Avengers 1 CGC 9.6 Heritage November 2015 Auction!

[jaeldubyoo]

I know they probably won't do it, but it would certainly help if CGC published their standards. Unless you've handled hundreds of slabs to be somewhat familiar with their grading, it's a guessing game most of the time.

[VintageComics]

I can't understand why anyone would want CGC to be consistently loose.

I don`t either, but Roy and others were saying that they just care about consistency. So in their world, books that have massive creases and wear and receive 9.8s are okay so long as all books that have massive creases and wear receive 9.8s.

 

That's not at all what I said.

 

You guys are all acting like comic book grading is some 'etched in stone', ten commandments, internationally accepted standard.

 

Meanwhile, CGC, Overstreet and no two dealers grade exactly the same way.

 

Grading is a relative thing, and while most people can be in the same ballpark with a given grade, everyone can see a given grade slightly differently.

 

VF minus or a F/VF?

 

VG or VG-?

 

NM+, NM or NMM?

 

Where are the scientific rules for these grades? There aren't any.

 

I only want consistency so I know what a given grade is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bomber-Bob]

I know they probably won't do it, but it would certainly help if CGC published their standards. Unless you've handled hundreds of slabs to be somewhat familiar with their grading, it's a guessing game most of the time.

 

I suspect the 'standards' are passed by word of mouth, not written down. If you watched Paul Litch on Pawn Stars it's a gut feeling type of system that I believe he referred to as 'magic'. There is no analytic process that puts a book in a specific grade, just an opinion, albeit a very educated opinion.

Publishing of standards, not going to happen.

[VintageComics]

Come on, we both know Steve was PR person. My guess is that CGC's grading was initially on the light side in order to appease dealers who had no experience with CGC grading so that they would continue to submit books and then they tightened up but they re still human and subjective and their grading did swing back and forth even in those first 4 years.

This statement is pretty much the opposite of being true. CGC's grading was incredibly strict when they first opened their doors. Sure, there were the occasional head-scratchers. But as someone who submitted around 700 books in CGC's first year, I can tell you from first-hand, bloody, bruising experience that you're way off base here. Not even in the ballpark. Or universe.

 

Or maybe you're talking about CGC on Earth 2?

 

I didn't sub a book to CGC until 2003 but my comments about early grading standards were based on people who iI have spoken to since then, some who are 'upstanding and valued' members on these boards or BSD's.

 

 

[VintageComics]

My real problem is that what some are referring to as being 'tight' is really undergraded IMO. What used to be a VG book, for decades, is now a G/G-.

 

That ship sailed when CGC opened its doors, and out came grades that had some of the dealers both complaining, and scrambling to catch up to the tight standards.

 

Also, I don't think there ever was a VG book in the decades before CGC. Dealer grading standards varied so much that the same comic could receive a wide variety of grades and restoration checks, depending on the seller.

 

Bingo.

[TeddieMercede]

CGC/Borock had a pretty bad period after all that initial backlash to appease sore dealers who were unhappy at how tight they were when they first opened up shop.

[VintageComics]

CGC/Borock had a pretty bad period after all that initial backlash to appease sore dealers who were unhappy at how tight they were when they first opened up shop.

 

Thank you.

[blazingbob]

Frankly NONE of you can grade since NOBODY has a certificate stating that they were trained on how to grade which has been the BIGGEST problem this hobby has had since it started. I've had more "Who taught you how to grade arguments" in the last couple of years then I've ever had. Amazing the answers I get. Everybody has a PERK list of defects they gloss over versus the next person. The "Grading is Subjective canned answer" is because no one is trained how to grade. If everyone were taught the same way this thread goes POOF. Everyone who reads a how to guide has their own interpretation when there is no instructor. The same goes for the Overstreet grading guide.

 

Anybody who has attempted to read the grading guide can see that it contradicts itself.

 

A grading company that comes out of the gate grading tighter then what the marketplace currently did. This grading company NEVER publishes their grading standards which gives EVERY seller who sells their product no retort to grading disputes. Grading by committee using standards that no one to this day still knows.

 

To resolve that problem Overstreet lets the CGC head grader rewrite the standards. Solved nothing.

 

Restoration issues are rewritten.

 

CGC board threads continue to this day arguing over the issue of consistency/tightness of grading.

 

Mark Haspel "The hammer". Well I would argue that the hammer turns into a rubber hammer depending on the genre.

 

While I was and still am of the belief that every genre is graded the same way that doesn't exactly seem to be the case. Mark Haspel might have graded Silver age strictly but I've seen some pretty loose Atlas and golden Age books over the years where I'm scratching my head. Oh yeah Golden Age has bindery tears but honestly a crease is a crease whether it is a Gold/Silver/Bronze/Modern/copper age book. A sunshadow is what it is regardless of the age of the book. I can go on and on. Front covers were supposedly graded the same way as a back cover. Not sure I ever read that a crease on the back cover meant less then a crease on the front cover.

 

Blue label "Restored" books. Hmmm, Steve and the "Hammer" were around for that one. Exactly what are the dimensions of "very minor color touch or glue" per the back of the label and who exactly is the "Sole Discretion" referee? I've seen minor color touch Purple and minor color touch blue. Do certain Pedigrees get the "Sole discretion Pass" where others do not?

 

 

 

 

[lou_fine]

I know they probably won't do it, but it would certainly help if CGC published their standards. Unless you've handled hundreds of slabs to be somewhat familiar with their grading, it's a guessing game most of the time.

 

I suspect the 'standards' are passed by word of mouth, not written down. If you watched Paul Litch on Pawn Stars it's a gut feeling type of system that I believe he referred to as 'magic'. There is no analytic process that puts a book in a specific grade, just an opinion, albeit a very educated opinion.

Publishing of standards, not going to happen.

 

You are most definitely correct on the above last point.

 

If it hasn't been done in the last 15 years, there's absolutely no way it's going to be done now.

 

Although it would help you, it most certainly would not help CGC if they published their standards. Although most people here seem to think that CGC has the collector's best interest at heart from some of the comments here, you really should remember that CGC is a business entity and as such, really has their own best interest at heart.

[lou_fine]

Come on, we both know Steve was PR person. My guess is that CGC's grading was initially on the light side in order to appease dealers who had no experience with CGC grading so that they would continue to submit books and then they tightened up but they re still human and subjective and their grading did swing back and forth even in those first 4 years.

Just the opposite. CGC came out with guns blazing to establish their credibility. 9.4s and the very few 9.6s and 9.8s that appeared in those early years were seriously solid books.

 

Then the dealers started screaming because many of the books that they thought were NM or better were getting lower grades from CGC. Hence the relaxing of standards as time went by.

 

I submitted a run of Western Penn DDs during that period, including the WP DD 2, which was flat out one of the nicest SA books I had ever seen. I thought for sure it would get at least a 9.6, and had a chance at 9.8. It only got a 9.4, which just astounded me. It now resides in a 9.8 (new label) slab.

 

Fast forward a few years to the new label era, and I submitted a run of Golden State Sgt Furys, which I figured had a decent shot at 9.6s, with maybe 1 or 2 with a decent shot at 9.8. They all came back as 9.8s, except for one 9.6.

 

Are you trying to tell me that I got ripped off on my grading submission to CGC?

 

So those CGC 9.4 and 9.6 graded books from the late 30's and early 40's that I got graded for the Manning auction could actually be 9.8's or possibly even higher using today's grading standards. They most definitely did not have the stress lines that are so visibly apparent on this 9.6 graded copy of Avengers 1.

 

 

Good thing it was only a small sample of my lower value books to test out CGC's grading and the feasibility of using an auction house since both were relatively new at the time.

[jimjum12]

I've lost track of how many books I've removed from the slab...... but I've been doing it since the early 2000's..... through all the "periods"..... and the one thing I've learned is that assessing CGC's standards while looking at a book through the slab is nearly pointless. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[Transplant]

I don't know about it being a 9.6.

 

the # in the upper left corner trumps the fact it's a NM-

 

so much for CGC being in a tight grading period.

 

a NM- 9.2 copy sitting in a 9.6 label

 

Agree with this. As a collector it is a shame to see CGC soften up with their grading again. I blame CBCS in part.

Is this thread considered promotion of a CGC competitor?