Batman #1 CGC 8.0 blue label on eBay...

[esquirecomics]

I'm the high bidder again!

[markseifert]

I'm the high bidder again!

 

Nice. Do you think it's a resubmission candidate? It looks pretty darn nice in that pic, but does the owner have any straight-on shots that he's shown anyone?

[esquirecomics]

I leave that question up to everyone else. Personally, for a variety of reasons, I don't play the re-submission game.

 

If I seriously disagreed with CGC on a grade, I would simply crack the book out and let people make up their own mind. I wouldn't resubmit it hoping to get another grade from the same organization. Certainly nothing unlawful, unethical or even inappropriate for doing so, but to to me, I just don't think its right. I will either disagree or agree with CGC and leave it at that.

 

Frankly, I would hope - though I don't believe this to be reality - that CGC would give the same grade every time b/c that's how any grading service should work.

 

Also, and perhaps most importantly, I don't want to see CGC giving different grades on different days b/c it diminishes their credibility and no one wins if that happens.

[adamstrange]

I leave that question up to everyone else. Personally, for a variety of reasons, I don't play the re-submission game.

 

If I seriously disagreed with CGC on a grade, I would simply crack the book out and let people make up their own mind. I wouldn't resubmit it hoping to get another grade from the same organization. Certainly nothing unlawful, unethical or even inappropriate for doing so, but to to me, I just don't think its right. I will either disagree or agree with CGC and leave it at that.

 

Frankly, I would hope - though I don't believe this to be reality - that CGC would give the same grade every time b/c that's how any grading service should work.

 

Also, and perhaps most importantly, I don't want to see CGC giving different grades on different days b/c it diminishes their credibility and no one wins if that happens.

 

If there is a problem with CGC's consistency (and there seem to be a few posts on that subject), ignoring it/sweeping it under the rug isn't likely to result in the problem getting fixed sooner rather than later. At least that doesn't appear to be the tack you take with your law practice.

[esquirecomics]

If there is a problem with CGC's consistency (and there seem to be a few posts on that subject), ignoring it/sweeping it under the rug isn't likely to result in the problem getting fixed sooner rather than later. At least that doesn't appear to be the tack you take with your law practice.

 

AS, I'm certainly neither ignoring it or sweeping it under the rug. To the contrary, you'll find several posts of mine throughout the boards commenting, if not criticizing, CGC on the inconsistencies and requesting that they disclose the standards they apply. I will happily join the chorus on seeing what can be done to address this problem, or if necessary go solo.

 

What I am simply saying is that I have no desire to contribute to the problem of inconsistent grading by resubmitting books myself. That would be hypocritical of me.

 

Besides, based on my repeatedly stated philosphy, then I would have to disclose it to everyone anyway so I gain nothing!

[ajaxfarrell]

(and actually has been so poor in recent iterations), that it seems unlikely to prompt any new speculation in the title.

it·er·a·tion repetition: an instance or the act of doing something again.

Also called iterance

[DarrenSmith]

If I seriously disagreed with CGC on a grade, I would simply crack the book out and let people make up their own mind.

 

Mark,

 

I am confused by your statement. Have you changed your stance on disclosing what grade a book was given by CGC? If not, why wouldn't you just leave it in the slab?

[esquirecomics]

If I seriously disagreed with CGC on a grade, I would simply crack the book out and let people make up their own mind.

 

Mark,

 

I am confused by your statement. Have you changed your stance on disclosing what grade a book was given by CGC? If not, why wouldn't you just leave it in the slab?

 

I'm not sure I've ever articulated any specific stance on having to disclose prior CGC grades outright. What I have stated was that when someone knew that a book had received more than one CGC grade, that fact should be disclosed because obviously there was some substantive reason for the change because it is our hope and desire that CGC maintains consistent grading skills from day to day (of course, the reality is that the change may simply have resulted from a different group of graders on a different day). I've cited for example the case of my More Fun #52 (Rockford). First it was a restored 6.5, and then it was an unrestored 5.5 after restoration was removed. Or my Military Comics #38 (Mile High). It was a CGC 8.5, and now it is a CGC 9.4 (glue was removed). Changes like these should always be disclosed.

 

I've yet to crack open any CGC book and, as I said above, I have no intentions on knowingly resubmitting books in an attempt to secure a better grade.

 

But let's not get distracted. CGC is not the end all to grading. They are just an independent grading service. I see no problem with someone who disagrees with a CGC grade cracking the book open and then touting it unslabbed as some other grade, so long as they can support their grade determination by the evidence of the book. The buyer can determine what grade they think the book is and either buy or not buy the book.

 

There is no difference between this example and Dealer "A" buying a book from Dealer "B" and selling it as a higher (or even lower if the case may be) grade. Grading is subjective and can vary from person to person, though we hope it to be consistent. I would have more of a problem with a dealer selling a book one week as one grade and then somehow getting the book back and selling it at a higher grade the next time around. At the very least it doesn't say much for the dealer's grading standards.

 

However, frankly, if someone asked me whether a book I owned had been previously graded by CGC or any other dealer but yet I had assigned another grade to it, I would reveal what I knew. And then I would defend my grade determination and point out why I thought the prior grade determination was inaccurate.

 

The true issue, has it became with the recent discussion in the Silver Age Section about Harley Yee and a FF #1, was the evidence for the grade. In that example it was shown that CGC had graded the book a 2.0 yet Yee had the same book for sale as a 4.5. Should he have disclosed the book was previously graded by CGC as a 2.0? What if it really was a 4.5 and CGC's grade was wrong?

 

Now, the consensus was that the book was nowhere near a 4.5 and that CGC's grade was far more accurate. That was really the controversy. Had Yee been selling the book as a 2.5, I doubt the controversy would have existed in the manner it manifested itself into being.

 

Hope that dispels any confusion.

[DarrenSmith]

If I seriously disagreed with CGC on a grade, I would simply crack the book out and let people make up their own mind.

 

Mark,

 

I am confused by your statement. Have you changed your stance on disclosing what grade a book was given by CGC? If not, why wouldn't you just leave it in the slab?

 

I'm not sure I've ever articulated any specific stance on having to disclose prior CGC grades outright. What I have stated was that when someone knew that a book had received more than one CGC grade, that fact should be disclosed because obviously there was some substantive reason for the change because it is our hope and desire that CGC maintains consistent grading skills from day to day (of course, the reality is that the change may simply have resulted from a different group of graders on a different day). I've cited for example the case of my More Fun #52 (Rockford). First it was a restored 6.5, and then it was an unrestored 5.5 after restoration was removed. Or my Military Comics #38 (Mile High). It was a CGC 8.5, and now it is a CGC 9.4 (glue was removed). Changes like these should always be disclosed.

 

I've yet to crack open any CGC book and, as I said above, I have no intentions on knowingly resubmitting books in an attempt to secure a better grade.

 

But let's not get distracted. CGC is not the end all to grading. They are just an independent grading service. I see no problem with someone who disagrees with a CGC grade cracking the book open and then touting it unslabbed as some other grade, so long as they can support their grade determination by the evidence of the book. The buyer can determine what grade they think the book is and either buy or not buy the book.

 

There is no difference between this example and Dealer "A" buying a book from Dealer "B" and selling it as a higher (or even lower if the case may be) grade. Grading is subjective and can vary from person to person, though we hope it to be consistent. I would have more of a problem with a dealer selling a book one week as one grade and then somehow getting the book back and selling it at a higher grade the next time around. At the very least it doesn't say much for the dealer's grading standards.

 

However, frankly, if someone asked me whether a book I owned had been previously graded by CGC or any other dealer but yet I had assigned another grade to it, I would reveal what I knew. And then I would defend my grade determination and point out why I thought the prior grade determination was inaccurate.

 

The true issue, has it became with the recent discussion in the Silver Age Section about Harley Yee and a FF #1, was the evidence for the grade. In that example it was shown that CGC had graded the book a 2.0 yet Yee had the same book for sale as a 4.5. Should he have disclosed the book was previously graded by CGC as a 2.0? What if it really was a 4.5 and CGC's grade was wrong?

 

Now, the consensus was that the book was nowhere near a 4.5 and that CGC's grade was far more accurate. That was really the controversy. Had Yee been selling the book as a 2.5, I doubt the controversy would have existed in the manner it manifested itself into being.

 

Hope that dispels any confusion.

 

Mark,

 

Thanks for the quick but wordy reply. I believe your one sentence "I see no problem with someone who disagrees with a CGC grade cracking the book open and then touting it unslabbed as some other grade, so long as they can support their grade determination by the evidence of the book" clarifies your position.

 

Thanks,

 

Darren

[esquirecomics]

Thanks for the quick but wordy reply. I believe your one sentence "I see no problem with someone who disagrees with a CGC grade cracking the book open and then touting it unslabbed as some other grade, so long as they can support their grade determination by the evidence of the book" clarifies your position.

 

Sorry, sometimes I doth write too much.

 

Habit picked up from my day job.

[nearmint]

Matt Nelson just put a blue label 4.0 Bat #1 up on eBay. Almost makes a guy like me wonder what books I could sell to afford such a prize!

[markseifert]

Matt Nelson just put a blue label 4.0 Bat #1 up on eBay. Almost makes a guy like me wonder what books I could sell to afford such a prize!

 

As was being discussed in that "multiple All Star #3's on ebay" thread (and as I mentioned there, a pair of Golden Age Subby #1's popped up within a day of each other last week also), is this another example of one key being auctioned drawing out another, or merely a coincidence? As somone with no personal selling experience on ebay, I'm curious about this phenominon, which seems to happen pretty often. Is the second seller hoping to catch attention from the underbidders of the first auction, basically?

[nearmint]

Reserve has been met on Matt's 4.0.

[action1kid]

just llike action comics #1.,the highest unrestored grades of this book have yet to touch the cgc census[batman 1] .mark my words, 5 years from now on the cgc census that 9.0 will not be the highest grade on that census...[batman 1]

[Aman619]

thats true for ALL THE TITLES FOR WHICH DAVE AND OTHERS HAVENT SENT BOOKS INTO CGC FOR! (caps lock) We all look at the census as a work in progress... dont you?

[action1kid]

indeed i do.....thanks for your reply...

however alot of people here look at the census like its god and what it says is written in stone....there are people here who think that the superman #1 on cgc will be the highest forever....ive been told that many times here,i respectfully disagree.......there are just to many bat and supes 1s out there that the census has not yet even dented,,so i agree with you...

[action1kid]

i was referring to superman #1 AND BATMAN #1

[nearmint]

indeed i do.....thanks for your reply...

however alot of people here look at the census like its god and what it says is written in stone....there are people here who think that the superman #1 on cgc will be the highest forever....ive been told that many times here,i respectfully disagree.......there are just to many bat and supes 1s out there that the census has not yet even dented,,so i agree with you...

 

I don't recall anyone saying that. Who specifically thinks that there will NEVER be a higher grade Supes #1 on the census?

[rob_react]

indeed i do.....thanks for your reply...

however alot of people here look at the census like its god and what it says is written in stone....there are people here who think that the superman #1 on cgc will be the highest forever....ive been told that many times here,i respectfully disagree.......there are just to many bat and supes 1s out there that the census has not yet even dented,,so i agree with you...

 

I don't recall anyone saying that. Who specifically thinks that there will NEVER be a higher grade Supes #1 on the census?

 

I think we're all in agreement that there's at least one known copy that's better than 8.0.

[Aman619]

yeah, I never heard anyone say that either. We can draw conclusions from the census so far, and we do in buying, but clearly we all add to it the books we KNOW about (like Dave's or our own copies) as well as intuiting from it what else may be sitting raw somewhere. The census will probably NEVER represent the entire population, except perhaps by accident if the number of ghosts equals the number of ungraded copies.