Some Guys Get All The Breaks - 8.5 to 9.2

[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.

 

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.

 

I'm assuming nothing. Steve has said that he knows, or can find out who's books are being graded.

[Foolkiller]

I understand the natural tendency to be skeptical and to be suspicious. I can only give my impression of both Paul and Mark, both of whom I know are honorable guys from spending time with them. I just don't see them doing things which are shady in order to bump up certain people's books. I'm not trying to change your mind, just offering my experience with them which has been positive.

 

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]

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.

 

I'm assuming nothing. Steve has said that he knows, or can find out who's books are being graded.

 

Well, of course he can find out. He's the president of the company, for crying out loud. But if you're suggesting that Steve walks into the grading room and says "Okay guys, these books are from Jason, so all those 8.5s are 9.2s" and West, Mark, and the other graders say "Right-o, boss", I think that's absolutely ludicrous.

[BassGMan]

I think that all CGC has done to raise the values is more confidence that you are getting someone to certify the grade is (x) and it doesn't have resto...

 

 

In my opinion, I believe the confidence you can truly have from a CGC grade is knowing that the book is around or approximately the grade given. If the label states 9.2, then you can reasonably be assured that when resubbed it will most likely come back between 9.0 and 9.4. We know that this IS the case. Fine. With that said, why do we value one notch in grade so dramatically when that grade can move up or down depending on the day of the week or the set of graders working that day? Yes, luck has alot to do with it, either on the upside or the downside. And yes we do get the benefit of knowing the approximate grade when buying a CGC slab, that you can be assured. For that, it is worth paying a premium over raw for the assurance of the professional estimate of grade. But to pay ridiculous multiples for slight differences in estimates? I would never pay them, but being a seller of HG BA slabs, I'm certainly glad that some others will.

[nearmint]

I completely agree, Sid. Some in this thread have suggested that we're headed towards price adjustments at the 9.6/9.8 level, and I tend to agree.

[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.

 

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.

 

I'm assuming nothing. Steve has said that he knows, or can find out who's books are being graded.

 

Well, of course he can find out. He's the president of the company, for crying out loud. But if you're suggesting that Steve walks into the grading room and says "Okay guys, these books are from Jason, so all those 8.5s are 9.2s" and West, Mark, and the other graders say "Right-o, boss", I think that's absolutely ludicrous.

 

"Hey look, another big batch of books from Jason. Well, better get to work grading."

 

Again, maybe it's an unconscious bias. It's as likely as any of the other "maybes" if read in this thread. Because I don't know any of the graders, that's my unbiased theory.

[nearmint]

Because I don't know any of the graders, that's my unbiased theory.

 

You see it as an unbiased theory. I see it as calling into question the integrity of people you admit to not even knowing.

[comicwiz]

His motivations? I'm not privy to them, as I am not privy to Ewerts or Borocks or anyone elses. I've also told Marnin that I don't agree with some of the personal attacks he's launched at CGC in the past, which I believe arose out of frustration on his part, and I think he's appreciated my honesty.

 

I don't mean to put you on the spot here Brad, but from where was this so-called "Marnin" motive born? Are you suggesting there is a rift between him and CGC which leads him to form the opinons he does? And if this is the line of thinking, are we perhaps hurriedly thinking past the possibility that there may be some basis to his claims?

 

It just seems from my observations, anytime anyone has a view that attempts to barge through the CGC hatches, there's some sort of hidden agenda. There's always some damned motive to call out the wolf in sheeps clothing. Its tiring, and to be honest, its served as nothing more than a crutch on these boards to stifle a great many discussions on some very important issues, and I'd sooner see this suspicion (which eventually leads to lynching) either forever burrowed down to hell or blown into obvlivion.

[Fan4Fan]

You see it as an unbiased theory. I see it as calling into question the integrity of people you admit to not even knowing.

 

Who better to call into question?

 

Because you don't know them, you assume they are chock full o' integrity?

[nearmint]

You see it as an unbiased theory. I see it as calling into question the integrity of people you admit to not even knowing.

 

Who better to call into question?

 

Because you don't know them, you assume they are chock full o' integrity?

 

Um, I do know them. Did you miss the last few pages of this thread?

[Sal]

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?

 

 

i think this question bears repeating. i don't have my OGG here with me at the office. cursed workplace

[awe4one]

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?

 

 

i think this question bears repeating. i don't have my OGG here with me at the office. cursed workplace

 

You don't need an OGG to know this defect isn't allowable in the 9.X grades...

 

Are we suppose to believe three graders missed the rip?

 

Jim

[nearmint]

I think one of you should call CGC and get the grader's notes for both books. If the notes are the same, simply ask why one is an 8.5 and the other is 9.2. I'm sure they get questions like that all the time.

[awe4one]

Do you think a comic with a similar rip should get a 9.X?

 

Jim

[nearmint]

Do you think a comic with a similar rip should get a 9.X?

 

Jim

 

No, I don't. But I don't think that it got the 9.2 because Jason submitted it.

[Fan4Fan]

You see it as an unbiased theory. I see it as calling into question the integrity of people you admit to not even knowing.

 

Who better to call into question?

 

Because you don't know them, you assume they are chock full o' integrity?

 

Um, I do know them. Did you miss the last few pages of this thread?

 

Right, but I don't... and I don't know you.

 

So, it just seems natural to distrust others that might have a vested interest in making money for themselves or their friends.

 

 

I am not casting any aspersions, but to ask others to not question someone else's integrity is a bit ludicrous... at least based on those oh-so-integrity-filled elected officials that I have to deal with around these parts.

 

Thanks,

Fan4Fan

[OldGuy]

You see it as an unbiased theory. I see it as calling into question the integrity of people you admit to not even knowing.

 

Who better to call into question?

 

Because you don't know them, you assume they are chock full o' integrity?

 

Um, I do know them. Did you miss the last few pages of this thread?

 

When he said "you" he meant everyone that doesn't know them, not you.

[Ze-man]

 

I don't mean to put you on the spot here Brad, but from where was this so-called "Marnin" motive born?

 

Brad can certainly answer in his own way, but I wanted to say that awhile ago during phone conversations I flat out asked both Steve, and Marnin WTF the deal was between them. And of course both had a different story. Not that I discount Marnins version altogether..but rather I just know Steve personally and consider him a stand up guy that does not go around making up stories.. I simply asked him about something, and he openly told me about it.

Let us just say there is a history between them. It was not exactly a secret they knew each other back in the day, whatever the reason....money, girls,comics..... bad blood was formed between them on some level.

 

So what then about the bias of Marnins rants towards CGC? There is reason to believe he has an axe to bury, but it was more the method that Marnin chose to bring his arguments against CGC that made me question his motives.Then what he was actually bringing to light

The issues he brought up might be well worth exploring, I am all for hearing both sides of any story. But one tends to tune out a person screaming at the top of his lungs. Even if it is something worth hearing

 

Lotsa different worms in that can Marnin opened.

Anyone got a ten foot pole?

 

Ze-

 

 

[Red Hook]

His motivations? I'm not privy to them, as I am not privy to Ewerts or Borocks or anyone elses. I've also told Marnin that I don't agree with some of the personal attacks he's launched at CGC in the past, which I believe arose out of frustration on his part, and I think he's appreciated my honesty.

 

I don't mean to put you on the spot here Brad, but from where was this so-called "Marnin" motive born? Are you suggesting there is a rift between him and CGC which leads him to form the opinons he does? And if this is the line of thinking, are we perhaps hurriedly thinking past the possibility that there may be some basis to his claims?

 

It just seems from my observations, anytime anyone has a view that attempts to barge through the CGC hatches, there's some sort of hidden agenda. There's always some damned motive to call out the wolf in sheeps clothing. Its tiring, and to be honest, its served as nothing more than a crutch on these boards to stifle a great many discussions on some very important issues, and I'd sooner see this suspicion (which eventually leads to lynching) either forever burrowed down to hell or blown into obvlivion.

 

Hi Joseph. I'm not really sure what your point is. Could you just put proper names in there so I know who is barging, and who is calling out? But I'll try to address what I think you're asking. I think you just read way to much into what I was saying. What I'm saying is that everyone is motivated by something. Everyone has an agenda. I was trying to be evenhanded in my post and I'm just saying I do not feel inclined to speak for Marnin.

 

And who is lynching who? I'm confused. Help me out.

[Ze-man]

I think one of you should call CGC and get the grader's notes for both books. If the notes are the same, simply ask why one is an 8.5 and the other is 9.2. I'm sure they get questions like that all the time.

 

 

 

You mean after all of this thread.. and the one over on the STL board.. and nobody has called for the notes yet?