CGC announces NEW Pedigree Labels and NEW Pedigrees 3 3

[Sqeggs]

On 7/13/2019 at 12:19 AM, MrBedrock said:

Can a submitter choose which color? If I prefer the blue label with the pedigree designation can I have that instead of the black? Or from this point forward will pedigrees automatically be given a black label?

There's always a problem child in the group. Young man, you'll get what the other boys and girls get and like it. 

[Sqeggs]

23 hours ago, Robot Man said:

Depends on the pedigree, the book, the condition, rarity just like anything. Some pedigrees are more in demand and some aren't. Many don't sell for any more than a non-pedigree.

I'd put the Crowley books in that category. With some peds that are focused on a particular period or genre it's tough to say whether the ped gives the book a premium or whether the books command strong prices just because they are high-grade copies of tough books. I'm thinking here of some of the River City books, which includes some higher-grade DCs that are otherwise tough to find.

I was just looking at CGC's list and Circle 8 is on it. I thought that one had been defrocked or am I looking at an old page? 

[telerites]

32 minutes ago, entalmighty1 said:

There are Toledo books slabbed with the new cases running around now.  I have one, but it's old label, and I was always hesitant to resubmit it because it wasn't listed on their website anymore.

Yeah - CGC will get some reholders for the new ped designations but do you think anyone would reholder to lose one of those three that I mentioned since they are no longer recognized?  I kind of think it makes the book maybe even  more desirable than if the ped had been maintained.  I personally would love to have a Toledo and Sherwood.  I have a couple of Diamond Runs already or I would want one of those too.

@Straw-Man I think BP has an example of all of them in his ped collection plus all the noted collections.  Now he can add these to his coffers in a CGC slabs instead of or along with the alien slab he may also have of these.  Love to follow his ped thread and see upgrades.

Edited July 14, 2019 by telerites

[entalmighty1]

1 minute ago, telerites said:

Yeah - CGC will get some reholders for the new ped designations but do you think anyone would reholder to lose one of those three that I mentioned since they are no longer recognized?  I kind of think it makes the book maybe even  more desirable than if the ped had been maintained.  I personally would love to have a Toledo and Sherwood.  I have a couple of Diamond Runs already or I would want one of those too.

@Straw-Man I think BP has an example of all of them in his ped collection plus all the noted collections.  Now he can add these to his coffers in a CGC slabs instead of or along with the alien slab he may also have of these.  Love that set of of his.

I know I wouldn't resub my Toledo unless I knew dang well it was getting returned in a pedigree slab.

 

[Sqeggs]

2 hours ago, telerites said:

Someone mentioned earlier and I hope Detroit Trolleys - the two I have are structurally very sound and bright vibrant cover colors.  I bought them from Marnin and I am sure I have probably read the backstory but what keeps them from being considered?

Were Toledo, Sherwood, and Diamond Run the only peds that lost their status?  And I know Mile High II but that was some quirky deal with Chuckster wasn't it, with the initial sub of the books?

I thought Circle 8 was cashiered as well, but apparently not (if I'm looking at the correct page). I thought they were booted out when CGC decided not to give ped status to what were essentially file copies, as the Mile High II books were.

[newshane]

4 hours ago, adamstrange said:

My expectation is that a pedigree comic will exhibit a combination of structural quality (minimal physical defects), page quality and cover color/gloss so as to make it standout from other non-ped copies. The Eldon Cookeville etc look rather typical and don't stand out from other copies sufficient to be a pedigree, though I do think it a good thing for their provenance to be noted on the label.

But what about the Bethlehems, for example? Dust shadows on many of the books...F to VF condition on many of them...

I've seen lots of older peds with these same issues..where hardly any hit the NM range. 

I guess it depends on the definition of "high grade"? 

[telerites]

27 minutes ago, Sqeggs said:

I thought Circle 8 was cashiered as well, but apparently not (if I'm looking at the correct page). I thought they were booted out when CGC decided not to give ped status to what were essentially file copies, as the Mile High II books were.

I thought the same as well but saw they are still listed.

[N e r V]

38 minutes ago, newshane said:

But what about the Bethlehems, for example? Dust shadows on many of the books...F to VF condition on many of them...

I've seen lots of older peds with these same issues..where hardly any hit the NM range. 

I guess it depends on the definition of "high grade"? 

That’s partly why the term “pedigree” has become a bit problematic among collectors because there is no universal or general agreement on it.

With regards to saying the collection must average high grade well who’s high grade standards are we using? The collector who thinks it should be in the Very fine average (8.0 ish) or much higher (9.0 ish)? If you have any original owner collection  from pre 1960’s that runs VF-ish as its average today that’s a pretty damn remarkable collection. 

Also even when you have a stellar collection you still are left with some stinkers in it. Should lesser pedigree books be left out as not deserving the label? I, like a lot of others are not fans of restored books so should a pedigree still have its label status noted if its restored? How about a lesser pedigree that only hits a low number? Say a Nothford as a 5.0?

I know that this is a debate that has existed for some time and will continue but as a collector I like the extra information I get on a books history, usually look at any books background if it’s from a known collection and have enough brains to judge the book in front of me and not gush over its greatness because of a name.

Maybe someone should introduce different levels of the term pedigree to satisfy the obvious discontent with how the term is applied to all collections? 

Edited July 14, 2019 by N e r V

[N e r V]

17 minutes ago, telerites said:

I thought the same as well but saw they are still listed.

Maybe when CGC adds the new 3 to that list we’ll know for sure it’s updated.

[newshane]

37 minutes ago, N e r V said:

 

Maybe someone should introduce different levels of the term pedigree to satisfy the obvious discontent with how the term is applied to all collections? 

Nah...I say let the gods at CGC decide for everyone.  

[N e r V]

One of these days I’m going to make a list of some of the great debates in comics the last few decades brought us. A few off the top of my head would be...

What was the first silver age comic?

How much should the spreads be between good-fine-mint?

How to view comic book restoration?

Using the 100 point grading system.

Using a 10 point grading system.

Oh, let’s not forget the entire debate of actually slabbing comics like coins.

I have little doubt I could fill pages here with more...

 

[lou_fine]

On 7/12/2019 at 9:57 AM, batman_fan said:

More reason to re submit 

It's actually even less reason to resubmit unless it's either time for you to sell or you have a bank account with no limit.

After all, I believe this is just only another step in continuing label changes for CGC in their quest to generate additional revenue streams going forward.    

[lou_fine]

On 7/12/2019 at 8:33 PM, Gotham Kid said:

On 7/12/2019 at 4:58 PM, bronze johnny said:

Will we see classic covers get special labels?

that's up next

or maybe new labels for GA, SA, BA, CA etc ...

or even GOLD labels for highest certified books, SILVER for second, BRONZE for third.

endless ...

Endless is probably right as CCG seems to be totally focussed right now on generating as many additional streams of revenues as possible.  Looks like all of the recent label changes is their latest technique, so that you too can pay an additional charge to have your vintage collectible comic book encased in one of their atrocious looking gimmicked manufactured collectible slabs.     

Honestly, I would not be surprised at all if after this latest go round with the all black pedigree label, CGC ends up rolling out an even more special and unique label for the original legacy pedigrees that we all know.  Now, who wouldn't pay to have their books reholdered in one of those truly special pedigree slabs, especially when you wouldn't want it to be confused with one of these new quasi border line pedigrees now being designated by CGC? 

Sad to say but in fact, similar to the current Marvel labels, Walking Dead labels, and what have you, it would also not surprise me at all if they eventually come up with uniquely designed labels (for an additional fee of course ) for each one of these legacy pedigrees.  Now, no collector in their right mind would ever be able to pass up the opportunity to get their unique pedigree book encased with a special label uniquely designed just for that pedigree.  

Edited July 14, 2019 by lou_fine

[bluechip]

1 hour ago, N e r V said:

That’s partly why the term “pedigree” has become a bit problematic among collectors because there is no universal or general agreement on it.

With regards to saying the collection must average high grade well who’s high grade standards are we using? The collector who thinks it should be in the Very fine average (8.0 ish) or much higher (9.0 ish)? If you have any original owner collection  from pre 1960’s that runs VF-ish as its average today that’s a pretty damn remarkable collection. 

Also even when you have a stellar collection you still are left with some stinkers in it. Should lesser pedigree books be left out as not deserving the label? I, like a lot of others are not fans of restored books so should a pedigree still have its label status noted if its restored? How about a lesser pedigree that only hits a low number? Say a Nothford as a 5.0?

I know that this is a debate that has existed for some time and will continue but as a collector I like the extra information I get on a books history, usually look at any books background if it’s from a known collection and have enough brains to judge the book in front of me and not gush over its greatness because of a name.

Maybe someone should introduce different levels of the term pedigree to satisfy the obvious discontent with how the term is applied to all collections? 

There will be weird examples, to be sure.   Low grade, poor and restored copies of books exist in pedigree collections and if the whole idea is to identify a book as part of a pedigree collection it contradicts that concept to say a book isn't from a collection that you know it's actually from, just because the grade is low, or because the grade is high but there is a dot of glue on the staple and graders want people to disapprove of that.  Weirdities, whether intended or not, are absolutely unavoidable anytime colors are used to say something is good, or bad.  

But unless and until colored labels are used, if at all, only for things which are not rationally debatable, the addition of a pedigree label is a good thing, if only because it opens the doors for all those other identified collections people are referring to here.   From now on, CGC could ID your books from those other collections with lesser debate about whether they qualify to be a "pedigree." 

[Sqeggs]

2 hours ago, newshane said:

But what about the Bethlehems, for example? Dust shadows on many of the books...F to VF condition on many of them...

I've seen lots of older peds with these same issues..where hardly any hit the NM range. 

I guess it depends on the definition of "high grade"? 

With the Bethlehems, I think the (usually) high-grade 1950s books are probably what earned it ped status. 

[Sqeggs]

15 minutes ago, bluechip said:

There will be weird examples, to be sure.   Low grade, poor and restored copies of books exist in pedigree collections and if the whole idea is to identify a book as part of a pedigree collection it contradicts that concept to say a book isn't from a collection that you know it's actually from, just because the grade is low, or because the grade is high but there is a dot of glue on the staple and graders want people to disapprove of that.  Weirdities, whether intended or not, are absolutely unavoidable anytime colors are used to say something is good, or bad.  

But unless and until colored labels are used, if at all, only for things which are not rationally debatable, the addition of a pedigree label is a good thing, if only because it opens the doors for all those other identified collections people are referring to here.   From now on, CGC could ID your books from those other collections with lesser debate about whether they qualify to be a "pedigree." 

It seems as if these four (with the possible exception of the New Hampshires) would have been better labeled as "collections" rather than pedigrees. 

Designating the Cookeville books as a pedigree is a real head-scratcher to me.  

Here's one of CGC's bullet points setting out the criteria to get a pedigree designation:

The collection must be high-grade. Comics from the Silver Age in general would have to be 9.2 and higher, and a collection of exclusive Silver Age material must have an average grade of 9.4. Golden Age comics would have to be high-grade as well. For example, the Lost Valley collection consisted of many golden age books from before 1941 that were technically mid-grade, but were almost across the board the highest graded copy for that book. Page quality must be nice as well.

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but most of the Cookevilles I've owned or seen are mid-grade. I don't think I've seen many graded 9.0 or above. Unless there's a stash out there sitting in someone's collection, I don't see how this can be considered a high-grade collection.

[Sqeggs]

I may be forgetting something, but I think this is the highest-graded Cookeville I own. If anything, it may be on the high side of the grades most of these books have received. (Obviously, there are some higher-grade books in the collection, but I don't think they're representative.)

It's a large OO collection that includes books from the early 1940s, including some keys. Worth a label notation as a collection, imo, but doesn't fit the definition of a pedigree as CGC has previously defined it. 

[N e r V]

 

 

22 minutes ago, Sqeggs said:

It seems as if these four (with the possible exception of the New Hampshires) would have been better labeled as "collections" rather than pedigrees. 

Designating the Cookeville books as a pedigree is a real head-scratcher to me.  

Here's one of CGC's bullet points setting out the criteria to get a pedigree designation:

The collection must be high-grade. Comics from the Silver Age in general would have to be 9.2 and higher, and a collection of exclusive Silver Age material must have an average grade of 9.4. Golden Age comics would have to be high-grade as well. For example, the Lost Valley collection consisted of many golden age books from before 1941 that were technically mid-grade, but were almost across the board the highest graded copy for that book. Page quality must be nice as well.

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but most of the Cookevilles I've owned or seen are mid-grade. I don't think I've seen many graded 9.0 or above. Unless there's a stash out there sitting in someone's collection, I don't see how this can be considered a high-grade collection.

Which is why they should note some as you said as collections or create different levels of the term pedigree. I just like the info. and think it’s a shame every time information like a books roots is deleted off the label.

Reading the above standards would it not to fair to say having a silver age collection from 1956 to 1963 averaging 9.4 is way more difficult than having a 1964 to 1970 in that condition? That broad of range is tough. 

How do restored books weigh in on that average? No way a 9.4 clean book is remotely equal to a 9.4 restored. Are both 9.4’s weighed in the same now? 

It makes me wonder if all the books in known pedigrees were slabbed/graded how many of what people consider the top really averaged a 9.2 or 9.4 if you knock them down on points for restored or lesser copies?

 

Edited July 14, 2019 by N e r V

[jimbo_7071]

2 hours ago, Sqeggs said:

I may be forgetting something, but I think this is the highest-graded Cookeville I own. If anything, it may be on the high side of the grades most of these books have received. (Obviously, there are some higher-grade books in the collection, but I don't think they're representative.)

It's a large OO collection that includes books from the early 1940s, including some keys. Worth a label notation as a collection, imo, but doesn't fit the definition of a pedigree as CGC has previously defined it. 

This 8.0 is a Cookeville copy. I know I've seen other Cookeville Caps that are 8.0 or higher, but the books aren't ultra high grade.

Edited July 14, 2019 by jimbo_7071

[Sqeggs]

1 hour ago, jimbo_7071 said:

This 8.0 is a Cookeville copy. I know I've seen other Cookeville Caps that are 8.0 or higher, but the books aren't ultra high grade.

Be interesting if someone would post a Cookeville in 9.0 or higher. I kinda think I've seen at least one or two. But they certainly aren't representative of those books. 

Not to mention the fact that the collection had such low visibility that dealers would list obvious Cookeville books without bothering to mention it. So the state of preservation on the books by this point is probably worse than if they had received the ped designation years ago and people had taken more care with them. Although, of course, not many people read their books, ped or not, these days so maybe it doesn't matter!