CGC et al To Aggressively Defend Against Lawsuit Filed In Pennsylvania 11 11

[VintageComics]

That is not exactly what they stated, in regards to the defendant(s). The statement does not hold up at all and neither does the timetable or the status of the plaintiff at the time of the alleged improprieties by the defendant(s). It sounds good, but it is designed generalized confusion, as are most of the allegations, inclusive of who is who.

 

I'm simply rehashing what I remember from the discussion threads over the past year.

 

If you're talking about legal timeline and filings, that's a different discussion.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

That is not exactly what they stated, in regards to the defendant(s). The statement does not hold up at all and neither does the timetable or the status of the plaintiff at the time of the alleged improprieties by the defendant(s). It sounds good, but it is designed generalized confusion, as are most of the allegations, inclusive of who is who.

 

I'm simply rehashing what I remember from the discussion threads over the past year.

 

If you're talking about legal timeline and filings, that's a different discussion.

 

Yes, and I was also referring to the thread that the plaintiff participated in. If the plaintiff posts are scrutinized and compared with the Complaint statements, a very loud uhooooo can be heard. I apologize if my post came across as disagreement or criticism of your post. I was actually agreeing with what you were remembering, and that is the point....It actually works against the plaintiff .

[chrisco37]

I don't understand why there would be such a big difference in grade of one company saying it's a 8.0 and the other 9.0.

 

I can see why there will sometimes be a half grade difference, but if all the graders know how to grade, it should be pretty much spot on and not a full grade in difference.

 

 

I guess you must have missed my previous post on this exact same subject matter:

 

.....since grading is just an opinion and hence totally subjective within reasonable limits.

 

In addition, it should also be pointed out that both companies most likely do not abide by the same grading standards, since they both have their own unique individual set of grading standards. Hence, one type of defect on a book might be hit more severely by CGC than it would be by the other company, while another type of defect might possibly be hit to a much lesser degree than how it would be treated by the other company.

 

As a result, it could be argued that it is indeed quite possible for a book to be properly graded as a 8.0 by one company and yet at the same time, still also be properly graded by the other company as a 9.0 copy.

 

In fact, not only can grading results be different between the grading companies themselves, grading can also be different over time within the same company itself since grading standards can change over time.

 

Especially in the case of CGC since they do not publish any of their grading standards at all, and hence are basically free to shift and reinterpret them almost at will.

 

 

None of the 3rd party grading companies publish their grading standards.

 

 

The other company, at least, attempts to lay out some basic guidelines. As Lou said, CGC does not publish "any".

 

Those "guidelines" are copied from Overstreet and are no different than any you could find doing a google search for "comic book grading". They mean absolutely nothing.

 

I disagree. They mean something. And they are available for people to see. You said that nobody had anything. That is not a correct statement.

[mschmidt]

I don't understand why there would be such a big difference in grade of one company saying it's a 8.0 and the other 9.0.

 

I can see why there will sometimes be a half grade difference, but if all the graders know how to grade, it should be pretty much spot on and not a full grade in difference.

 

 

I guess you must have missed my previous post on this exact same subject matter:

 

.....since grading is just an opinion and hence totally subjective within reasonable limits.

 

In addition, it should also be pointed out that both companies most likely do not abide by the same grading standards, since they both have their own unique individual set of grading standards. Hence, one type of defect on a book might be hit more severely by CGC than it would be by the other company, while another type of defect might possibly be hit to a much lesser degree than how it would be treated by the other company.

 

As a result, it could be argued that it is indeed quite possible for a book to be properly graded as a 8.0 by one company and yet at the same time, still also be properly graded by the other company as a 9.0 copy.

 

In fact, not only can grading results be different between the grading companies themselves, grading can also be different over time within the same company itself since grading standards can change over time.

 

Especially in the case of CGC since they do not publish any of their grading standards at all, and hence are basically free to shift and reinterpret them almost at will.

 

 

None of the 3rd party grading companies publish their grading standards.

 

 

The other company, at least, attempts to lay out some basic guidelines. As Lou said, CGC does not publish "any".

 

Those "guidelines" are copied from Overstreet and are no different than any you could find doing a google search for "comic book grading". They mean absolutely nothing.

 

I disagree. They mean something. And they are available for people to see. You said that nobody had anything. That is not a correct statement.

 

And I disagree - they don't mean squat. Describing a 9.8 as "close to mint with few minor defects" isn't a grading standard, it's simply a statement of fact.

[Tony S]

 

Those "guidelines" are copied from Overstreet and are no different than any you could find doing a google search for "comic book grading". They mean absolutely nothing.

 

The guidelines are not copied from Overstreet. I can see several significant differences at a glance. Perhaps the one that stands out the most is concerning cleaned and/or vintage staple replacement. Overstreet allows this all the way to NM. CGC and Voldemort call it restored or conserved.

 

Tape isn't mentioned in OPG until VG, which is what an otherwise high grade book grades with a small amount of tape. Voldemort lists books can - with small amount of tape - grade as high as 7.0. Essentially Voldemort uses the pre 2013 CGC standard for tape, CGC does something completely different and neither reflect OPG. In the least.

 

I wish we had more guidance from the grading companies. But one cannot reasonably argue that Voldemort does NOT offer more insight to their grading standards than does CGC. Clearly they do offer more insight and guideance.

 

Edited December 30, 2016 by Tony S

[lou_fine]

 

Actually, this is the part of the issue that I could not understand even in the original thread from last year.

 

If the restoration is done so well that you cannot discern what is original from what is restored, is this not the definition of "perfect" restoration? Or are the restorers always supposed to do an "imperfect" job so that you can tell what is original from what has been restored?

 

I suppose a restoration job is supposed to make the book look as close to original as possible. That means if the restoration is not detected, they're probably doing their job.

 

The actual detection of the restoration does not appear to be the issue here as as both the CGC labels and the Voldy labels clearly identifies the type of restoration work that was done on the books in question.

 

The problem comes when someone is asked to appraise how much of the book is restored and they can't tell.

 

I don't believe any of the grading companies specifies exactly how much of a book is actually restored, beyond their rather loose Restoration Quantity Scale ranging from Slight to Moderate to Extensive. And on every single one of these books in question, the restoration is clearly designated as Extensive. Maybe they need to add a new Level 6 or Super Extensive for these books, but that would be in the ball court of the grading companies.

 

It's my understanding that IGB was painting / glossing covers to the point where you couldn't tell where it started or stopped.

 

Once again, were the Meyers painting over the entire cover to intentionally conceal the extent of the restoration work or was the recoloring simply done so well on the recreated parts that you could not distinguish it from the untouched coloring on the original parts? If it's the latter, then I would have no issue with the work and would certainly not expect them to draw a line on the book just so the graders can know where the original stopped and the recoloring started.

 

It's also my understanding that this led to the books not feeling or looking like original comics.

 

In reading the original thread from last year and if my memory serves me correctly, this indeed was the case with the initial books worked on by the Meyers. Apparently not so much with the books that were worked on later as I was under the impression that Matt was supposedly "working' with the Meyers and providing "guidance" to them in an attempt to perfect their technique and that the later books started to feel much more original.

 

Lawsuit notwithstanding, if I was Matt, I would certainly be PO if the Meyers did in fact managed to improve their restoration techniques to the point where the books felt original and then decided to withhold them from him for proprietary purposes. Especially when he had supposedly helped them to improve their restoration techniques.

 

As a buyer, how do you buy something when you can't quantify how much is original, since restored books are more or less valued on how much is original and how much isn't?

 

See my comments above on the Restoration Quantity Scale as I believe buyers determine the valuation of Restored books based upon what is currently listed on the label, and not on exactly how much is original and how much is recreated as this is not actually specified anywhere at all. In other words, the valuation of restored books are really based more upon the type of restoration activities performed, the quality of the restoration work (i.e. amateur or professional), and the extent of the restoration performed (i.e. slight/moderate/extensive).

[lou_fine]

Although I DO hope it makes CGC reconsider their relationship with CCS, as there has always been an inherent perceived of conflict of interest that you'd think a grading company would want to avoid.

 

I definitely agree on what you said in the last paragraph.

 

I suspect that at some point CCS will have to be let go or become the source of CBCS becoming the primary grading company.

 

Although I certainly understand the issue of conflict of interest here, somehow I strongly doubt we will see anything of the sort.

 

If this was the case, would it also not mean that Heritage Auctions would only be allowed to carry non-CGC books in their auctions?

[NewWorldOrder]

Are any of the graders purposely over grading, under grading to try to make their company more successful?

 

I don't have an answer to this, but I wanted to share a thought since you raised this point, and the issue of conflict of interest seems to be at the center of this discussion.

 

I recieved a PM yesterday, and maybe being on these boards as long as I have makes me feel like everything old is new again. Full disclosure, I read Mark's debate on restoration article a month before this whole situation broke. I always felt it anchored the culture at a certain point in the timeline where everything changed, but since then, we've regressed. More to the point, it seems the same cultural issues are constantly being brought up, but it's like a flashpoint version of the comic hobby because the main players are now either assuming different positions or are found in completely unexpected areas of the field.

 

A guilty pleasure of mine is watching Pawn Stars. I know this show gets it's fair share of criticism because "it's staged", but I just feel there's something this show does that captures the essence of negotiating in real world situations. The one aspect of the show that's always made me cringe however is the "bring in the expert" to help Rick and company make a fair offer. I'm sure some reading this will think my ethical compass is wound too tightly, but I feel strongly that our approach to the ethical dilemma's in every situation we confront is the true measure of a person successful in navigating uncharted waters, and seperates them from those constantly taking on water.

 

I should also mention that seeing some familiar faces of the comic hobby appear on the show is a close second to the thrill of being consulted on the valuation of the Toy Fair Fett when the owner made an appearance on the show around last Christmas. However, the one thing that just doesn't sit well is seeing CGC appearing on the show as both an expert on grading and appraising comic books. I realize NGC has also appeared on the show numerous times doing the same thing, but should TPG's be offering value opinions? This to me is as close as it gets to an actual conflict of interest being caught on camera, yet I'm not sure if we've seen such a radical cultural shift from the days Mark wrote that article, that it doesn't matter as much to the community as it once did.

 

But I think it's still a valid question to raise - is a grader is out of bounds when it starts involving itself in arms length purchasing and selling activities?

 

My simple response is grade and value are inseparably tied. There is no point to grading if it doesn't affect value. So a third party grading service also estimating value doesn't seem out of bounds. The grading companies will "bump" books that they feel are greatly undervalued upon submission. And such takes into account the grade(s)

 

Thanks Tony. I appreciate that values are commensurate to grade, however my question specifically relates to whether a grader should be offering valuation opinions.

 

A good measure to go by would be USPAP, whose ethics rules were the basis for one third of the examination I had to write to become an accredited appraiser. Specifically their ethics rules are what appraisers are bound by, and their conditions and outlined parameters are what allow an appraisers opinion to be certified. The two that stand out for me are the disclosure requirements to avoid any forseeable conflict of interest, and experience which is usually inferred by the experience an appraiser has buying/selling personal property.

 

Isn't one of the conditions to work as a CGC grader that you can't be selling comics? What experience would a grader have selling comics?

 

Based on what I know as an accredited appraiser, CGC/NGC offering valuations on Pawn Stars would be considered arms length purchasing and selling activity.

 

PAWN STARS is a staged TV show that is meant for entertainment only and mentioning it over and over has zero relevance in this thread.

 

Obviously a grader could have sold that specific kind of collectible prior to working for that collectible grading company. Market knowledge doesn't just go away because he/she is now unable to sell it.

Edited December 30, 2016 by NewWorldOrder

[lou_fine]

Actually I just remembered not that long ago someone contacted me on Facebook asking my opinion on leafcasting and this book. May not be everyone's definition of "ultra" high grade, but a 9.4 Tec 27 is pretty darn close:

 

Interesting. That is very high grade. It would be interesting to know how much leafcasting was done...small area or large.

 

I took "cover" to mean the entire wrap, and I can't deny the moderate designation was the first thing that stuck out to me when I saw it.

"Cover" just designates where (as opposed to interior wraps) but doesn't speak to quantity...size of a dime, full spine, large corner, etc. I seriously doubt it is more than 10% of the full cover area, but it may be a bet I would lose.

 

So, as far as I understand it, leafcasting is almost like recreating something from nothing in order to fill in the missing pieces.

 

In terms of this particular restoration activity, I assume the graders would be able to readily distinguish which parts of the book have been leafcasted as opposed to which parts of the book is original. I hope.

 

Any idea why the fact that ("Bob Kane" on first page in pen) is being included as part of the restoration notes on the label?

[MyNameIsLegion]

all this hair splitting suggests that if restoration technology has gotten so slick, and the market has driven so many to employ whatever means necessary to maximize value that it has influenced the very markets definition of restoration. (5 years ago, what was all that debate about disclosure of pressing? Now pressing is a fundamental part of the business) Conservation, restoration, leaf-casting, blah, blah blah, it's all sledding down the slippery slope.

 

My simple suggestion is that if restoration occurs then CGC (or whomever) should have the benefit of seeing scans of the BEFORE condition. Rather than tease out how much and what kind of restoration has occurred (because it could go either way, under-detected, like advanced doping techniques in sports, or it could be unfairly assumed, either if or how much, and taint the perceived authenticity of a genuine, un-restored, un-pressed, or otherwise altered books) Now that pressing is part of the process, and because it is (mostly) undetectable, we assume everyone is doing it. Does that mean an old 9.8 pre-pressingisokeveryoneisdoingitincludingCGC is worth more than a recent 9.8? Will anyone win the Tour De France ever again and not be suspected of cheating?

 

Show me the before and after picture - it's not the same as holding it in my hands, but any grader knows what the real things feel like, but they can't know what it looked like prior to being restored. I would think a restorer would take pride in showing the quality of their work. "Perfect Restoration" as someone else called it, that can't be detected by a third party? That's called deception/fraud/cheating if you stand to profit from not getting "caught."

 

this is why I collect original art- I don't have to worry about this mess. Or do I?

 

*Cough, Donnely Bros*

[Turtle]

Any idea why the fact that ("Bob Kane" on first page in pen) is being included as part of the restoration notes on the label?

 

The restoration notes and the general notes go on the same line on the label. If this were a Universal label, the ("Bob Kane" on first page in pen) would still be present on the same line. As it's a restored book, it must share the space with the restoration notes.

[comicwiz]

Are any of the graders purposely over grading, under grading to try to make their company more successful?

 

I don't have an answer to this, but I wanted to share a thought since you raised this point, and the issue of conflict of interest seems to be at the center of this discussion.

 

I recieved a PM yesterday, and maybe being on these boards as long as I have makes me feel like everything old is new again. Full disclosure, I read Mark's debate on restoration article a month before this whole situation broke. I always felt it anchored the culture at a certain point in the timeline where everything changed, but since then, we've regressed. More to the point, it seems the same cultural issues are constantly being brought up, but it's like a flashpoint version of the comic hobby because the main players are now either assuming different positions or are found in completely unexpected areas of the field.

 

A guilty pleasure of mine is watching Pawn Stars. I know this show gets it's fair share of criticism because "it's staged", but I just feel there's something this show does that captures the essence of negotiating in real world situations. The one aspect of the show that's always made me cringe however is the "bring in the expert" to help Rick and company make a fair offer. I'm sure some reading this will think my ethical compass is wound too tightly, but I feel strongly that our approach to the ethical dilemma's in every situation we confront is the true measure of a person successful in navigating uncharted waters, and seperates them from those constantly taking on water.

 

I should also mention that seeing some familiar faces of the comic hobby appear on the show is a close second to the thrill of being consulted on the valuation of the Toy Fair Fett when the owner made an appearance on the show around last Christmas. However, the one thing that just doesn't sit well is seeing CGC appearing on the show as both an expert on grading and appraising comic books. I realize NGC has also appeared on the show numerous times doing the same thing, but should TPG's be offering value opinions? This to me is as close as it gets to an actual conflict of interest being caught on camera, yet I'm not sure if we've seen such a radical cultural shift from the days Mark wrote that article, that it doesn't matter as much to the community as it once did.

 

But I think it's still a valid question to raise - is a grader is out of bounds when it starts involving itself in arms length purchasing and selling activities?

 

My simple response is grade and value are inseparably tied. There is no point to grading if it doesn't affect value. So a third party grading service also estimating value doesn't seem out of bounds. The grading companies will "bump" books that they feel are greatly undervalued upon submission. And such takes into account the grade(s)

 

Thanks Tony. I appreciate that values are commensurate to grade, however my question specifically relates to whether a grader should be offering valuation opinions.

 

A good measure to go by would be USPAP, whose ethics rules were the basis for one third of the examination I had to write to become an accredited appraiser. Specifically their ethics rules are what appraisers are bound by, and their conditions and outlined parameters are what allow an appraisers opinion to be certified. The two that stand out for me are the disclosure requirements to avoid any forseeable conflict of interest, and experience which is usually inferred by the experience an appraiser has buying/selling personal property.

 

Isn't one of the conditions to work as a CGC grader that you can't be selling comics? What experience would a grader have selling comics?

 

Based on what I know as an accredited appraiser, CGC/NGC offering valuations on Pawn Stars would be considered arms length purchasing and selling activity.

 

PAWN STARS is a staged TV show that is meant for entertainment only and mentioning it over and over has zero relevance in this thread.

 

Obviously a grader could have sold that specific kind of collectible prior to working for that collectible grading company. Market knowledge doesn't just go away because he/she is now unable to sell it.

 

I beg to differ, especially in the context of a person whose sole profession is to grade comics appearing on the show and being asked to appraise an item. Especially when the consumer and collecting communities have been told differently - i.e. specifically that employees are not to deal commercially in comics. The actual conflict of interest scenario of arms length purchasing and selling activities happening on camera on a nationally broadcast television series may not only be limited to liability risks from a disgruntled buying party, and may include the producers, the TV network and/or advertisers.

 

To your point on "prior history" and relevance, with regard to appraising an item in this market specifically, any comparable or data point reference older than 6 months is irrelevant, and I rarely use anything older than 3 months. As I mentioned, disclosure and experience is central to certifying any statement or opinion of value. Unless these people appearing on the show were moonlighting as PT/FT sellers, they shouldn't be giving that opinion without observing and satisfying at the very least those two conditions as a standard code of practice. To say nothing of the explanation consumers and the community are owed on how these activities have been allowed to contravene rules set out by their employers which disallow such activities.

[herc2000]

Yes I get that if I graded a long box, some of them would slightly differ, I might for example grade

 

Swamp Thing 1 VF but if I regraded it later, I pretty much would expect it to be between a VF- to VF+ at best, half grade in or out, not VF/NM?

 

To me, there's a big difference between VF, VF/NM and I thought more than one person graded each comic (not sure on this though?).

 

Also the grader of the other company is the forefather grader of CGC, so shouldn't the grades be pretty much spot on?

[Transplant]

Obviously a grader could have sold that specific kind of collectible prior to working for that collectible grading company. Market knowledge doesn't just go away because he/she is now unable to sell it.

 

Are graders really unable to "sell it"?

[chrisco37]

 

Also the grader of the other company is the forefather grader of CGC, so shouldn't the grades be pretty much spot on?

 

Out of the small sample size I've submitted to the others, I thought the grades were in-line with what I'd expect from CGC.

 

Of course, there are some people here that would say the others overgrade and there are people on the other side that say that CGC does.

 

 

[CBT]

It's a verified complaint. That comes with quite a heightened responsibility for factual accuracy compared to basic notice pleading.

 

[lou_fine]

Any idea why the fact that ("Bob Kane" on first page in pen) is being included as part of the restoration notes on the label?

 

The restoration notes and the general notes go on the same line on the label. If this were a Universal label, the ("Bob Kane" on first page in pen) would still be present on the same line. As it's a restored book, it must share the space with the restoration notes.

 

Makes sense to me and good to know.

 

Any idea if the marketplace views this uncertified signature as a slight positive or negative when it comes to selling, or is this dependent upon the individual collector? Is CGC supposed to denote uncertified signatures on their labels or is it optional on their part?

[VintageComics]

It's up to the individual collector. Some don't want any writing, some think it's cool.

 

CGC doesn't authenticate the signature, they just make note of it if they feel it's someone worth recognizing (like a creator who worked on the book). If it said 'Sarah loves Donald' on the 1st page they wouldn't notate it.

[Tony S]

Yes I get that if I graded a long box, some of them would slightly differ, I might for example grade

 

Swamp Thing 1 VF but if I regraded it later, I pretty much would expect it to be between a VF- to VF+ at best, half grade in or out, not VF/NM?

 

To me, there's a big difference between VF, VF/NM and I thought more than one person graded each comic (not sure on this though?).

 

Also the grader of the other company is the forefather grader of CGC, so shouldn't the grades be pretty much spot on?

 

You are better than me I have done mail order of collectible comics since 1978. So I am constantly taking a "second look" at books I graded months or years ago. Pulling them and looking them over as they sell. Most of the time I'm still comfortable with the grade. But it is not uncommon for me to look at a book I graded a year ago and think "WTF was I thinking?" Sometimes I think the book looks a lot nicer, sometimes not near as nice.

 

Yes, more than one person grades a comic. I believe it is (at least) two graders and a grade finalizer.

 

And yes, my experience is that grading is overall quite similar between CGC and Voldemort - no doubt a result of Steve Borock having been and currently being the head grader. However, there are differences and one primary reason is the grading standards have not remained static. Over time it's not hard to see a difference in how the grading companies treat certain defects. Tape, stains, foxing and tanning of edges come immediately to mind. I have seen grades change "bigly" simply because how they treated stains, tanning and tape have changed from the time last graded to today.

 

[herc2000]

Yes I get that if I graded a long box, some of them would slightly differ, I might for example grade

 

Swamp Thing 1 VF but if I regraded it later, I pretty much would expect it to be between a VF- to VF+ at best, half grade in or out, not VF/NM?

 

To me, there's a big difference between VF, VF/NM and I thought more than one person graded each comic (not sure on this though?).

 

Also the grader of the other company is the forefather grader of CGC, so shouldn't the grades be pretty much spot on?

 

You are better than me I have done mail order of collectible comics since 1978. So I am constantly taking a "second look" at books I graded months or years ago. Pulling them and looking them over as they sell. Most of the time I'm still comfortable with the grade. But it is not uncommon for me to look at a book I graded a year ago and think "WTF was I thinking?" Sometimes I think the book looks a lot nicer, sometimes not near as nice.

 

Yes, more than one person grades a comic. I believe it is (at least) two graders and a grade finalizer.

 

And yes, my experience is that grading is overall quite similar between CGC and Voldemort - no doubt a result of Steve Borock having been and currently being the head grader. However, there are differences and one primary reason is the grading standards have not remained static. Over time it's not hard to see a difference in how the grading companies treat certain defects. Tape, stains, foxing and tanning of edges come immediately to mind. I have seen grades change "bigly" simply because how they treated stains, tanning and tape have changed from the time last graded to today.

 

Yeah if I graded a comic from a grade I made back in the 80's, 90's, I know it would be very different to now, as I know my grading has got a lot better since then.

 

But a grade from a year or two ago, I'm pretty sure it would be half a grade out either direction if not the same, unless of course it had been pressed or damaged.

 

Voldemort?

 

Do you mean grading standards from CGC have not remained static? As in my opinion there have been times where grading was very erratic, not static.

 

Or if you're correct and their standards have changed over the last few years to a new level, then does this mean we get free re-submissions to get the correct grade from them?

 

Also does this mean, for example that all the people who bought a CGC Batman 100 in 9.4, which they also paid a premium price for, is in fact the wrong grade because it was graded 9-10 years ago or whenever this grading system has changed so much in the last few years?