FF #1 Found in Trash-was cgc 2.0 Now on ebay as 4.5?

[Dr_Neff]

Action # 1 2.5

[shadroch]

That is an excellent point.

It'a okay for dealers to break out a book if it is undergraded by CGC ,yet stick it to a buyer when they think its over-graded.

I know its very tough to grade a book based on a scan,but to call that book a VG+ is simply wrong.

[Ze-man]

 

Why should a buyer be forced to accept CGC's grade if the seller's not willing to do the same?

 

 

I think it has something to do with cake.. having cake, eating cake.. wanting cake.. or something like that.

I never quite understood that phrase..

"Having your cake and eating it too."

 

If you had cake.. of course you would want to eat it.

But..if you wanted cake.. and had none.. then I could see how you could not eat it.

But in having cake , you are able to eat said cake. So whats the big deal?

 

I guess my point is.. Harley seems to enjoy CGC cake, but only if he can have the bigger piece.

 

 

Ze-

[mrwoogieman]

 

Why should a buyer be forced to accept CGC's grade if the seller's not willing to do the same?

 

 

I think it has something to do with cake.. having cake, eating cake.. wanting cake.. or something like that.

I never quite understood that phrase..

"Having your cake and eating it too."

 

If you had cake.. of course you would want to eat it.

But..if you wanted cake.. and had none.. then I could see how you could not eat it.

But in having cake , you are able to eat said cake. So whats the big deal?

 

I guess my point is.. Harley seems to enjoy CGC cake, but only if he can have the bigger piece.

 

 

Ze-

 

That's because the proper phrase is almost always misquoted. It should be

 

You can't eat your cake and have it too.

 

Makes sense that way, no? Once you've eaten it, you can't also still have it because it's gone.

[Ze-man]

I thought it was used to describe a greedy person who wanted all the cake?

 

And even though they were actually eating a piece of cake.. they wanted even more...at the same time.

 

 

All this talk of cake is making me hungry...

 

Google had this to say.. Having your cake and eating it too

 

 

 

Ze-

[mrwoogieman]

'Cake' is also a slang term for money...

[mrwoogieman]

And, why did someone leave their cake out in the rain?

 

 

...and did they eat it afterwards, or even still have it after it was rained on? Was it still cake at that point?

[Ze-man]

'Cake' is also a slang term for money...

 

 

BINGO.. you smart man.. you a lawyer or sumthin.. ?...

 

 

[drbanner]

'Cake' is also a slang term for money...

 

Never heard that one before, must be British??

 

One of AC/DC's songs talks about wanting to "...cut your cake with my knife...", but why does he have to use his knife? I guess there's lots of different kinds of cake?

[nearmint]

mmmmm...german chocolate cake...yummy...

[esquirecomics]

I don't really think that is a fair comparison. Restoration is an objective fact.

 

Except where pressing is concerned!

 

Whoops, didn't mean to go there!

[drbanner]

mmmmm...german chocolate cake...yummy...

 

Let them eat cake!

[Red Hook]

[Ze-man]

 

 

But where is the cake?

 

Ze-

[Red Hook]

Harley Rules.

[Aman619]

Harley ate the whole dam thing!!

[Aman619]

 

is this retouched? Its the smallest Harley booth Ive ever seen!!

[Red Hook]

Unretouched.

[october]

I don't really think that is a fair comparison. Restoration is an objective fact.

 

Except where pressing is concerned!

 

Whoops, didn't mean to go there!

 

It's still an objective fact, just because it can't be detected doesn't change that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait, ignore this post. Must not start another pressing debate!

[october]

If a dealer can grade a book whatever he likes dispite what CGC grades it,who is to say they will agree with CGC when they get a PLOD?

 

I don't really think that is a fair comparison. Restoration is an objective fact. Grading, on the other hand, is highly subjective. I don't think there is anything wrong with disagreeing with an assigned grade, especially since CGC isn’t internally consistent. Claiming there is no restoration would, in most cases, be an affirmative misrepresentation.

 

Sure, a dealer has every right to disagree with an assigned grade, crack it out of its slab, and raise the grade two-and-a-half points. But, I would hope the same dealer wouldn't refuse a return of a slabbed book because it was graded by an impartial 3rd party grading service.

 

Why should a buyer be forced to accept CGC's grade if the seller's not willing to do the same?

 

I agree, a buyer should be able to return a slabbed book if the dealer feels free to crack the slab and sell it at a higher grade. I know Harley has a CGC return policy like this.