Some Guys Get All The Breaks - 8.5 to 9.2

[Red Hook]

Maybe a surveillance car parked outside of CGC headquarters with film and camera, and a team of psychologists to deterimine what level of grading-fatigue the staff is operating at that day.....

 

Up for that, Newt?

[Aman619]

Well, I think that if CGC's grading team took part in our grading contests we'd get a real feel for how they were grading that month......

 

now THATS a great idea. That would be fun to have them in the mix... of course, we grade from scans so their opinions on scans gardes would ONLY be fun but not necessarily indicative of anything..

[sterlingcomics]

Well, I think that if CGC's grading team took part in our grading contests we'd get a real feel for how they were grading that month......

 

now THATS a great idea. That would be fun to have them in the mix... of course, we grade from scans so their opinions on scans gardes would ONLY be fun but not necessarily indicative of anything..

 

I concur. Bring it on!

[namisgr]

As I've posted before on a different thread, I owned a book that increased by two grading units without having any work done on it. I purchased a 9.0 early ASM key with OW/W pages and an old blue label. Cracked the book out, which was my standard policy for the first 30 or so slabs that I bought. Saw a sweet looking book that I thought deserved a 9.2. Resubmitted it years later for on-site grading at a show, and had it come back 9.4 OW/W new blue label. I don't wish to give the particulars, since I have sold the book and it is currently back in the marketplace. Don't know whether or not that GSX-1 had any work done to it, but it is entirely possible that it was regraded untouched.

 

The take home messages? First, the knowledge that the subjectivity of the grading process can cause two unit shifts in the CGC grade must be factored into any consideration of the purchase of high grade, expensive books, in which the price swings between grades are so enormous. Second, it is best to buy books in person, where they can be perused through the lucite, or better still, purchased raw after a thorough inspection. Finally, the prices being realized for many a 9.6 and 9.8 book are truly insane, because on any given day their overall quality (read: CGC-assigned grades) can vary.

[Davenport]

I think everyone is making good points in this thread, but I just can't expect CGC to grade a book exactly the same, months or years apart. I have to factor in the human element, and the fact that our ideas of grading are constantly evolving.

In Mosconi's post he states " This book was a questionable 8.5 in my opinion and I felt it was closer to the 8.0 grade so that is why I sold it to begin with. ." Followed by: " I have no idea what he may have done to it (pressing, cleaning???) but I repeat: THIS BOOK HAS A 1/2 INCH TEAR AT THE SPINE!!!!! "

 

That tear is still visible in the Ewert scan. So is it an 8.0/8.5 in a 9.2 holder, or is a 1/2 inch cover tear accepted criteria for CGC 9.2?

 

[nearmint]

I'm certainly not arguing that the uber-high grade market is stable. The fact that I don't play on that field should illustrate that. But, I will say that I don't know of any collectible field where the uber-high grade market IS stable. In comics, I think 9.0 and below, perhaps 9.2 and below, is quite stable, at least in the titles I'm buying.

 

As for CGC, it's my honest belief that they grade the book in front of them, with no regard as to whether they've ever graded it before. That's exactly how I want them to operate. Many of you seem to think that just because a book is a pedigree, that the graders remember it. That's simply not the case.

 

As an example, I talked for a while with West and Peter(rarehighgrade) at the SD forum dinner. Peter has a ridiculous collection. AMAZING books. He was asking West about several pre-Batman Detective Church books that he'd love to get his hands on. So he'd say to West, "How about the Detective 10? Do you remember why that got a 9.0?" In virtually every case, West couldn't remember. I don't blame him. The guy grades hundreds of books a day.

 

I understand everyone's frustration with inconsistent grading, but what's the solution? Do we really want CGC to reseach every book that comes in to see if they've graded before, and just slap the same grade on all re-subs?

[skybolt]

Well said Aman...

 

Jim

 

Yes, I agree with Amman's statement as well. Thankfully, I'm content with my 7.5 to 8.5 collection. I just can't see myself paying 10 X guide for a book just because it has a couple of less creases on it. I've always justified my being habits by evaluating what I could purchase with the remaining difference between a 9.6 and a 9.0 book. Would I rather own one 9.6 graded Hulk #181, or a slightly inferior 9.0 copy with GSX-Men #1, ASM #129 and X-Men #94 in the same grade thrown in. I'd pick the latter everytime, unless the 9.6 value comes down from the stratosphere.

[toro]

I don't know if it that GS X-Men has been pressed or not, but I have done the same as namisgr. I bought a JIM 117 from a dealer on ebay who was unhappy that it only received an 8.0. Now I know the dealer has a great eye for books so I bought it, and then foolishly sent it in to CGG and it came back at 7.5. Finally after a year or so I thought no way is this a 7.5 and I sent it back in to CGC and they graded it 8.5. So that is a one grade bump from an old label to new, I could see a 2 grade bump especially on square bounds, they always seemed tough on those in the beginning. (except if that is a 1/2" tear, then I'd go with the C-note theory)

[OldGuy]

I'm shocked that CGC graded this book an 8.5 the first time when a "little guy" submitted it and then a 9.2 the second time when a "big time dealer" submitted it.

 

[nearmint]

I'm shocked that CGC graded this book an 8.5 the first time when a "little guy" submitted it and then a 9.2 the second time when a "big time dealer" submitted it.

 

 

I just can't buy into that. I know West and Mark well enough to know that they don't make enough money to operate unethically.

[JuliusSeizure]

It sounds like what CGC needs is a quality control process, if they don't already have one. For example, they could keep track of the average grade they give out per day, week, and month, and track that over time to catch trends over time. Unless there's a good reason for a trend to form (e.g., fees have risen so a higher proportion of HG books are submitted), with a large enough sample size, the grades should average out the same, all else being equal.

 

They also might run a Design of Experiments with a test suite of books to look for statistically significant differences in grading of the same books by:

 

* Grader

* Day of week

* Time of day

* Grade

* Submitter

* Others...

 

Yes, this would cost money (graders would be doing non-revenue-producing work), but if the market starts to estimate CGC's margin of error at +/- 2 grade levels, the value of CGC books is liable to drop, which would make it less economical for dealers to submit "on the bubble" books. This is the same kind of effort that goes into reducing the variance in industrial processes.

[Foolkiller]

I know them both personally and would never believe either of them to be dishonest and operate in that fashion.

 

I'm shocked that CGC graded this book an 8.5 the first time when a "little guy" submitted it and then a 9.2 the second time when a "big time dealer" submitted it.

 

 

I just can't buy into that. I know West and Mark well enough to know that they don't make enough money to operate unethically.

[Aman619]

WANTED: CGC 9.4 copies of Detective #457 and Superman #292, CGC 9.0 or 9.2 copies of Detective #395, #397, #401, & #409, CGC 8.5 or better copies of Lois Lane #41, 43, 49, 50, 51, 54, 55, & 57. Also need raw NM or better copies of Wonder Woman #82-84, 88-89(2nd series), and a back cover to Superman #34!

 

I just read your signature and I just wanna say for some of the books you have talked about that are in your collection, this is one wacky want list!! Its funny whats finally left to fill in or upgrade, huh?

[Crackandpresstoan11]

I'm shocked that CGC graded this book an 8.5 the first time when a "little guy" submitted it and then a 9.2 the second time when a "big time dealer" submitted it.

 

 

I just can't buy into that. I know West and Mark well enough to know that they don't make enough money to operate unethically.

 

Maybe they don't make enough money to operate ethically?

[OldGuy]

I know them both personally and would never believe either of them to be dishonest and operate in that fashion.

 

I'm shocked that CGC graded this book an 8.5 the first time when a "little guy" submitted it and then a 9.2 the second time when a "big time dealer" submitted it.

 

 

I just can't buy into that. I know West and Mark well enough to know that they don't make enough money to operate unethically.

 

I know neither one of them so can't say one way or the other. Maybe it's an unconscious bias. Maybe not. Seems like bias one way or the other.

[Crackandpresstoan11]

I know them both personally and would never believe either of them to be dishonest and operate in that fashion.

 

I'm sure Bernard Ebbers friends feel the same way about him.

[nearmint]

WANTED: CGC 9.4 copies of Detective #457 and Superman #292, CGC 9.0 or 9.2 copies of Detective #395, #397, #401, & #409, CGC 8.5 or better copies of Lois Lane #41, 43, 49, 50, 51, 54, 55, & 57. Also need raw NM or better copies of Wonder Woman #82-84, 88-89(2nd series), and a back cover to Superman #34!

 

I just read your signature and I just wanna say for some of the books you have talked about that are in your collection, this is one wacky want list!! Its funny whats finally left to fill in or upgrade, huh?

 

Wacky is a perfect word to describe it. The Detective #457 and Superman #292 are books I have a lot of nostalgia for. They are among the earliest DCs I bought off the rack at my local drugstore. The Detective 395, 397, 401, and 409 are just Adams covers that I really like(and now that I think about it, I need to delete 401 and 409 because I just won them on eBay). The Lois Lanes listed are what I need to complete a run from 39-60. The raw Wonder Womans are the last I need to complete the run of Bolland covers on that title. Finally, I need a back cover to Superman #34 because years ago I bought a front cover off eBay, then a coverless copy a few weeks later. I'd love to take three disparate parts and reunite them into a whole again.

 

Thanks for asking!

[Fan4Fan]

Well, I think that if CGC's grading team took part in our grading contests we'd get a real feel for how they were grading that month......

 

So, then mark the slabs with grading dates and then put out a guide to which months were perceived as more accurate?

 

I like this for the chaos in the marketplace that this could engender...

 

"Oh, no, no, no... That is a January, 2005. I think Monsieur would definitely prefer the November, 2004."

 

Thanks,

Fan4Fan

[nearmint]

I know them both personally and would never believe either of them to be dishonest and operate in that fashion.

 

I'm shocked that CGC graded this book an 8.5 the first time when a "little guy" submitted it and then a 9.2 the second time when a "big time dealer" submitted it.

 

 

I just can't buy into that. I know West and Mark well enough to know that they don't make enough money to operate unethically.

 

I know neither one of them so can't say one way or the other. Maybe it's an unconscious bias. Maybe not. Seems like bias one way or the other.

 

You're proceeding from the assumption that the graders know who's books they're grading, and I just don't believe that's the case.

[iron maniac]

I think everyone is making good points in this thread, but I just can't expect CGC to grade a book exactly the same, months or years apart. I have to factor in the human element, and the fact that our ideas of grading are constantly evolving.

In Mosconi's post he states " This book was a questionable 8.5 in my opinion and I felt it was closer to the 8.0 grade so that is why I sold it to begin with. ." Followed by: " I have no idea what he may have done to it (pressing, cleaning???) but I repeat: THIS BOOK HAS A 1/2 INCH TEAR AT THE SPINE!!!!! "

 

That tear is still visible in the Ewert scan. So is it an 8.0/8.5 in a 9.2 holder, or is a 1/2 inch cover tear accepted criteria for CGC 9.2?

 

Yeah I noticed that too.