Some Guys Get All The Breaks - 8.5 to 9.2

[tth2]

thats the rub. well said. And even though I agree that a single grade difference in two different CGC gradings is almost to be expected owing to human error or involvement..... it STILL it's a funny "way to run an airline" as the old ad slogan went. To sell "inconsistency" across the board like this would be tolerated in which other industries?

Aman, I'm pretty surprised at your naivete here. ANY industry whose product involves subjective assessments "sells inconsistency", to use your words. Off the top of my head, this would include law firms, accounting firms, consulting firms, investment banks, appraisers, etc. Throw a fact pattern to a couple of lawyers, and you could get conflicting opinions. Throw the same company, with identical information, to a couple of investment analysts and you could get radically different valuations. There's nothing unethical about shopping for "better" opinions, either. Insurance companies will often use 2 sets of independent appraisers.

 

Grading is as much art as science. As soon as people get over this concept that there is some inherent TRUTH in CGC's grades, the better. Having said that, I DO believe their grading is good, and is generally consistent, and most importantly, that it's good enough and consistent enough to have achieved market acceptance.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

I don't see where this seller is unethical. I don't know this seller very well, but it sounds like the guy has been really active and successful in comics for a really long time. I look at his ebay feedback and he has 2287 positive feedbacks with raving reviews and no negatives. He has had a legion of people stand up for him on these boards and speak positively on his behalf, as it appears he is not active here.

 

So let me get this straight, this seller is unethical because (and if any of the following is incorrect, please let me know):

 

a.) He resubmitted this book and acquired a higher grade despite the book looking exactly as it did in the prior 8.5 holder (and that may not even be the case - does he still own it ? Did he maybe sell it to someone else who resubmitted it to acquire the higher grade ? Did he buy it back or have it consigned back to him in the higher grade ? - the original poster mentioned the book was purchased last year. It would seem like a strange mindset to hold a marginal potential undergraded book for over a year in hopes of resubmitting for a higher grade).

 

and

 

b.) (and this is based on a collection of old threads I tried to review here on these boards) he bought a Daredevil #11 like a year and a half ago, the seller of the book said he shipped it directly to someone else, the book got upgraded at some point , according to Pedigree the book was offered to Pedigree from another collector, Pedigree didn't need to buy if from this other collector as he already owned a Daredevil #11, it was then consigned back to this seller with the higher grade holder ,and then finally pulled from auction because the consignor gave him instructions to do so. Other threads have shown this seller's responses to questions directly emailed to him stating he is more than happy to reveal if he personally pressed a book he was selling.

 

No offense, but I just don't see the unethicalness (is that a word?)

 

The main reason for Jason's never-ending lynching on these boards is the belief among many that he has books pressed and then resubmitted for higher grades, a no-no among many Board regulars.

 

I've never asked him personally about it, but as someone who has done business with him this year, and all the way back to 1993, I can say this: He is as fair an individual as I've ever met in this business. He is easy to deal with when buying, and easy to deal with when selling.

 

Does he seem to get higher grades when resubbing? Yes. Do some of them make me wonder how he does it? Considering some of those books were mine, you bet. Does anyone here every mention the hundreds of resubs he probably got back the same or lower? No....that's conveniently a non-issue.

[awe4one]

A tear in thst area can only be a printing defect, especially on a Giant Size book.

 

That's not true...Giant Size and 100 Pagers can definitely get a tear on the spine similar to this issue. Can easily occur when the issue has an uneven spine in relation to the cover. Opening the cover a tad too far and it'll rip over time. It a common defect seen regularly on squarebounds and has nothing to do with printing defects...

 

Jim

[awe4one]

Grading is as much art as science. As soon as people get over this concept that there is some inherent TRUTH in CGC's grades, the better. Having said that, I DO believe their grading is good, and is generally consistent, and most importantly, that it's good enough and consistent enough to have achieved market acceptance.

 

But should THREE graders miss a rip on the spine at a professional grading company? This isn't human fallability we're talking here unless all three similarly fall short. This example has more to do with consistancy in grading, especially with major errors like this, than subjectivity...

 

Jim

[awe4one]

Does anyone here every mention the hundreds of resubs he probably got back the same or lower? No....that's conveniently a non-issue.

 

Can't be an issue unless we know about it...we know about the higher resubs. Unless you have some inside info on the other "hundreds" which has escaped us...

 

Jim

[joe_collector]

A tear in thst area can only be a printing defect, especially on a Giant Size book.

 

Come on, let's not get into apologist mode.

 

I have otherwise-HG copies of Giant-Size books that have small tears on the front or back cover. It's very common due to the tight binding, and comes from kids bending them on the spinner racks or unboarded issues being flipped through in a comic box.

 

I purchased a big GS lot awhile back, and all of the issues were pristine, except for a small rip on the top or bottom part of the spine. I talked to the guy after, and apparently he bagged and stored the comics away for years, but couldn't resist rifling through them every once in a while.

 

This book we're talking about looks EXACTLY the same, and I seriously doubt it's a "printing defect"/

[Red Hook]

Not a printing defect, IMO.

 

I file this under WTD defects......."Whacked the Dog" with it.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

Does anyone here every mention the hundreds of resubs he probably got back the same or lower? No....that's conveniently a non-issue.

 

Can't be an issue unless we know about it...we know about the higher resubs. Unless you have some inside info on the other "hundreds" which has escaped us...

 

Jim

 

Yeah, I do. Especially since a couple were books purchased from me. Then of course there are conversations and emails with the man himself. First hand info is always better than innuendo, though it rarely has the same sizzle.

[awe4one]

Does anyone here every mention the hundreds of resubs he probably got back the same or lower? No....that's conveniently a non-issue.

 

Can't be an issue unless we know about it...we know about the higher resubs. Unless you have some inside info on the other "hundreds" which has escaped us...

 

Jim

 

Yeah, I do. Especially since a couple were books purchased from me. Then of course there are conversations and emails with the man himself. First hand info is always better than innuendo, though it rarely has the same sizzle.

 

Well show us some examples with scans. There should be many available since "hundreds" have come back with the same or lower grade.

 

Again, we can't talk about an issue unless it's brought to our attention. Just because you may be privy to info doesn't mean you can chastise others over disregarding it if we have never been seen it in the first place...

 

Jim

[comicwiz]

Although not directly implied, the point you made does allude to the idea that Marnin might have a bone to pick with CGC. I'm asking WTF this bone pickings all about. Otherwise, lets stop making examples of people who have called out CGC on some tough issues and dismiss their claims as being motivated by nothing more than some sort of vendetta or agenda.

 

Joseph.....you completely misinterpreted my post. I think what Marnin is doing is a cool idea. Marnin read my post. He has no problem with it. He does have a history of disagreement with CGC over various issues. My point was is that I try to take in the whole picture of the relatioship between two parties (or at least as much as I am privy to). These things don't occur in a vacuum. I wasn't implying that's why he had taken the stance he has. Go back and reread what I wrote. You drew an incorrect conclusion.

 

I mean, are we going to start playing truth or dare? I will if you will.

 

For the most part, the conclusion I drew that bothered me most, was that everyones got an agenda when it comes down to sharing opinions and views. Although its your opinion, and your entitled to share it, I think its a load of b.s.

 

Its view like this this that have prevented me from sharing some of my own views/opinions/insights publicly. I just can't handle hearing people cast their verdict about me without knowing who I am or what I'm about.

 

Suffice it to say that if this is a belief you hold true, then perhaps my agenda can be found in seeing this hobby move beyond this pathetic and undying trend of swindling hobbyists and this unrelenting pursuit to constantly come up with new money-generating schemes to sustain the voracious appetites of this hobby's greed-mongers.

[Red Hook]

And where exactly do you think we disagree? You and I are very much on the same page. I'm still not clear about what you are getting frothed up about......

 

Are you saying you are bothered because I mentioned that Marnin and CGC have not always seen eye to eye on things? Are you saying that I was implying that Marnin's position on pressing was suspect because of these past disagreements?

 

I'm not saying that at all. Perhaps you misunderstood my use of the word agenda, in this case. It wasn't meant as a negative thing. Just a fact. We all have agendas or motivations. Having never met you in the flesh, or 95% of the board members, I reserve a small amount of scepticism until I have a larger, more personal dialog with someone. Or some face time. It's nothing personal.

 

And I expect that people approach my postings the same way. I bet there are folks out there who think my ranting about pressing is based on being ticked off that I can't afford high end books, or that I am just getting my jollies doing the witchy thing. I don't get worked up if people don't see it as 100% altruistic. I still think a lot of this is about the money and greed. I am more than willing to being asked what my motivations are, at any time, and will explain them the best that I can. I do know that the comic biz is woven with bad blood, greed, misunderstandings and fear of recrimination if one's true feelings are voiced and one's experiences are recounted in full openness. And I understand that. But that is a general statement. I don't know why you are reacting to it so strongly.

 

I said I think Marnin really loves the books. I believe that. That is something that he and I share. I happen to think that many books, on principle alone, shouldn't be pressed, if they are in 9.2 or 9.4 range to begin with. Whether they are going to be slabbed, kept raw, sold or kept in your personal collection for the next 20 years. I don't expect everyone else to be that concerned about it.

 

I still don't understand your reference to BS. My post was about my support of Marnin's campaign to identify the books he has for sale that he thinks were pressed. I was in no way trying to say anything negative about Marnin. I think you just saw it that way.

 

Red

[comicwiz]

Are you saying you are bothered because I mentioned that Marnin and CGC have not always seen eye to eye on things? Are you saying that I was implying that Marnin's position on pressing was suspect because of these past disagreements?

 

Yes

 

I'm not saying that at all. Perhaps you misunderstood my use of the word agenda, in this case. It wasn't meant as a negative thing. Just a fact.

 

That's not how its interpreted here Brad, and you know it.

 

Lets get one thing straight. I couldn't give a rats one way or another what you or others think about my stance on pressing, or any opinion I share regarding the hobby. The written word lacks emotion, and what you construe as "frothing" is far from being that, and I couldn't care one way or another because I look at it as two people having a discussion. Nothing more.

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this point because IMO it just gives fuel to the fire whenever someone's opinion sharing is construed as being based on motive or some hidden agenda. Whether or not you think there is no harm, on these boards agenda=negativity because the apologists are always ready to connect any mention of an agenda to some consipirator, flake or rantings of lunacy.

 

I also think we can at least agree that we both like what Marnin's done, and some things more than others, but to a large extent, leaving some room in your opinion of him that bases some element of suspicion that could stem from past grudges impacts the cred factor. And its just not right because in many ways I admire the fact that he's come out and done something that a great many others were in a position to do, but didn't have the balls or were downright too afraid to do it themselves.

[nearmint]

I think the question had been raised, but has anyone called for the notes on the book,,,if so does it mention a 1/2 tear? I don't know who Mosconi is, and I'm not saying he is telling any thing but the truth,,,but maybe it isn't a tear. In the blow up does it look like a tear? Not to me, but then again I need reading glasses.

 

And has anyone ever submitted a modern book with a 1/2 inch tear and received a 9.2. I've never seen it.

 

On to pressing, I didn't see anything that suggest pressing and how would that help a book if it has a 1/2 inch tear in it?

Here's the original thread:

Original STL Ewert Thread

He lists a "1/2 inch tear below the Beast's hand" that was in the grading notes.

I haven't called for the notes personally but I don't see why Mosconi would make it up.

 

I don't think he's making it up either, but you're not going to get the full picture unless you call for the notes on the re-sub. It would be interesting to hear if they are identical to the first sub or different.

[nearmint]

thats the rub. well said. And even though I agree that a single grade difference in two different CGC gradings is almost to be expected owing to human error or involvement..... it STILL it's a funny "way to run an airline" as the old ad slogan went. To sell "inconsistency" across the board like this would be tolerated in which other industries?

Aman, I'm pretty surprised at your naivete here. ANY industry whose product involves subjective assessments "sells inconsistency", to use your words. Off the top of my head, this would include law firms, accounting firms, consulting firms, investment banks, appraisers, etc. Throw a fact pattern to a couple of lawyers, and you could get conflicting opinions. Throw the same company, with identical information, to a couple of investment analysts and you could get radically different valuations. There's nothing unethical about shopping for "better" opinions, either. Insurance companies will often use 2 sets of independent appraisers.

 

Grading is as much art as science. As soon as people get over this concept that there is some inherent TRUTH in CGC's grades, the better. Having said that, I DO believe their grading is good, and is generally consistent, and most importantly, that it's good enough and consistent enough to have achieved market acceptance.

 

Couldn't agree more, Tim.

[nearmint]

Grading is as much art as science. As soon as people get over this concept that there is some inherent TRUTH in CGC's grades, the better. Having said that, I DO believe their grading is good, and is generally consistent, and most importantly, that it's good enough and consistent enough to have achieved market acceptance.

 

But should THREE graders miss a rip on the spine at a professional grading company? This isn't human fallability we're talking here unless all three similarly fall short. This example has more to do with consistancy in grading, especially with major errors like this, than subjectivity...

 

Jim

 

Who said they missed the tear? Has anyone called for the notes on the re-sub?

[Red Hook]

 

That's not how its interpreted here Brad, and you know it.

 

 

 

Choose to interpret what I said the way you want. All power to you. I just think you're wrong. And referring to those that don't have the balls....,I assume that's self-referential, right?

[comicwiz]

 

That's not how its interpreted here Brad, and you know it.

 

 

 

Choose to interpret what I said the way you want. All power to you. I just think you're wrong. And referring to those that don't have the balls....,I assume that's self-referential, right?

 

Yep.

[FlyingDonut]

 

Who said they missed the tear? Has anyone called for the notes on the re-sub?

 

No, because that would ruin the conspiracy theory.

[Red Hook]

 

That's not how its interpreted here Brad, and you know it.

 

 

 

Choose to interpret what I said the way you want. All power to you. I just think you're wrong. And referring to those that don't have the balls....,I assume that's self-referential, right?

 

Yep.

 

Well, I'm glad we straightened that out.

[nearmint]

Again, we can't talk about an issue unless it's brought to our attention. Just because you may be privy to info doesn't mean you can chastise others over disregarding it if we have never been seen it in the first place...

 

I think the point is worth bringing up whether he's privy to info or not. It's been implied in this thread that JE gets better grades from CGC than the rest of us. To mention that his uber-high grade books are what get all the attention, and we don't know how many books he gets back with the same grade or lower, IS relevant.

 

Why should we take implications of unethical behavior seriously when they're based on select information, especially considering that when confronted with that fact, your response is "well, that's all the info we have." I don't have to be a lawyer to know that wouldn't hold up in any court, and certainly doesn't hold water with me.