A Discussion About How CGC Label Non-US Publications Which Reprint / Reproduce Original US Comic Content 10 10

[Get Marwood & I]

Hello. What do we think of how CGC currently label 'foreign' publications - those intended for a non-US audience - which reprint original US comic content? Are they getting it right?

I saw these two examples in the 'Foreign' thread today:

 

The 'Spidey' is fairly OK. I don't like the word 'France' just hanging there on it's own, but the book is labelled in line with it's title, issue number, date and publisher. And it notes the original US comic content which the book reproduces. It doesn't seem to bother CGC that the book caries an existing US title, and the census separates them accordingly:

That's not too bad really.

The Greek book is another matter. 

If CGC are happy to call the French Spidey 'Spidey' - because that is its title - why do they not call this book 'Enaintep Man', or the actual Greek text equivalent? How can it be called 'Amazing Spider-Man' #252 when:

• It isn't called Amazing Spider-Man (English text)
• It is number 164

How can it be labeled as tying with Marvel Team Up #141 as the first appearance of the black costume when it is a later reprint? Should that designation not be reserved for the US original only?

Why is it a 'Greek Edition' when the the previous Spidey book is simply 'France'? Does this imply a lack of uniformity in the labelling approach? Or is it because CGC are saying that the book is the 'Greek Edition' of Amazing Spider-Man #252 (which I would argue it very much isn't).

I raised an 'Ask CGC' question along similar lines here in relation to comics produced for the Philippines - have a read if you're interested: 

My offer of a discussion group was not taken up.

In addition to that, some of you may be aware of the discussions I have been involved in relating to the correct labelling of what CGC now call 'UK Price Variants'. Whilst that work ended in CGC changing their labelling approach for the UK, Canadian and Australian first printing variants (they were printed at the same time as the US copies), they did stop short at agreeing to stop calling UK publications 'Editions'. So there was some progress, admittedly, but CGC still I feel have a very confused approach to the labelling of non-US publications which reprint original US comic content, often produced long after the original US printing.

What do others think? Are CGC getting it largely right do you think, or is there an argument for this area to be revisited, with strategic labelling approach corrections made, before there are so many examples out there that it will take years to rebalance? Do CGC have a duty not to confuse us with inconsistent approaches?

CGC know my thoughts on this and I'm not going to 'marshal' this discussion or try to push it in a certain direction. I want to hear what others think and, if there is a consensus of opinion one way or the other, maybe CGC may take heed of it. After all, what is the point of having all the experience that this forum gathers if you aren't prepared to use it and listen to suggestions which may ultimately improve your operating model? At the very least, a desire for accuracy should be uppermost in CGC's mind in all respects I think. 

What do you think?

[bababooey]

I think the inaccurate ASM 252 designation on the Greek comic was likely to fit into some competitive registry set thing, there may be other census slots for that comic.   While I think census/label accuracy is something that is often misused by sellers I don't think CGC cares about how that data is used, I don't have any issue with the French comic other than minor clean up.  

I don't know how the mechanics of creating the first label for a previously unsubmitted book works but I imagine it's similar to when you try to checkout an unpriced item at the grocery store....the clean up of that data only occurs when someone cares enough to point out a discrepancy AND reaches someone who agrees with the importance of the issue.  

Edited April 25, 2021 by bababooey

[Get Marwood & I]

35 minutes ago, bababooey said:

I think the inaccurate ASM 252 designation on the Greek comic was likely to fit into some competitive registry set thing, there may be other census slots for that comic.   While I think census/label accuracy is something that is often misused by sellers I don't think CGC cares about how that data is used, I don't have any issue with the French comic other than minor clean up.  

I don't know how the mechanics of creating the first label for a previously unsubmitted book works but I imagine it's similar to when you try to checkout an unpriced item at the grocery store....the clean up of that data only occurs when someone cares enough to point out a discrepancy AND reaches someone who agrees with the importance of the issue.  

Good points. I agree that the French comic is labelled OK aside of the rather clumsy 'France' sitting there. The data present is factually accurate and therefore defendable. 

Here are the various entries for ASM #252 on the census:

Our Greek comic is the 'Kabanas Hellas' entry:

As you say, they probably found it easier to piggy back off of the ASM #252 record than to create a new category but I don't know how their systems work. Maybe they can't create a title that involves foreign text in their system? I don't even know what the second character in the title that looks like a lower case 'n' is?

It's all Greek to me 

[gpanalysis]

As a side note with respects to what the Greek title is, if we use the English equivalent letters to the Greek letters, it is actually spelled:

SPAINDER MAN

The first letter is an S (the Greek capital Sigma), the second a soft "p", and the last "P" is actually a Greek capital "R". So in fact it is as close to "Spider Man" as it gets.

I think from what I've been privy to, CGC are moving these foreign titles under their US equivalent and using the cover to group them together - so the above cover on the Greek publication is the US #252 cover, so it's being categorised under that, and the label notes the original Greek numbering, which is #164

While both this new categorisation method and the way these foreign books were previously categorised exist, there will be some overlap until all are brought together under the sale title in the census and the newer way of labelling these books prevails.

In GPA we're also categorising these in the same way going forward - older labels will exist and as we come across these we'll move them over to their respective titles and let CGC know to update on their end so they get moved in the census also.

[gpanalysis]

I should add the Greek "T" is not a "D" as I have noted in SPAINDER, just that it would most likely be pronounced in that way when you look at the context of the word.

[Get Marwood & I]

21 minutes ago, gpanalysis said:

As a side note with respects to what the Greek title is, if we use the English equivalent letters to the Greek letters, it is actually spelled:

SPAINDER MAN

The first letter is an S (the Greek capital Sigma), the second a soft "p", and the last "P" is actually a Greek capital "R". So in fact it is as close to "Spider Man" as it gets.

Cool

Quote

I think from what I've been privy to, CGC are moving these foreign titles under their US equivalent and using the cover to group them together - so the above cover on the Greek publication is the US #252 cover, so it's being categorised under that, and the label notes the original Greek numbering, which is #164

While both this new categorisation method and the way these foreign books were previously categorised exist, there will be some overlap until all are brought together under the sale title in the census and the newer way of labelling these books prevails.

In GPA we're also categorising these in the same way going forward - older labels will exist and as we come across these we'll move them over to their respective titles and let CGC know to update on their end so they get moved in the census also.

Just so I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying you think this is a conscious decision by CGC - to group and label foreign publications to an original US comic where they share the same cover - as opposed to calling them what they are?

You favour calling #184 of a Greek publication which translates as 'Spainder Man' as 'The Amazing Spider-Man' and labelling it #252?

[gpanalysis]

I believe this is the way it's going to be done moving forward. I don't necessarily favour one way or the other, but I think it's a reasonable way of categorising these as the cover is one way they can be grouped together and tracked efficiently. 

It could also be due to the fact that getting the foreign title correct could be a sticking point at times, and hence why moving the same covers under one unified title/issue, and then noting anything of the original foreign title on the label, is preferable. 

[Get Marwood & I]

Interesting, thanks GPA.

Taking the above scenario - the labelling and categorisation of a foreign publication by cover in line with a US original publication - how would you expect a graded copy of this to be labelled?:

It would have to be labelled as "Mysteries of Unexplored Worlds #20" as it shares its cover:

Here is a graded example however:

As it turns out, everything is right in my opinion apart from the "UK Edition" label entry. It is not the 'UK Edition' of Out of This World because it's cover and contents do not match that of the US title of the same name. It is just 'Out of This World #17', published by Alan Class. The 'edition' is not required.

It just happens to reprint Amazing Fantasy #15. Surely you do not think it should be labelled as, and grouped with, Charlton's Mysteries of Unexplored Worlds #20, just because it shares a cover image?

[gpanalysis]

I'm not sure how they're going to handle all titles, especially the example you give here. I guess we'll see as more are graded with the new categorisation  method. But it could well be the case that it is grouped in with the US title and the label notes the foreign information including the internals. 

[Get Marwood & I]

If so, the potential for confusion will grow I think.

I could populate the thread with many examples of these types of misleading, non-sensical labelling practices. The central thrust of my argument is that a comic should be labelled as what it is itself, not what it is a subsequent derivation of, in full or in part.

A CGC label has the following basic entry fields:

• Title
• Issue Number
• Publisher
• Date
• Designation (UK Price Variant, Mark Jewelers Insert etc)
• Notes

I believe they should be populated with the correct physical details of the comic being graded. So our Greek 'ASM #252' would be:

• Title - Enaintep Man
• Issue Number - 164
• Publisher - Kabanas Hellas
• Date - 06/84
• Designation - Publication of Greece (for example)
• Notes - Reprints The Amazing Spider-Man #252

This would be factually correct. That book is not Amazing Spider-Man #252 and the only justification for those words being on the slab label are to indicate the reproduction of it.

CGC should, I think, grade what it is in front of them and not seek to link the publication to something that it is not in their systems. And they certainly should not label it as such. I see this very clearly. Does anyone else?

 

[Chaz G.]

2 minutes ago, Get Marwood & I said:

If so, the potential for confusion will grow I think.

I could populate the thread with many examples of these types of misleading, non-sensical labelling practices. The central thrust of my argument is that a comic should be labelled as what it is itself, not what it is a derivation of, in full or in part.

A CGC label has the following basic entry fields:

• Title
• Issue Number
• Publisher
• Date
• Designation (UK Price Variant, Mark Jewelers Insert etc)
• Notes

I believe they should be populated with the correct physical details of the comic being graded. So our Greek 'ASM #252' would be:

• Title - Enaintep Man
• Issue Number - 184
• Publisher - Kabanas Hellas
• Date - 06/84
• Designation - Publication of Greece (for example)
• Notes - Reprints The Amazing Spider-Man #252

This would be factually correct. That book is not Amazing Spider-Man #252 and the only justification for those words being on the slab label are to indicate the reproduction of it.

CGC should, I think, grade what it is in front of them and not seek to link the publication to something that it is not in their systems. And they certainly should not label it as such. I see this very clearly. Does anyone else?

 

+1

[Get Marwood & I]

21 minutes ago, Chazgee said:

+1

Thanks Chaz.

The application of the approach I set out - label and categorise what is in front of you - cannot go wrong, as it is factual. We could perhaps create an additional data entry field for the target country where the publication is of non-US origin, and preserve the 'designation' field as I called it for variant descriptions such as Mark Jewelers, Canadian Price Variant etc. Just make it clear on the label that the publication is of and for a foreign market for those that can't read Greek. And the notes section is there to bring out any salient points of interest, e.g. the reprinting of a popular US original book.

But to label a comic as something that it is evidently not can only, surely, generate confusion. A dog is a dog. It is not a 'Dog Edition' of a Cat. And #164 is not #252.

What on Earth are CGC doing here?

[Chaz G.]

13 minutes ago, Get Marwood & I said:

Thanks Chaz.

The application of the approach I set out - label and categorise what is in front of you - cannot go wrong, as it is factual. We could perhaps create an additional data entry field for the target country where the publication is of non-US origin, and preserve the 'designation' field as I called it for variant descriptions such as Mark Jewelers, Canadian Price Variant etc. Just make it clear on the label that the publication is of and for a foreign market for those that can't read Greek. And the notes section are there to bring out any salient points of interest, e.g. the reprinting of a popular US original book.

But to label a comic as something that it is evidently not can only, surely, generate confusion. A dog is a dog. It is not a 'Dog Edition' of a Cat. And #184 is not #252.

What on Earth are CGC doing here?

Another thing to consider is the initial submission.

If the "foreign variant" book isn't in their database, your only choice will be to submit as ASM 252 and enter "Greek Variant" in the Variant field, which is the only field you can modify. After grading, QC should be in charge of correctly categorizing the book according to a pre-approved method. This is also important on domestic books so you don't have multiple copies of the same book with different indicia, which I've seen as well.

But if they're in a rush due to a high volume of submissions (as they have been recently), they might just go with what the submission sheet said in order to get the book out.

 

[grebal]

I'm curious why the greek ed. Spiderman is priced in drachmas when they use euros over there.  Pre-euro collectible ?

I guess their translation works better than "Aνθρωπος Aρaχνη" [Arachne Anthropos] even with the confusing letter combo pointed out by GPA (but fyi, the "NT" combo in greek is simply pronounced as a D; and lucky they used all CAPS since in greek alphabet the small N is written "v").

 

[Get Marwood & I]

1 hour ago, Chazgee said:

Another thing to consider is the initial submission.

If the "foreign variant" book isn't in their database, your only choice will be to submit as ASM 252 and enter "Greek Variant" in the Variant field, which is the only field you can modify. After grading, QC should be in charge of correctly categorizing the book according to a pre-approved method. This is also important on domestic books so you don't have multiple copies of the same book with different indicia, which I've seen as well.

But if they're in a rush due to a high volume of submissions (as they have been recently), they might just go with what the submission sheet said in order to get the book out.

 

You've probably hit the nail - or a nail, at least - on the head there Chazgee. If what you have said is true (I've never submitted) the submission process reinforces the possibility of incorrect classification and, as you say, QC are likely too stretched to care. Shame though, if true, as it means they have built a model which will over time corrupt the integrity of the data and, as I say, cement confusion. 

[Get Marwood & I]

1 minute ago, The New Sheriff said:

This lame joke was the entire reason you started this thread 

I've started some for less 

[Get Marwood & I]

1 minute ago, The New Sheriff said:

1 minute ago, Get Marwood & I said:

3 minutes ago, The New Sheriff said:

This lame joke was the entire reason you started this thread 

I've started some for less 

We know 

[Get Marwood & I]

1 hour ago, grebal said:

I'm curious why the greek ed. Spiderman is priced in drachmas when they use euros over there.  Pre-euro collectible ?

Probably, yes. 

1 hour ago, grebal said:

I guess their translation works better than "Aνθρωπος Aρaχνη" [Arachne Anthropos] even with the confusing letter combo pointed out by GPA (but fyi, the "NT" combo in greek is simply pronounced as a D; and lucky they used all CAPS since in greek alphabet the small N is written "v").

 

In that example, where the title may as well be in hieroglyphics for all the sense it makes to English speaking audiences (not that they're the only audiences of course, other countries citizens collect and submit comics) it might be best to include a title translation if it is not immediately obvious to help those who don't speak the language that the book is written in.

So this book could either be labelled with the title exactly as it shows (pretty sure there will be a programme to allow that) or as shown and accompanied by a translation in brackets. Just don't call it "The Amazing Spider-Man #361" and group it with that original US comic.

If anyone reading this thinks that that might be unreasonable, unrealistic, or too onerous for CGC to administer, then I would say 'tough'. If CGC want to position themselves in the market as the go-to grading company, and carry a reputation for accuracy on all fronts, then they need to do the work and spend the money to create an operating model to accommodate all possibilities. To me, they haven't put enough thought into the grading of 'foreigns'. With submissions increasing, perhaps they should.

[steve566]

I think CGC had to decide which direction they were going to go with foreign comics and decided on a “cover approach” rather than the “guts approach”. I’m heavily involved with foreign comic collectors and can say for a fact that some are outraged by the new labels and others love them. I think CGC still has a ways to go but they are at least trying to do SOMETHING with foreign Editions. I think by using the cover approach they are making it much easier to search the census for foreign books since all you have to do is type “Spiderman 300” and you see all of the different countries publishers in one place. Is the information 100% accurate, no.. but it’s a start. I’ll include pictures of my slabbed foreigns so you can see more new labels

[steve566]

Issues I had where that the Indonesian batman information is way off... I honestly don’t think they had any idea on how to approach these extremely rare comics.. most people don't have a clue that golden age Batman covers were redrawn and used in Indonesia.

also the Swedish batman 181 does contain the 1st app of Poison ivy but they didn’t put that on the label.

Seems UK books keep their original titles