BB28 from an 8.0 to a 9.0??????????

[rube11]

Hey Mark,

 

We were sort of waiting for info from you after speaking with Steve L I thought?

[esquirecomics]

I did contact Steve (as well as cc'd Josh), and alerted him to this discussion. He did respond right away, and asked that I call him to discuss the matter further. I did. But we still haven't spoken so I am afraid I don't have any more details to post.

 

Although he did provide an initial response, since I haven't received permission from him to release what he wrote me in the e-mail, I am sure everyone can understand that I will respect the contents of his private communication with me.

 

Of course, both Steve and Josh watch the boards, and in fact have posted before about various issues. Since they are aware of the controversy, they don't need me to speak out on their behalf. They can do so themselves.

[WIZARDTBT-migration]

Can anyone please explain how the B&B#28 received a 9.0 from CGC? Pressing aside, it appears no better than when it was an 8.0.

 

Was the 9.0 a favor grade for Comgeek?

 

A few problems here?

 

Are CGC books worth the premium when they turn out books such as this?

 

Is the comic book market in general to blame for placing such a drastic price difference a VF and a VF/NM? Are these spreads real or artificial?

[sterlingcomics]

I'm personally of the opinion that it is very naive thinking either party would disclose anything about the B&B28.

[WIZARDTBT-migration]

I think you are right. The book was pressed and got a 9.0 (even though it looks like an 8.0)

 

However, the silence raises the question about what other books on Comiclink are new and improved.

[jbud73]

I think you are right. The book was pressed and got a 9.0 (even though it looks like an 8.0)

 

However, the silence raises the question about what other books on Comiclink are new and improved.

 

Well I think to be fair this needs to be expanded as there are a lot of books on many different websites now that are "New and Improved"

 

Now many people still think that CGC has cemented comic book grading to the point where there is NO subjectivity left??? : screwy:

[awe4one]

Now many people still think that CGC has cemented comic book grading to the point where there is NO subjectivity left??? : screwy:

 

A better question is how many CGC slabs are being looked at by collectors with a jaded eye these days? I'm not sure we as a hobby aren't going back a bit in regards to whether a comic has been worked on previously or not. CGC was supposed to eliminate this uncertainty...not contribute to it, even indirectly...

 

Jim

[BassGMan]

I'm personally of the opinion that it is very naive thinking either party would disclose anything about the B&B28.

 

Yes, as Mark said, both parties are aware of this topic, both have posted before and can again on this topic if they want. When we don't get any kind of response at all from these guys, especially when they realize that their reputation is on the line, then what are we supposed to think? I'd love for somebody to come on board and explain what happened if we have taken this is the wrong direction. But without that, I guess it is natural for us to believe the worst.

[toro]

It is quite funny, I came across an old Comic Book Marketplace from 1991 the other day and it all had to do with restoration. It seems that the majority of the dealers at that time had no problems with books that were cleaned and pressed. They mainly had problems with people who didn't disclose touched up books, or the amatuers ruining a f/vf book using magic markers.

[garthgantu]

CGC is a business and it can be influenced, presumably, by its customer base like any other business.

 

I'd take this point a step further... CGC is a system, and systems can be gamed. What we're seeing with these "clean, press and resubmit" examples are instances of gaming the system.

[Aman619]

xactly. Game on!

[Aman619]

in other words, the game is afoot.

[sfilosa]

 

CGC is a business and it can be influenced, presumably, by its customer base like any other business.

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

I'd take this point a step further... CGC is a system, and systems can be gamed. What we're seeing with these "clean, press and resubmit" examples are instances of gaming the system.

 

Cleaning is RESTORATION, except dry cleaning. And since CGC barely downgrades for dirt anyway, dry cleaning a book has almost no effect on grade.

[garthgantu]

Now, if you are still referring to whether a never pressed 9.2 has a significant value difference than a pressed 9.2, then I would say the jury is still out on that question. Clearly, to some, there is no difference and no concern.

 

See, I don't buy this part of the argument. Those who say they don't view pressing as restoration and wouldn't balk at buying a book they knew had been pressed are full of it. If someone had two copies of the same book, both in HG, and said "this one here was pressed, the other wasn't," any of us would buy the never-been-pressed copy without a second thought. Only reason some folks here are claiming they wouldn't have a problem buying a pressed book is because there's no way to disprove their claim - we're taking it on faith.

 

If there's truly no difference in the desirability and demand (aka 'value') of pressed books versus unpressed, why won't a single dealer come forward and acknowledge that they've been involved in pressing? Because they know that some portion of the buying community does have a problem with pressing.

 

So by not being forthright about their practices, these shadier dealers are able to sell to the same overall audience of buyers as upstanding dealers - except the pressing dealers now have an ace up their sleeve.

 

If you're a dealer that doesn't press books, I would think you'd be most passionate about this issue. You're not only seeing your competitors more or less printing money in their back rooms, you're also not seeing their reputations take a hit for doing so. Heck, some of them are actually burnishing their reputations by having higher grade books available more consistently!

 

How about a petition specifically for dealers, which when signed by enough of them could be submitted to CGC, stating that the signatures below are from upstanding comic book sellers who view pressing as a form of restoration and would like to see it acknowledged as such by CGC..? Sure, CGC might still just play the "we can't detect it" card, but

- at least they'd have to acknowledge that a portion of the industry does view pressing as resto

- the signatures on the petition might help cast light on who is and isn't engaged in the practice of pressing

[garthgantu]

I've also heard of people buying up golden age off of Heritage and re-submitting them and almost all had gotten higher grades.

 

Most of those are examples of pressing. See Arty's list of known Church/Mile High pedigree books that have been slabbed more than once, with the resubs garnering much higher grades in virtually every case. (Some went up two, three, even four full grades.) In instances with pedigreed books, this kind of sleuthing is more definitive and airtight. If there's only one copy of Say, Superman #37 from the Church collection, and it's been graded twice, first as a 7.5 and later as a 9.2, it's pretty safe to say that the book has been pressed and probably cleaned as well.

 

If there is a conspiracy theory to really think about, suppose some day, someone steals some slabs out of production ,makes counterfit labels, then heat seals a ASM #1 that was originally a 7.5 and puts in a counterfit 9.0 label. How many of us call up and ask for the notes when we purchase a book off someone else, I know I've only done it twice since I started to purchase CGC'd books. Are there phoney CGC slabs out there now, I doubt it,,but who know what will happen in the future! Might sound but it could happen. Well it could!

 

I agree this is not a fantastic scenario - it's well within the realm of possibility with today's scanning and printing technologies. Yet another reason to call CGC when buying any high-dollar slabbed book. *However, it wouldn't be that much harder for the 'forger' to include the serial number for the original ASM 1 in 9.0 (using your example), in which case CGC wouldn't be able to help you avoid such counterfeiting anyway.

[esquirecomics]

Now, if you are still referring to whether a never pressed 9.2 has a significant value difference than a pressed 9.2, then I would say the jury is still out on that question. Clearly, to some, there is no difference and no concern.

 

See, I don't buy this part of the argument. Those who say they don't view pressing as restoration and wouldn't balk at buying a book they knew had been pressed are full of it. If someone had two copies of the same book, both in HG, and said "this one here was pressed, the other wasn't," any of us would buy the never-been-pressed copy without a second thought. Only reason some folks here are claiming they wouldn't have a problem buying a pressed book is because there's no way to disprove their claim - we're taking it on faith.

 

If there's truly no difference in the desirability and demand (aka 'value') of pressed books versus unpressed, why won't a single dealer come forward and acknowledge that they've been involved in pressing? Because they know that some portion of the buying community does have a problem with pressing.

 

So by not being forthright about their practices, these shadier dealers are able to sell to the same overall audience of buyers as upstanding dealers - except the pressing dealers now have an ace up their sleeve.

 

If you're a dealer that doesn't press books, I would think you'd be most passionate about this issue. You're not only seeing your competitors more or less printing money in their back rooms, you're also not seeing their reputations take a hit for doing so. Heck, some of them are actually burnishing their reputations by having higher grade books available more consistently!

 

How about a petition specifically for dealers, which when signed by enough of them could be submitted to CGC, stating that the signatures below are from upstanding comic book sellers who view pressing as a form of restoration and would like to see it acknowledged as such by CGC..? Sure, CGC might still just play the "we can't detect it" card, but

- at least they'd have to acknowledge that a portion of the industry does view pressing as resto

- the signatures on the petition might help cast light on who is and isn't engaged in the practice of pressing

 

Well said.

 

This is completely true. Even recently I know of certain dealers who asked others that certain books not be targeted as potentially having been pressed b/c it was scaring away customers, and the books were big ticket items. There is a significant degree of stigma surrounding these books.

 

I still intend to post a draft "contract" that buyers can use when they seek to purchase books to attempt to protect themselves from pressed books. I will also draft a proposed petition such as you described for dealers, and I will circulate it around. Who will or will not sign will reveal a great deal.

 

But give me some time to do so as my wife is due to give birth anyday!

[FFB]

But give me some time to do so as my wife is due to give birth anyday!

 

Congratulations in advance on the new addition to the family, Mark!

[WIZARDTBT-migration]

So did anyone ever speak to Josh or Comgeek?

[Aman619]

...about what?

[Ze-man]

If there's truly no difference in the desirability and demand (aka 'value') of pressed books versus unpressed, why won't a single dealer come forward and acknowledge that they've been involved in pressing? Because they know that some portion of the buying community does have a problem with pressing.

 

 

Dont forget to include all the potential buyers that are currently not even aware of pressing. They also might decide they have a problem with it. When they learn about pressing while reading a sellers honest disclosure in an auction they are interested in.

 

Ze-