Some Guys Get All The Breaks - 8.5 to 9.2

[Lazyboy]

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.

 

If you read the STL thread, Mosconi called for the notes on both the original and the re-sub. The original was unavailable due to it being removed (when the old label was sent in with the re-sub) and he lists the new notes in the thread. Anyone who wants to verify the notes can obviously do so.

[Davenport]

 

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

 

No, because that would ruin the conspiracy theory.

Mosconi posted yesterday: Got my curiousity up and decided to call CGC. The notes for the GS 8.5 have been removed from the system due to the resub. The notes for the 9.2 are as follows: small light bend bottom right corner, spine stress, ding top spine, spine tear. All three graders were at 9.2.

[Mr. Zipper]

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

 

Mosconi called yesterday. According to him:

 

"Got my curiousity up and decided to call CGC. The notes for the GS 8.5 have been removed from the system due to the resub. The notes for the 9.2 are as follows: small light bend bottom right corner, spine stress, ding top spine, spine tear. All three graders were at 9.2."

 

So, it went from 8.0/8.5/8.5 to 9.2/9.2/9.2

 

Beautiful.

 

[joe_collector]

I think it's obvious the book is pressed, and that's one reason why it went up., Check the two scans; the first shows slight bends and imperfections on the cover edges, but you could cut a steak with the re-sub copy.

 

Maybe CGC believes wrongly that the rip might have been production-related, and CGC went soft on it both times. I also may be missing a post, but wasn't there something about a stain on the 8.5 notes, and nothing on the 9.2?? If so, where did it disappear to?

 

I do not believe the theory that "Jason gets better grades from CGC", but more that he uses pressing and dry cleaning technology to get those better grades. Simple as that, science wins again.

[nearmint]

So they didn't miss the tear.

 

Wish they still had the grader's notes from the original sub. Would be interesting to know if there were additional defects that may have been removed.

[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.

 

Well, I'm glad we straightened that out.

 

Not to be self-righteous, but I tried man -- no one was listening so I packed it in.

[nearmint]

I think it's obvious the book is pressed, and that's one reason why it went up., Check the two scans; the first shows slight bends and imperfections on the cover edges, but you could cut a steak with the re-sub copy.

 

Maybe CGC believes wrongly that the rip might have been production-related, and CGC went soft on it both times. I also may be missing a post, but wasn't there something about a stain on the 8.5 notes, and nothing on the 9.2?? If so, where did it disappear to?

 

I do not believe the theory that "Jason gets better grades from CGC", but more that he uses pressing and dry cleaning technology to get those better grades. Simple as that, science wins again.

 

Certainly possible. Seems like the "small light bend" would have been corrected by pressing, but who knows.

[Red Hook]

I think there were plenty of people listening.

[awe4one]

So they didn't miss the tear.

 

I know you can't answer the question NM but it has to be asked...

 

So what's CGC's excuse for giving this a 9.2 then? Are spine rips now appropriate in the grade?

 

Jim

[nearmint]

So they didn't miss the tear.

 

I know you can't answer the question NM but it has to be asked...

 

So what's CGC's excuse for giving this a 9.2 then? Are spine rips now appropriate in the grade?

 

Jim

 

That's a very good question. I'd like to hear an answer as much as you.

[OldGuy]

None of this really changes anything. Those that have trusted CGC implicitly to this point will continue to and those that don't have more reason not to.

 

NEXT!

[awe4one]

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.

 

Maybe if you didn't excise the rest of the post you'd see I asked him to provide proof. I'm all about listening to facts but to say JE has "hundreds" of resubs that are equal to or lower without something to back it up is heresay.

 

We have proof about the upgrades and have discussed. Can't just come in and chastise others by saying they know something without providing proof and expect to be taken seriously.

 

I'm sure JE does have some unsuccessful resubs. But you can't expect people to talk about them if they aren't provided the basic info...which was the basis of my reply to Jive...

 

Jim

[Aman619]

I think it's obvious the book is pressed, and that's one reason why it went up., Check the two scans; the first shows slight bends and imperfections on the cover edges, but you could cut a steak with the re-sub copy.

 

Maybe CGC believes wrongly that the rip might have been production-related, and CGC went soft on it both times. I also may be missing a post, but wasn't there something about a stain on the 8.5 notes, and nothing on the 9.2?? If so, where did it disappear to?

 

I do not believe the theory that "Jason gets better grades from CGC", but more that he uses pressing and dry cleaning technology to get those better grades. Simple as that, science wins again.

 

I may have overstated when I said the tear must be a printing error. But I based that not on thousands of giant sized book sI have inspected, but on all the ones I have owned. Those square spines crimp the paper tightly in an unnatural right angle and I have seen th erips on my copies. but not after opening pages etc as suggested.

 

anyway, by the notes, it seems CGC didnt think it was an "actual rip" (as in man-made damage" either, since they all gave it a 9.2!!

 

I agree with you that wheres theres smoke, theres fire. If a dealer consistently gets higher resub grades, well, th efacts speak for themselves. We must all draw our own conclusions.

 

And to me its a NON-ISSUE how mant FAILED resubs he goes thru to upgrade 100 books. Thats even worse! Cause it means he's pressing 10x as many books as notice by the grades shooting up!

[Red Hook]

None of this really changes anything. Those that have trusted CGC implicitly to this point will continue to and those that don't have more reason not to.

 

NEXT!

 

 

I don't agree. There are new collectors coming into the hobby all the time. They should hear discussions about the issues that are hot topics right now. What's the alternative, just shut down the discussion? I don't believe in that.

[Aman619]

hey Hook - - -shut it down already!!

[Red Hook]

Nope. I think we're starting to see cases of battle-fatigue showing up.

[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.

 

Maybe if you didn't excise the rest of the post you'd see I asked him to provide proof. I'm all about listening to facts but to say JE has "hundreds" of resubs that are equal to or lower without something to back it up is heresay.

 

We have proof about the upgrades and have discussed. Can't just come in and chastise others by saying they know something without providing proof and expect to be taken seriously.

 

I'm sure JE does have some unsuccessful resubs. But you can't expect people to talk about them if they aren't provided the basic info...which was the basis of my reply to Jive...

 

Jim

 

Jim,

I started my post by saying it's a worthy point whether he's privy to info or not. In other words, I don't think he has to provide proof for it to be a relevant point. It's not a very big leap to think that JE has re-subs that come back the same or lower, as that happens to anyone who makes a practice of re-subbing.

 

All I'm saying is that accusations are being made without all the facts. As a result, those accusations lack veracity.

[nearmint]

None of this really changes anything. Those that have trusted CGC implicitly to this point will continue to and those that don't have more reason not to.

 

<h1>NEXT!</h1>

 

 

I don't agree. There are new collectors coming into the hobby all the time. They should hear discussions about the issues that are hot topics right now. What's the alternative, just shut down the discussion? I don't believe in that.

 

It's also a worthy topic for the reasons Jim has mentioned. Is CGC down-grading a half-inch tear differently than they used to?

[topofthetotem]

I almost won that book at 811.11 oh well man can dream

[Davenport]

I think it's obvious the book is pressed, and that's one reason why it went up., Check the two scans; the first shows slight bends and imperfections on the cover edges, but you could cut a steak with the re-sub copy.

 

Maybe CGC believes wrongly that the rip might have been production-related, and CGC went soft on it both times. I also may be missing a post, but wasn't there something about a stain on the 8.5 notes, and nothing on the 9.2?? If so, where did it disappear to?

 

I do not believe the theory that "Jason gets better grades from CGC", but more that he uses pressing and dry cleaning technology to get those better grades. Simple as that, science wins again.

Since it's a square bound I wonder if any pressing was done. Tracey Heft's service won't accept them. " HOWEVER, we will not press square-bounds or magazines."

http://www.eclipsepaper.com/pressing.htm

 

Are there services that will accept square bounds for pressing?