General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[mikenyc]

What the hell are you people talking about?

 

If you think spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on pulp and ink is ridiculous, then doing the same on sneakers will blow your mind.

As long as no one is collecting socks...

Some people pay for stinky socks...

 

I always knew you Canadians were a freaky bunch. But hey, different strokes for different folks.

[porcupine48]

What the hell are you people talking about?

 

If you think spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on pulp and ink is ridiculous, then doing the same on sneakers will blow your mind.

As long as no one is collecting socks...

Some people pay for stinky socks...

 

I always knew you Canadians were a freaky bunch. But hey, different strokes for different folks.

Hey,I didn't say -I- did......but freaky bunch for sure....

[Kystix]

THIS will answer all of your questions

 

Negative

 

Neutral

 

To me all this shows for the negative feedback is people not using the return feature. Or asking for part of a refund back. Also that if I bid on his books, that I will grade them down 2 full grades, and bid accordingly.

 

 

-Kystix

Edited September 1, 2014 by Kystix

[Speedy-D]

What the hell are you people talking about?

 

If you think spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on pulp and ink is ridiculous, then doing the same on sneakers will blow your mind.

As long as no one is collecting socks...

 

Underpants, man, underpants is where it's at...

 

1. Collect underpants.

2.

3. Profit.

[Logan510]

For the record: there was no malice in the initial pointing out: Bobo posted the eBay link without realizing it was Chip's for a comparision, and 1Cool realized it.

Then, I assume, Bobo looked at the other grades for a comparision. I do not see this as "butthurt" – grading should be consistent wherever you sell, or at least I think everyone expects that.

 

Overgrading and undergrading are another matter.

 

Thanks Caludio.

 

However, I did know that they were both the same book and both were from Chip when I originally posted the ebay 5.5 link against his board advertised 4.0.

 

This is not butthurt or malice, although some may think it is.

 

I just think it’s fair if Chip explains the reason of the inconsistency.

Some may see slight overgrading and pricing lower as a selling strategy, and it might be as long as you provide scans, although to me it’s always shady terrain.

 

Above all, I expect the grade to be consistent if you sell here and there – at least as a buyer. A VG can be a rag for some graders, while a tightly graded FN- can be a nice FN.

 

 

I hate to continue this before Chip chimes in, but I do want to restate an earlier point with a touch of elaboration because it seems to be lost here.

 

Grading is an opinion. The PGM threads are a collection of opinions. One persons 5.0 can look like another persons 6.5 and it's not necessarily because either are doing anything unethical. Again, grading is subjective.

 

What is not subjective is simultaneously listing the same Strange Tales 115 here as a 4.0 and on ebay as a 5.5. Or agreeing with a 3.5 average on the DD7 here and listing it on ebay as a 5.0. That same 1.5 grade bump is coincidentally the average for all 19 sub 9.0 examples (more accurately a 1.57 average) .

 

This is what the hoop jumpers and Defenders of Everything seem to want to ignore.

 

I don't know Chip from a hole in the ground, but when I read about this my first thought was "scam artist". If people want to ignore the behavior because the digital representation of himself seems nice or they've gotten a "great deal", so be it.

 

I'll be interested to see him attempt to defend it...if nothing else it should be entertaining. Though I have a feeling he hopes it'll just blow over.

[paperheart]

What he does on Ebay is between him and his seller rating. If he try's to sell them over graded here then maybe its an issue, maybe. jmho

Even when he advertises these sales through this board? That means he's telling us to go bid/buy these books...

 

For the record I've never trusted him.

 

his cry of poverty and woe is me is strong

[Comicopolis]

What the hell are you people talking about?

 

If you think spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on pulp and ink is ridiculous, then doing the same on sneakers will blow your mind.

As long as no one is collecting socks...

 

Underpants, man, underpants is where it's at...

 

1. Collect underpants.

2.

3. Profit.

 

[ItsJustRyan]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

[Sqeggs]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

[ItsJustRyan]

I've said my peace and offered it objectively.

 

Chip never asked me to post anything on his behalf.

 

This was just my opinion.

[Columbia Comics]

Good points Ryan. I can echo the same comments regarding PGM grading. It's weak to say the least.

 

Grading, like many things, are an opinion. And no one on these boards that grade do so professionally. And those that are professional do not grade based on two dimensions. So to say Chip is deceiving or "scamming" is wrong lest you have absolute proof.

 

I really think the trolls present need to find another soap box to stand on. This typical BS is getting old.

[Columbia Comics]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

 

Coming into this thread and commenting will do nothing but toss fuel on the fire. It's just what the big trolls want, right Boboset??

[vaillant]

I think Ryan’s post is the better one so far.

 

Bobo asked a legitimate question, however, based on how Chip tentatively graded the book he offered, anyway it all depends on how much he takes into account and/or agrees with the grading estimates in the PGM.

 

Why one has always to imply malice beforehand? Even if I point out a bad thing, it’s not done out of malice… it’s nonsense.

[vaillant]

OK, now, by re-reading the whole conversation, I think Bobo presented the whole thing in a way which is somewhat misleading.

Not saying he did it on purpose to denigrate Chip, but of all the various things he stated when explaining what he perceived as a problem, the following are not correct:

 

In the Giving Tree thread, Chip Cataldo posted a Strange Tales #115 that he graded 4.0. Another boardie pointed out to me that he had this same book listed on ebay as a 5.5.

This does not correspond to how things went: Chip offered the book in the Giving Thread, not providing a grade. Hector inquired for it, and Chip said it averaged a VG in the PGM thread, but he personally thought it was better. Even CAHokie guessed a better grade (FN-) at first glance, and I do agree it looks like a nice VG. Personally I’d grade it between VG and VGFN.

 

So I did a little bit of digging. Huge grade bumps from PGM to eBay and there are a LOT of examples. Here are some:

By saying “grade bumps” Bobo already implied Chip was agreeing with the average grade suggested in the PGM; which may not be the case.

In many occasions, with my books, I disagreed too.

 

To me, it looks like purposefully overgrading for a higher wining bid. What makes it worse is that's he advertises directly through this site.

I had a thought that maybe the grade disparity was due to undergrading in the PGM sub-forum. Not so. Why list the ST115 here as a 4.0 and on ebay as a 5.5? Or the DD 7, where he agrees with the 3.5 average but posts it on ebay as a 5.0? It reeks of serial overgrading.

Well, this just makes a case of overgrading, the rest is an insinuation implicating Chip acts dishonestly by knowing it’s a VG and then lists it higher.

The Daredevil was graded between 3.5 with a shot to 5.0, and Chip – when he asked – just generally agreed with Divad’s and another boardie grade of a VG.

He sells it on eBay as a VGFN, but this just means he considers it better, it still partially falls in the VG category (numeric grading can be a bit misleading here).

 

I would not consider it a VGF, but saying he overgrades and saying he is not acting honestly are two VERY different things.

[HarveySwick]

saying he overgrades and saying he is not acting honestly are two VERY different things.

 

Seriously?!

 

If someone INTENTIONALLY overgrades knowing that they are overgrading to get more money out of a buyer?? This is not acting dishonestly?

 

I don't even know how to respond to that other than a

[jsilverjanet]

Claudio

 

you are mistaken when you say

 

This does not correspond to how things went: Chip offered the book in the Giving Thread, not providing a grade. Hector inquired for it, and Chip said it averaged a VG in the PGM thread, but he personally thought it was better. Even CAHokie guessed a better grade (FN-) at first glance, and I do agree it looks like a nice VG. Personally I’d grade it between VG and VGFN.

 

 

this is his actual comment when I asked for a grade.

 

It's a 4.0 with CR/OW pages. I'll edit the post with that info.

 

Peace,

 

Chip

[CAHokie]

 

Even CAHokie guessed a better grade (FN-) at first glance.

 

I am trying to stay out of this conversation because I prefer to wait for Chip to tell his side of the story, though I do not know if that will ever happen. In the interest of being accurate and fair though, I must point out that my 5.5 comment was me being a bit sarcastic. I know little to none about that particular book and looked on EBAY to see what it was, if it was a first appearance, value, etc..... On the third book I clicked, I realized it was the same book as in the thread. Obviously at that point, several other boardies had already come to the same conclusion. I would also never give a real opinion on a grade, because I have never been taught how to grade and would never pretend to. I know I never used the term FN-

 

 

[jsilverjanet]

 

To me, it looks like purposefully overgrading for a higher wining bid. What makes it worse is that's he advertises directly through this site.

I had a thought that maybe the grade disparity was due to undergrading in the PGM sub-forum. Not so. Why list the ST115 here as a 4.0 and on ebay as a 5.5? Or the DD 7, where he agrees with the 3.5 average but posts it on ebay as a 5.0? It reeks of serial overgrading.

Well, this just makes a case of overgrading, the rest is an insinuation implicating Chip acts dishonestly by knowing it’s a VG and then lists it higher.

The Daredevil was graded between 3.5 with a shot to 5.0, and Chip – when he asked – just generally agreed with Divad’s and another boardie grade of a VG.

He sells it on eBay as a VGFN, but this just means he considers it better, it still partially falls in the VG category (numeric grading can be a bit misleading here).

 

I would not consider it a VGF, but saying he overgrades and saying he is not acting honestly are two VERY different things.

 

here's another instance where you are asking Bobo not to insinuate his motives but yet you are insinuating yourself what Chip's reasoning is to give it a higher grade.

 

Personally I would prefer for Chip to clarify things instead of anyone else, but I suspect he won't based on what Brock said.

 

 

[revat]

saying he overgrades and saying he is not acting honestly are two VERY different things.

 

Seriously?!

 

If someone INTENTIONALLY overgrades knowing that they are overgrading to get more money out of a buyer?? This is not acting dishonestly?

 

I don't even know how to respond to that other than a

 

I'm with valiant?

 

Lets say I have 10 raw books. I think they're all 9.8's. I send them all to CGC. They all come back as 9.0's. I think its pretty clear here that I consistently overgrade. Am I great at grading? Maybe not. But have I been dishonest at all in this case? I say no.

 

NOW if I crack them all out and sell them as 9.8's, then I'm probably doing something dishonest if I don't disclose.

 

One thing can mean the other, but it doesn't have to. Certainly we tend to think sellers who apparently consistently overgrade are doing it to get a buck (as the evidence seems to point to here), but it COULD be just that the person isn't a great grader.

[Dr. Balls]

THIS will answer all of your questions

 

Negative

 

Neutral

 

To me all this shows for the negative feedback is people not using the return feature. Or asking for part of a refund back. Also that if I bid on his books, that I will grade them down 2 full grades, and bid accordingly.

 

 

-Kystix

 

The prices of those books from his Neg/Neutral feedback are like $1-$6 books, with a couple $10+ books. I imagine no one even wants to deal with returning a 99¢ item - so the only recourse is to leave appropriate feedback. This is a great reason not to sell drek on Ebay. A neg from a 99¢ item isn't ever worth the hit to your reputation.