Assessing Pre-Screen Failures - Potential CGC Defect Code? 1 1

[KB West Seattle]

Over the last few years I've done a series of submissions of 9.8 prescreens of my personal books, purchased new, from the '90s. 

Today, I found a small stockpile of prescreen rejected, raw books that I had yet to open. 

As I inspected them I spent more time looking at the CGC printed label associated with each. Aside from barcode, identification number and printed title of book I noticed each had a hand-written number or series of numbers. For example, 6, 8, 12 or 6 & 8. 

My first thought, given consistency, was that this is a code that denotes the representative defect. If so and that is existing information published by CGC or forum and I missed, shame on me. Second thought was that the 6, 8 or 12 is associated with grader. 

If code does denote defect would be great to be able to associate with book to understand max grade potential. 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Lions Den]

8 minutes ago, KB West Seattle said:

Over the last few years I've done a series of submissions of 9.8 prescreens of my personal books, purchased new, from the '90s. 

Today, I found a small stockpile of prescreen rejected, raw books that I had yet to open. 

As I inspected them I spent more time looking at the CGC printed label associated with each. Aside from barcode, identification number and printed title of book I noticed each had a hand-written number or series of numbers. For example, 6, 8, 12 or 6 & 8. 

My first thought, given consistency, was that this is a code that denotes the representative defect. If so and that is existing information published by CGC or forum and I missed, shame on me. Second thought was that the 6, 8 or 12 is associated with grader. 

If code does denote defect would be great to be able to associate with book to understand max grade potential. 

 

 

 

 

 

If you don't mind, a picture of what you're referring to may be helpful...

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

[KB West Seattle]

Of course. I didn't want to spam with a bunch of pics as OP if I missed something obvious. Will have up in next hour. 

[joeypost]

Could simply be the number of the book as listed on the invoice.  A way for them to double check what goes back to the customer, unless you have repeating numbers as that would mean something different. 

[KB West Seattle]

Quick, crude pics of those I unboxed today, across three different boxes. Intent was only to capture label and hand written number.

What caught me was the common denominator numbers and when they were added together. I will go back in to a few short boxes I have close to see if I can find further reference. 

[KB West Seattle]

Found a few other rejects still with representative CGC stickers. Doesn't help clarify as there is no handwritten mark. Appreciate this could be goose chase. Would be curious to know if anyone else who has done recent prescreen has example. Hard to believe my prescreens are the only ones that have handwritten annotations. Unfortunately the first few rounds of prescreens I didn't pay enough attention and believe I tossed the polys with the stickers. I'll keep looking for more. 

[KB West Seattle]

2 hours ago, joeypost said:

Could simply be the number of the book as listed on the invoice.  A way for them to double check what goes back to the customer, unless you have repeating numbers as that would mean something different. 

Fair. What caught me was the occurrence of same numbers which wouldn't happen in same submission (1-25) and unlikely to have same three numbers in subsequent submissions. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

Alex Ross.