Bronze Age CGC 9.2. Is it enough?

[october]

 

Well said.

 

To finalize a point on 9.2's and 9.4's, having a huge difference in price, for just a small physical difference let me say this:

 

1) This is not unique to comic books or just collectibles. I can think of lots of goods where it cost a whole lot more to get just a little bit of extra quality. When I was buying music gear and needed a multi-track recorded, one was priced at $2,000 and one was at $8,000. I ask the salesperson the difference and he said the $8,000 unit had about 10% better quality.

 

Not the greatest analogy. Technology, and improvements to it, can be quantified. Comic book grading cannot.

 

2) While CGC grades are still somewhat subjective, they ARE NOT ARBITRARY.

 

Are you kidding? Graded books are the DEFINITION of arbitrary.

 

Here. Arbitrary : "based on or subject to individual discretion or preference"

 

The unquantifiable opinions of 3 graders, that change when the EXACT SAME book is resubmitted, qualify as arbitrary. The grades are subject to the individual grader's preference. If they weren't, how could the same book end up with different grades? I really don't see how you could possibly argue against this.

 

If the grades aren't arbitrary, please point me to the standard CGC or any other company uses in evaluating their books. Ooops, I forgot. They don't publish them.

[bullseye]

i have found for older stuff 5.0-7.0 is the best range for me, i can afford more books that way, they still look decent for the most part, and i can always upgrade later when the run is complete. For bronze/copper i admit i would prefer a 9.0ish or better mainly because they aren't really very scarce in high grades (hulk 181 for example), so the prices don't get out of hand until the mega high grade. but yeah collect what ya like, i buy it because it says daredevil on the cover, but some people prefer it to say 9.6, so that is their thing too

[Rob]

Heck, I'd like to collect a run of Detective 33-50 in CGC 2.0 or better. (I doubt I could afford poor copies of 27-32).

[Norrin_Radd]

Heck, I'd like to collect a run of Detective 33-50 in CGC 2.0 or better. (I doubt I could afford poor copies of 27-32).

 

Me neither. Maybe CGC 0.5. What grade does that translate to? Utter Shiite?

[Rob]

0.5 = Poor. I could live with a 0.5 Detective #31. Maybe bottom half is taped together, and is missing the back cover. It would be the pride of my collection.

[october]

The pre-Robin Detective Batman covers are unreal in their coolness. 31 has my all-time favorite cover and 29 and 35 would make it into my top ten or twenty as well. As long as the front cover was there, I would take a .5 copy. In the next five years, after I graduate and start working, those three issues are going to be my goal. I will probably shoot for restored copies in the 5.0 or better range. I would love to snag a copy of Detective 18 as well.

[sfilosa]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

2) While CGC grades are still somewhat subjective, they ARE NOT ARBITRARY.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Are you kidding? Graded books are the DEFINITION of arbitrary.

 

Here. Arbitrary : "based on or subject to individual discretion or preference"

 

The unquantifiable opinions of 3 graders, that change when the EXACT SAME book is resubmitted, qualify as arbitrary. The grades are subject to the individual grader's preference. If they weren't, how could the same book end up with different grades? I really don't see how you could possibly argue against this.

 

If the grades aren't arbitrary, please point me to the standard CGC or any other company uses in evaluating their books. Ooops, I forgot. They don't publish them.

 

 

Wrong.

 

Just because they don't have published standards, doesn't mean the don't have any standards. They do.

 

The fact that they do have a criteria (be it based in part on Overstreet standards) and the fact that AT LEAST THREE different people give their opinion of the grade (based on their INTERPRETATION of the standards) means that IT ISN'T ARBITRARY.

 

According to the way you are interpreting the definition, a judge/ jury decision is purely arbitrary, because 1) they can't quantify exactly why they made there decision nor 2) would a different group of people make the same decision.

[october]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

2) While CGC grades are still somewhat subjective, they ARE NOT ARBITRARY.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Are you kidding? Graded books are the DEFINITION of arbitrary.

 

Here. Arbitrary : "based on or subject to individual discretion or preference"

 

The unquantifiable opinions of 3 graders, that change when the EXACT SAME book is resubmitted, qualify as arbitrary. The grades are subject to the individual grader's preference. If they weren't, how could the same book end up with different grades? I really don't see how you could possibly argue against this.

 

If the grades aren't arbitrary, please point me to the standard CGC or any other company uses in evaluating their books. Ooops, I forgot. They don't publish them.

 

 

Wrong.

 

Just because they don't have published standards, doesn't mean the don't have any standards. They do.

 

The fact that they do have a criteria (be it based in part on Overstreet standards) and the fact that AT LEAST THREE different people give their opinion of the grade (based on their INTERPRETATION of the standards) means that IT ISN'T ARBITRARY.

 

According to the way you are interpreting the definition, a judge/ jury decision is purely arbitrary, because 1) they can't quantify exactly why they made there decision nor 2) would a different group of people make the same decision.

 

Ok. I could answer your post, but I am sure you are as tired of arguing with me as I am with you (not that it hasn't been fun ). Tell you what, why don't we just call it a draw since neither is going to change the other's mind. Or I can respond and we can go on. I will leave it up to you.

 

In any case, I would steer away from the legal analogies, I can and will go on ad nauseum as to why that one is both wrong and right, but I get enough of that [#@$%!!!] during the day. BTW: judge and jury trials ARE ARBITRARY. At least to some degree. That's why you get verdicts that are dissimilar, even for cases where the fact paterns are virtually the same.

[PovertyRow]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

2) While CGC grades are still somewhat subjective, they ARE NOT ARBITRARY.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Are you kidding? Graded books are the DEFINITION of arbitrary.

 

Here. Arbitrary : "based on or subject to individual discretion or preference"

 

The unquantifiable opinions of 3 graders, that change when the EXACT SAME book is resubmitted, qualify as arbitrary. The grades are subject to the individual grader's preference. If they weren't, how could the same book end up with different grades? I really don't see how you could possibly argue against this.

 

If the grades aren't arbitrary, please point me to the standard CGC or any other company uses in evaluating their books. Ooops, I forgot. They don't publish them.

 

 

Wrong.

 

Just because they don't have published standards, doesn't mean the don't have any standards. They do.

 

The fact that they do have a criteria (be it based in part on Overstreet standards) and the fact that AT LEAST THREE different people give their opinion of the grade (based on their INTERPRETATION of the standards) means that IT ISN'T ARBITRARY.

 

According to the way you are interpreting the definition, a judge/ jury decision is purely arbitrary, because 1) they can't quantify exactly why they made there decision nor 2) would a different group of people make the same decision.

 

I still love Borock and company but...one of the real problems here is the FACT that CGC books are often commanding considerably higher prices than their raw counterparts. One must ask oneself - is this due to the pure grading or to the restoration check? That is a fine line to define (hey! I'm a poet!). Personally I see the restoration check as the most valuable service CGC can supply. Even in the midst of the Pressing controversy, CGC makes their stance on Pressing clear. So that is fine. I DO tend to agree with their mainly GA proclivity to use a blue label and add a note for "slight glue" or "minor color touch". As I have said many times. would like to see the Purple label replaced by the Blue with resto notes.

 

Anyway, bringing into comparison a jury trial is simply not fair. To MAKE it fair we would have to have a defined (even secretly defined) set of standards for a jury to use. Such a set of standards would make it very easy for a jury to find one guilty or not guilty. But the simple concept of circumstancial evidence would take a jury trial out of comparison to a CGC verdict. (Except for the green label - that would fall closest to circumstancial evidence.) And beyonf that, a jury will, consciously or unconsciously bring into account factors dealing with personality or error (look at the OJ case - the "reasonable doubt" was brought into a quite bright light by the total screwups of the prosecution. I confess to having the oppurtunity to watch all of the OJ trial on Court TV - took a year break from working and it coincided.)

 

Evidence produced in many a court trial are subject to interpretation by the jury.

What is subject to interpretation by CGC? The length of a crease? The depth of a ding? The length of a tear? The amount of corner rounding? On and on. But I submit if there was a true and strict definition of defect vs grade, then grades would be consistent all the time regardless of the individuals bringing their assessment. That does not appear to be the case. (Phew!)

[awe4one]

Can I send you a few bullets so you can write me a post as coherent as the one above? You'll have to be available 24/7 though...

[PovertyRow]

Can I send you a few bullets so you can write me a post as coherent as the one above? You'll have to be available 24/7 though...

 

Why thank you. Of course.

[namisgr]

CGC grading "arbitrary"? Perhaps. "Subjective"? You bet. "Variable"? Frustratingly so. But my favorite descriptor for it is "capricious".

 

Ca-pri-cious - governed or characterized by caprice (whim; vagary); UNPREDICTABLE; INCONSTANT.

 

Just received two recent purchases, one a 9.0 and the other a pedigreed 9.4. Inside their slabs, I cannot discern a meaningful difference in the condition of these two books that might justify their two unit difference in grade.

 

BUY THE BOOK, NOT THE LABEL!

[sfilosa]

CGC grading "arbitrary"? Perhaps. "Subjective"? You bet. "Variable"? Frustratingly so. But my favorite descriptor for it is "capricious".

 

Ca-pri-cious - governed or characterized by caprice (whim; vagary); UNPREDICTABLE; INCONSTANT.

 

Just received two recent purchases, one a 9.0 and the other a pedigreed 9.4. Inside their slabs, I cannot discern a meaningful difference in the condition of these two books that might justify their two unit difference in grade.

 

BUY THE BOOK, NOT THE LABEL!

 

I'll completely acknowledge that CGC can be somewhat inconsistent, why else could a book be resubmitted and receive a higher grade.

 

That said, before you say that you can't tell the difference between the two books, you should call CGC and get the graders notes. Just looking at the two books through the slab only gives part of the picture. I have called for graders notes (actually even on a book that you once owned) and in more cases then not, all three graders gave the book the same grade. At least at that time, CGC was fairly consistent.

 

I will say that sometimes, pedigree books get a bump (especially if they are submitted in runs).

 

Lastly, what books did you buy?

[october]

CGC grading "arbitrary"? Perhaps. "Subjective"? You bet. "Variable"? Frustratingly so. But my favorite descriptor for it is "capricious".

 

Ca-pri-cious - governed or characterized by caprice (whim; vagary); UNPREDICTABLE; INCONSTANT.

 

Just received two recent purchases, one a 9.0 and the other a pedigreed 9.4. Inside their slabs, I cannot discern a meaningful difference in the condition of these two books that might justify their two unit difference in grade.

 

BUY THE BOOK, NOT THE LABEL!

 

 

I will say that sometimes, pedigree books get a bump (especially if they are submitted in runs).

 

 

Doesn't it bother anyone that pedigrees, Golden Age books and SA keys get a bump in grading? Is that a part of their "standard"? How is that bump determined? How much of a bump is it? Why is this inconsitency, subjectivity and refusal to publish standards acceptable? Why aren't other people asking these questions? How can someone objectively say that the crazy multiples paid for a 9.6 over a 9.4 are justified, especially when that grade might change on resub? In my mind this is classic example of a manufactured collectible bubble market...sell 'em if you got 'em.

[awe4one]

Doesn't it bother anyone that pedigrees, Golden Age books and SA keys get a bump in grading? Is that a part of their "standard"? How is that bump determined? How much of a bump is it? Why is this inconsitency, subjectivity and refusal to publish standards acceptable? Why is no one else asking these questions? How can someone objectively say that the crazy multiples paid for a 9.6 over a 9.4 are justified, especially when that grade might change on resub? In my mind this is classic example of a manufactured collectible bubble market...sell 'em if you got 'em.

 

Dude...where the hell have you been? These issues have all been debated and redebated on these boards since the beginning. It's not like no one's asked these questions. The problem is the answers, if given at all, haven't been that forthcoming...

 

Jim

[namisgr]

Well, for the sake of continuing the dialog, I will argue that, based on my experience, a "pedigree bump" for Silver Age books is a myth. One can always find examples of pedigree books that appear to be overgraded, just as there are occasional overgrades awarded to nonpedigree books as well.

 

The scientist remains skeptical, in the absence of any hard data...

[namisgr]

How can someone objectively say that the crazy multiples paid for a 9.6 over a 9.4 are justified, especially when that grade might change on resub? In my mind this is classic example of a manufactured collectible bubble market...sell 'em if you got 'em.

 

Don't know about how it speaks to a potential bubble market, but I strongly concur with your assertion about the wavy distinctions between high grade units like 9.4 and 9.6. With resubmission, I have had books change TWO grading units, and have had a book receive a different colored label. With these experiences in mind, and understanding the human fallability of the subjective grading of comic books, I urge collectors to buy the book, and not the label.

[october]

Doesn't it bother anyone that pedigrees, Golden Age books and SA keys get a bump in grading? Is that a part of their "standard"? How is that bump determined? How much of a bump is it? Why is this inconsitency, subjectivity and refusal to publish standards acceptable? Why is no one else asking these questions? How can someone objectively say that the crazy multiples paid for a 9.6 over a 9.4 are justified, especially when that grade might change on resub? In my mind this is classic example of a manufactured collectible bubble market...sell 'em if you got 'em.

 

Dude...where the hell have you been? These issues have all been debated and redebated on these boards since the beginning. It's not like no one's asked these questions. The problem is the answers, if given at all, haven't been that forthcoming...

 

Jim

 

Yeah, I know. My paragraph just sounded better with that in it.

[greggy]

Doesn't it bother anyone that pedigrees, Golden Age books and SA keys get a bump in grading? Is that a part of their "standard"? How is that bump determined? How much of a bump is it? Why is this inconsitency, subjectivity and refusal to publish standards acceptable? Why is no one else asking these questions? How can someone objectively say that the crazy multiples paid for a 9.6 over a 9.4 are justified, especially when that grade might change on resub? In my mind this is classic example of a manufactured collectible bubble market...sell 'em if you got 'em.

 

Dude...where the hell have you been? These issues have all been debated and redebated on these boards since the beginning. It's not like no one's asked these questions. The problem is the answers, if given at all, haven't been that forthcoming...

 

Jim

 

Yeah, I know. My paragraph just sounded better with that in it.

[october]

How can someone objectively say that the crazy multiples paid for a 9.6 over a 9.4 are justified, especially when that grade might change on resub? In my mind this is classic example of a manufactured collectible bubble market...sell 'em if you got 'em.

 

Don't know about how it speaks to a potential bubble market, but I strongly concur with your assertion about the wavy distinctions between high grade units like 9.4 and 9.6. With resubmission, I have had books change TWO grading units, and have had a book receive a different colored label. With these experiences in mind, and understanding the human fallability of the subjective grading of comic books, I urge collectors to buy the book, and not the label.

 

It's a bubble market because the inflated prices don't have any basis in reality. People are buying the label and an arbitrary number. Once people realize how out of whack these prices are, the market will drop and the bubble will burst. The CGC market is still bullish and people are still enthusiastic about it, but will it last? I don't think that 100x cover for a modern or 2x a 9.4 for a 9.6 are tenable prices in the long run.