ASM 12 CGC 9.4 ON EBAY NOW ..Undisclosed writing okay or not?

[uclapeterg]

I used to be on dialup and frequently had front and back cover scans, especially if I felt the back cover downgraded the book in any way. I think it's a great policy to institute. I wonder if you will be willing to accept the possible lower bid prices with such honesty. I feel sometimes the smnaller the scan is, the higher price it ends at because the scans don't always show the defects.

[sckao]

 

Whoa.

 

Shill bidding on your own auctions (since May 2002) and leaving feedback for yourself (on both accounts) ...That's clearly not cool.

 

I see people writing about leaving negative or neutral feedback for even the slightest of errors (late shipping) on these boards. (I don't agree with that practice either.)

 

This is much more serious and egregious.

 

eBay would automatically suspend the accounts normally.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[OldGuy]

I'm on dial up and here's one of my auctions: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=12592&item=2169421955

 

As a buyer I'd rather wait for the pics to download then wait for a reply to an e-mail then have to wait for the attachment to dowload anyway. As a seller I'd rather give as much info up front (large scans) so I have fewer e-mail requests for info (scans) to respond to.

[notch_top]

Nice...Like the format.

 

Might have to "borrow" it I was also thinking of using a smaller image then having a click to enlarge option to a full size heritage like scan.

 

Thanks!

[OldGuy]

Feel free to borrow it. I use thumbnails on my "About Me" page that link to large scans. I don't do it in my auctions because I think if someone is really interested they're going to download the larger scans any way.

[supapimp]

kool cover! nice letter in CBG BTW brian

[Titan777]

well you see Notch_top you are not cgc, the book is graded by cgc and it says 9.4 so guess what? its a 9.4 until its taken out and regraded regardless of what you may think it is, as of right now cgc says thats what it is if you feel so strongly about it just take out the books you think you have that are overgraded and send them in so they get regraded lower ..........also I doubt that a book with half the back filled with explicitives would get a 9.4 that would be pretty unpleasant to the eye and I think one of the requirments of the higher grades is definitely eye appeal.

[OldGuy]

Thanks.

[murph0]

There's been many a 9.4 that I have not agreed with on CGC at all. There's been many 9.2's I haven't agreed with either. It's sort of stupid to just say "well the label says 9.4, therefore it HAS to be a 9.4". Even CGC can't guarantee that the exact same CGC 9.4 will come back as a CGC 9.4 again. But that's a different branch of this issue. I guess if they offered both scans, but it was too small to see on the scan. They would have to disclose it. If not, I would ask for a return. If they say no, I'd leave some neutral feedback.

 

Brian

[notch_top]

Hmmm...

 

 

One of the requirements of higher grade is EYE APPEAL?

 

I had not realized CGC had published their grading standards.

 

Because I have alot of graded books with tremendous eye appeal that sure were not graded on that factor. I would say that STRUCTURE comes first and foremost with CGC's grading, eye appeal finishes much further down on the totem pole.

 

And you are right a CGC 9.4 is a CGC 9.4 because of that label.

 

But that sure as hell does not mean that is a NM book. And I sincerely hope that we are not ALL buying books because of what a label says it is.

 

No offense but you seem to be speaking from lack of experience in graded material. Everyone on this forum that has or handled 100+ slabs knows that not all CGC graded 9.4's are created equal.

 

 

And in this case based on my very first post I do not believe that they are. The scan represented in the auction and the auctions description would never make me think that this copy has writing on the back cover. As it happens I was considering this a potential buy and was ready to bid, until I received the scan. Personally to me a Cream paged book with a name written on the back cover is a borderline NM at best. So do you have anyt responses to my original question? DO you think that an acution should have full disclosure of date stamps, writing, etc...?

 

As far as resubmitting I think I have been one of the more vocal members on this forum about the books I have resubbed. I even showed an example of an ASM 4 that went from 8.5, to 9.0, to 9.2 after three submissions. So I am GLAD that "I am not CGC " to say the least .

 

[OldGuy]

"also I doubt that a book with half the back filled with explicitives would get a 9.4 that would be pretty unpleasant to the eye and I think one of the requirments of the higher grades is definitely eye appeal."

 

Ok, let's say one book is a 9.4 with "Frank's Comic" written on the back. Another is a 9.4 with " You" written on the back. Then there's a 3rd book 9.4 with nothing written on it. What book would you rather have? I know what I'd take. Hell, I'd rather have a 9.2 with nothing then one of the first two choices.

[Titan777]

When I speak of eye appeal Im speaking from the graders point of view since there are no set standards posted and the graders are human and not machines I would have to believe that individual graders take different things into consideration when grading the physical characteristics of the book........obviously what one grader may find acceptable another may not but I think sometimes it could be more personal sometimes,certain things may be overlooked and compromises are made, its human nature... just my opinion.

 

as for your opinion that structure comes first, your experience of recieving books that clearly dont look the grade they recieved contradicts this theory many times over.

 

also a person doesnt have to handle 100+ encapsulated books to know that every book the recieves a certain grade is equal to another of the same......thats common sense......as stated above its more of human nature that the graders have preferences.

 

Nice score on your ASM #4 do you have a pic of it I love that book

 

[clobberintime]

I think it is absolutely ridiculous that something like that is a factor in anything. I am sure you just want to bring this up to give Ewert a hassle. I love the anal ninnies around here squaking about baloney like this. Yeah that back cover is very important to me - it must be mark free or it is just not worthy of my collection. You can probably just sum that up though as an excuse as to why you didn't buy the book.

[Titan777]

murph .......the book was encapsulated as a 9.4 and it is a 9.4 until it is taken out and regraded......... would you start a auction on ebay that said Spider-man #14 cgc 9.4 looks 9.0??.......in order for you to prove this point you have to be willing to downgrade all the books in your collection that are overgraded not just the one book that you dont own that you think doesnt deserve that grade thats a double standard!

[notch_top]

Not sure what the hell you are talking about robert.

 

This is not Jason's listing first off.

 

Secondly it is a listing from one of the best dealers out there , with some of the strictest grading I have seen. We have done lots of business together.

 

He and I just disagree about full disclosure.

 

Personally I believe that a book with a back cover marking should have that disclosed especially if there is only a front cover scan present. I started this thread not to "hassle" anyone, just to get a consensus. And it seems I am not alone with my opinion.

 

I am not totally against a "marked" book I have many many in my collection.

Just when you are buying a book over the internet I think that disclosure is important.

 

I was considering buying the book but weighing the page quality in consideration, the writing and cream pages did me in for a book hitting nearly 3k.

 

Anal ninnies.... , so you buy the book based on the CGC grade alone?

 

Give me a break.

 

 

[clobberintime]

Sorry about that Ewert! This is want List obviously. No I don't buy the cgc grade alone but the back cover is the back cover for god's sake. I get sick of hearing twerps on here complain about a date stamp on the back or something like that. I don't buy any book for what's on the back cover. Lots of pedigree books have writing on the front - I guess they have all been misgraded. I think people like you complaining about something like this are spoiled, bratty types - you know sending the tea back at restaurant types. Just my opinion and observation.

[blowout]

Because I have alot of graded books with tremendous eye appeal that sure were not graded on that factor. I would say that STRUCTURE comes first and foremost with CGC's grading, eye appeal finishes much further down on the totem pole.

 

I would agree also that structure seems to be a higher factor in CGCs grading standards than eye appeal. I have many CGC books that look a higher grade through the holder than the one assigned.

I also think it is dangerous to assume that a CGC grade is like the word of god. They are not infalable and there are many grading discrepencies out there, buy the book not the grade.

Most of us here agree that CGC removing the grading notes was a big mistake. Full disclosure should be made by sellers in these cases, unless they are showing a back cover scan.

I personally would not buy a big $$$ book without seeing high res scans of both the front and back cover. CGC are doing a great job grading wise, but I do not trust their word implicitly.

[blowout]

Lots of pedigree books have writing on the front - I guess they have all been misgraded. I think people like you complaining about something like this are spoiled, bratty types - you know sending the tea back at restaurant types.

 

I don't think the issue here is whether or not date stamps/ writting is a good or bad thing. Its about disclosure, and allowing the buyer to make an informed choice based on their own preferences.

[OldGuy]

Implicitly.

[blowout]

say what?