Who would that impact? I am not following.

 

In the end, Joey can still submit books.

 

Well, I'll tell you one thing... it isn't a good thing for the consumer. That sort of change (if true) is escalating this into a turf war. They're basically threatening independent / non-CGC employees livelihood if those people choose to play a few games with the other team on the weekends.

 

So, basically, "it is us or them - choose."

 

 

Not really. When it comes to the SS program CGC has a very specific process whereby a direct or contract employee of CGC has to actually physically witness the signature as it's completed. The other company has made note that they will accept previously signed books, by other companies, for their signature program.

 

Given the length that CGC has gone to clearly identify the parameters of their program (only witnessing, no handwriting analysis or certification after the fact) they seem to want to avoid any confusion of a brand and product that they have spent nearly a decade working to hone.

 

Simply put, if someone is facilitating for more than one signature program at the same time (PGX has one too) the customer may equate the signature services as the same, given that they are dealing with one representative across companies, when the services and products are not the same.

 

Also that post was almost 2 months old. Given the amount of PGX Signature books proliferating Ebay and other venues it was a statement and a stance that needed to be made. The SS program is only as good as the safeguards that protect the integrity of the signature process and the perception of the SS consuming public at large.

 

This might give the impression that the other company will accept PGX signature books, which is not the case, PGX has zero credibility.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

 

Given the length that CGC has gone to clearly identify the parameters of their program (only witnessing, no handwriting analysis or certification after the fact) they seem to want to avoid any confusion of a brand and product that they have spent nearly a decade working to hone.

 

I've never understood why they should be so rigid with their SS program when there are and will always be large holes through their 'witness program'. Unless it is a private signing where a CGC rep, witness or facilitator sits with the talent there are some major problems.

 

Here is a personal example:

I commissioned two sketches on blanks last year on a Thursday. On Sunday, I picked them up with a CGC SS Witness. That person walked with me to the artist's table, where I picked up the sketches then walked back to the CGC processing area. The books were processed, slabbed and returned to me noting "sketch and signed by X" Who is to say that the artist actually did the sketch? What did CGC actually witness? Babe Ruth used to hand off a lot of mailed requests for his signatures to his wife to handle.

 

I'll take it one step further…

 

I had a book in Baltimore a few years ago get signed, with a facilitator, by Lee, Stern, and Romita Sr. It was supposed to get Romita Jr but he had a family emergency and left. Somehow there was a deal made in that JRJR took the books for like 3 or 4 months to sign and ship back to CGC. Who is to say the Romita Jr even signed the book? He could have had an intern do it. Heck it wouldn't be hard to copy the JRJR he rights on books.

 

I also had some sketches done. I sent the books to the guy months in advance and they were then picked up at a show. He could have had anyone draw them.

 

CGC's system has some holes.

[SquareChaos]

 

Given the length that CGC has gone to clearly identify the parameters of their program (only witnessing, no handwriting analysis or certification after the fact) they seem to want to avoid any confusion of a brand and product that they have spent nearly a decade working to hone.

 

I've never understood why they should be so rigid with their SS program when there are and will always be large holes through their 'witness program'. Unless it is a private signing where a CGC rep, witness or facilitator sits with the talent there are some major problems.

 

Here is a personal example:

I commissioned two sketches on blanks last year on a Thursday. On Sunday, I picked them up with a CGC SS Witness. That person walked with me to the artist's table, where I picked up the sketches then walked back to the CGC processing area. The books were processed, slabbed and returned to me noting "sketch and signed by X" Who is to say that the artist actually did the sketch? What did CGC actually witness? Babe Ruth used to hand off a lot of mailed requests for his signatures to his wife to handle.

 

I'll take it one step further…

 

I had a book in Baltimore a few years ago get signed, with a facilitator, by Lee, Stern, and Romita Sr. It was supposed to get Romita Jr but he had a family emergency and left. Somehow there was a deal made in that JRJR took the books for like 3 or 4 months to sign and ship back to CGC. Who is to say the Romita Jr even signed the book? He could have had an intern do it. Heck it wouldn't be hard to copy the JRJR he rights on books.

 

I also had some sketches done. I sent the books to the guy months in advance and they were then picked up at a show. He could have had anyone draw them.

 

CGC's system has some holes.

 

 

Seems a bit like a slippery slope fallacy to me. I mean, sure, it is probably best when they literally view the personal doing the signing or sketching, but at some point a system invariably has trust in it.

 

I mean, why argue from this perspective, why not just argue from the perspective of the credibility of the witness? What if they signed the books themselves and said it was Stan Lee? What if Stan's signature is actually really rare?