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

[rakehell]

On 12/13/2021 at 9:01 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

"What an overblown tart".

Not quite the words I would have used, but not a million miles away either. 

On 12/13/2021 at 9:01 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Here (hare, here), look how sorry we are, Marwood and I

You've got eels down your leg. 

On 12/13/2021 at 9:01 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Unless you're Buster Bloodvessel or course.....

Yeah, but look where that got him. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 12/6/2021 at 2:29 PM, CGC Mike said:

I have brought this up to Matt Nelson.  He says:

we are making an official announcement on this in January.  

Hi Mike. Where will this be announced by the way? Due any day now I take it, unless I missed it somewhere? 

[CGC Mike]

On 1/28/2022 at 3:04 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Hi Mike. Where will this be announced by the way? Due any day now I take it, unless I missed it somewhere? 

I will check.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 1/29/2022 at 1:01 AM, CGC Mike said:

I will check.

Ta. 

[CGC Mike]

On 1/28/2022 at 3:04 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Hi Mike. Where will this be announced by the way? Due any day now I take it, unless I missed it somewhere? 

. They are cleaning up the images for 250ish books, then we need to put them on a webpage and do the announcement write-up. I’m estimating about 2 more weeks, mainly depending on how fast they can build the webpage.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 1/31/2022 at 2:53 PM, CGC Mike said:

. They are cleaning up the images for 250ish books, then we need to put them on a webpage and do the announcement write-up. I’m estimating about 2 more weeks, mainly depending on how fast they can build the webpage.

Cheers Mike. 

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

On 1/31/2022 at 8:53 AM, CGC Mike said:

. They are cleaning up the images for 250ish books, then we need to put them on a webpage and do the announcement write-up. I’m estimating about 2 more weeks, mainly depending on how fast they can build the webpage.

Could you break that down by working days divided by hours squared multiplied by pi cubed? 

 

[CGC Mike]

On 1/31/2022 at 1:18 PM, onlyweaknesskryptonite said:

Could you break that down by working days divided by hours squared multiplied by pi cubed? 

 

Tree Fiddy

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

On 1/31/2022 at 12:19 PM, CGC Mike said:

On 1/31/2022 at 12:18 PM, onlyweaknesskryptonite said:

Could you break that down by working days divided by hours squared multiplied by pi cubed? 

 

Tree Fiddy

Funny as that was probably the answer you were expecting in the other thread. Instead it is the answer I got here.

Also Thank you for keeping on top of things around here. It is greatly appreciated!

 

[Get Marwood & I]

Still no sign of the announcement on this...

While we continue to wait, I spotted this copy of the 1968 Norwegian Koloss #1 on FB, which reprints Marvel's Incredible Hulk #1 from 1962:

 

There were eight issues of Koloss printed, according to the GCD and other sources:

Issues #1-6 reprint Incredible Hulk #1-6, and issues #7 and #8 reprint Tales to Astonish #59 and #61 respectively.

My understanding is that CGC intend to call a non-US reprint by the title of any key US book that it reprints or shares a cover with. Accordingly, I expect Koloss #1-6 to be slabbed as Incredible Hulk #1-6 and, subject to CGC's criteria as to what represents a key, Koloss #7 and 8 will be slabbed with a leading title of either Koloss or the TTA books that they reprint. 

I can see from the registry that our Koloss #1 above was graded only a few weeks ago, so I assume that it has been slabbed and recorded in line with the new model if that model is due to be announced any day now:

 

While we wait for that clarification, let's see how the Norwegian title Koloss fairs on the census currently. Bear in mind that there are three publisher names in the frame here:

1. Serieforlaget
2. Se-Bladene
3. Stabenfeldt

 

If we start with the search term of 'Koloss'...

 

...we get this one entry (note the incorrect Publisher):

 

Click on that, and we get a single result - Koloss #4 - again with the wrong publisher details:

 

Click on that and we see a single recorded slab. Note that there is no reference to the 'Incredible Hulk #4' that Koloss #4 reprints there - just the 'Key Comment' of 'Hulk'. And it still records Koloss as a Marvel Comic:

 

Unless I've missed something then, the census tells us that CGC have graded one book titled Koloss, and it is #4.

So where then is this 9.6 graded Koloss #2?

It is slabbed as 'Koloss' so should be listed under Koloss, no?

 

Let's try searching Incredible Hulk #2 instead, as that is what it reprints:

 

OK, it looks like there is an entry against the publisher 'Serieforlaget' for 1968 - let's see if that is it:

Looks like it - a 9.6 is there, but not with the slab title of 'Koloss' but 'Incredible Hulk'. Not definitive, therefore, but likely to be that book:

 

Let's see where our 8.0 graded Koloss #1, sorry, Incredible Hulk #1 is then, on the census:

 

Hmmm. No 'Serieforlaget' this time, but there is a 'Se-Blandene' dated 1968 - let's see what it has:

 

There it is, an 8.0 slabbed Koloss #1 is recorded:

 

So that means that this one Norwegian title - Koloss - exists in three different places on the census, with entries littered with inaccuracies and misleading information, and with no obvious way that I can see to connect them. The picture will be muddied further if someone submits a Koloss #7 or #8, which we do not know how CGC will record. 

Now, please - how is that in any way satisfactory? Could CGC have made that anymore complicated if they tried? How much has the opportunity for operator error been magnified here, do we think? Surely it would have been better to stick with the actual book titles, dates and numbers, and find an alternative way to recognise and connect any reprinted key book status?

I will be interested to see whether concerns like these - which I have been raising now for a year - will be covered and addressed in the announcement.

Aside of the concerns regarding the census recording, I will also be interested to see if CGC address any of my other core concerns in their communication. They say that they are doing this out of a love for the wonderful 'foreigns', and they want to bring them to wider attention. That is actually very noble, and I agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly. They are indeed, wonderful, beautiful things, and worthy of wider recognition, but as what they are, not what they are not. How can relegating a book's actual title to a footnote on the slab label, and absent completely from the census record, be a sign of love? Is that not disrespectful? How can labelling a book printed six years after the original as the '1st appearance' be correct? After all, there is a world of difference between the following three phrases:

• Origin and 1st appearance of the Incredible Hulk
• Reprints the origin and 1st appearance of the Incredible Hulk
• 1st appearance of the Incredible Hulk in a Norwegian title

Isn't there?

Which will CGC go for, do you think, of those three options?

I guess we'll find out soon....

The 'Norwegian Edition'....of what!  There isn't a 1968 US book called 'Koloss' for this to be the Norwegian edition of!

 

 

[Yorick]

On 2/15/2022 at 6:23 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

"Incredible Hulk #1" 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 2/15/2022 at 5:28 PM, Yorick said:

"Incredible Hulk #1" 

Joking aside Yorick, that is such an obvious, natural, understandable reaction from you there.

 

Because it is not The Incredible Hulk #1.

 

[gadzukes]

I had this one slabbed a couple years ago.

Looks like CGC got it right on this one. 

I have to admit, I hate that KG Murray numbered it as #6 because it's actually the 1st issue under the name Superboy in the series.  Issues 1-5 were called "Adventure Comics" and reprinted US "pre-Superboy 1" Adventure Comics stories.  Murray could have easily just started it over with issue 1 when he changed the name to match the US versions.

This copy came out just a few months after the US Superboy 1.

 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 2/15/2022 at 7:46 PM, gadzukes said:

I had this one slabbed a couple years ago.

Looks like CGC got it right on this one. 

I have to admit, I hate that KG Murray numbered it as #6 because it's actually the 1st issue under the name Superboy in the series.  Issues 1-5 were called "Adventure Comics" and reprinted US "pre-Superboy 1" Adventure Comics stories.  Murray could have easily just started it over with issue 1 when he changed the name to match the US versions.

This copy came out just a few months after the US Superboy 1.

 

Nice book 

I like that it says 'Reprints Superboy #1' on the label, but not that it says 'Australian Edition', for the reasons I've outlined in this thread. The word 'Edition' is too closely connected to first printing variations as a term in the industry and isn't necessary here.

Here is your book - the lone copy on the census:

Everything is factually correct in the top seven components of that record. 

If I understand the new model correctly however, your book would now be labelled as Superboy #1 and filed in the census against the DC record. 

We'll see if I'm right or wrong on any of that when the announcement comes. Talking of which, breathe in....  

[nmtg9]

CGC need to recognise their responsibilities to the community here as well. 

There are a lot of new (and old) collectors out there who would believe what the label and the less- than- fully- honest dealer says when they describe a comic as a first appearance when really it's a six year old reprint. Already happened on at least one listing which was discussed earlier. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 2/16/2022 at 6:18 AM, nmtg9 said:

CGC need to recognise their responsibilities to the community here as well. 

There are a lot of new (and old) collectors out there who would believe what the label and the less- than- fully- honest dealer says when they describe a comic as a first appearance when really it's a six year old reprint. Already happened on at least one listing which was discussed earlier. 

Indeed. Not everyone in the hobby is as clued up on these things. We wouldn't have a newbie Q&A forum if they were. I really hope they don't stick with that part of the strategy.  Add just a couple of words, and the potential for problems and misunderstanding goes away. Keep that 'first appearance' distinction for the books that warrant it. 

[Garystar]

On 2/15/2022 at 7:46 PM, gadzukes said:

Looks like CGC got it right on this one. 

But they didn’t get it right did they? Surely it should either be Superboy Comics #6 - it’s actual title or Superboy #1 - the title it reprints?

[Get Marwood & I]

On 2/16/2022 at 4:24 PM, Garystar said:

But they didn’t get it right did they? Surely it should either be Superboy Comics #6 - it’s actual title or Superboy #1 - the title it reprints?

This book predates their strategy change, so they would have gone with the actual book title Gary. AUS Reprints lists it as 'Superboy Comics' but they may have gone for the GCD title which is just 'Superboy'. I haven't seen the indicia myself, so don't know what that says - if anything. 

@steve566 Steve - any idea which is the correct title for this one?

[Redshade]

On 2/15/2022 at 2:23 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Still no sign of the announcement on this...

While we continue to wait, I spotted this copy of the 1968 Norwegian Koloss #1 on FB, which reprints Marvel's Incredible Hulk #1 from 1962:

 

There were eight issues of Koloss printed, according to the GCD and other sources:

Issues #1-6 reprint Incredible Hulk #1-6, and issues #7 and #8 reprint Tales to Astonish #59 and #61 respectively.

My understanding is that CGC intend to call a non-US reprint by the title of any key US book that it reprints or shares a cover with. Accordingly, I expect Koloss #1-6 to be slabbed as Incredible Hulk #1-6 and, subject to CGC's criteria as to what represents a key, Koloss #7 and 8 will be slabbed with a leading title of either Koloss or the TTA books that they reprint. 

I can see from the registry that our Koloss #1 above was graded only a few weeks ago, so I assume that it has been slabbed and recorded in line with the new model if that model is due to be announced any day now:

 

While we wait for that clarification, let's see how the Norwegian title Koloss fairs on the census currently. Bear in mind that there are three publisher names in the frame here:

1. Serieforlaget
2. Se-Bladene
3. Stabenfeldt

 

If we start with the search term of 'Koloss'...

 

...we get this one entry (note the incorrect Publisher):

 

Click on that, and we get a single result - Koloss #4 - again with the wrong publisher details:

 

Click on that and we see a single recorded slab. Note that there is no reference to the 'Incredible Hulk #4' that Koloss #4 reprints there - just the 'Key Comment' of 'Hulk'. And it still records Koloss as a Marvel Comic:

 

Unless I've missed something then, the census tells us that CGC have graded one book titled Koloss, and it is #4.

So where then is this 9.6 graded Koloss #2?

It is slabbed as 'Koloss' so should be listed under Koloss, no?

 

Let's try searching Incredible Hulk #2 instead, as that is what it reprints:

 

OK, it looks like there is an entry against the publisher 'Serieforlaget' for 1968 - let's see if that is it:

Looks like it - a 9.6 is there, but not with the slab title of 'Koloss' but 'Incredible Hulk'. Not definitive, therefore, but likely to be that book:

 

Let's see where our 8.0 graded Koloss #1, sorry, Incredible Hulk #1 is then, on the census:

 

Hmmm. No 'Serieforlaget' this time, but there is a 'Se-Blandene' dated 1968 - let's see what it has:

 

There it is, an 8.0 slabbed Koloss #1 is recorded:

 

So that means that this one Norwegian title - Koloss - exists in three different places on the census, with entries littered with inaccuracies and misleading information, and with no obvious way that I can see to connect them. The picture will be muddied further if someone submits a Koloss #7 or #8, which we do not know how CGC will record. 

Now, please - how is that in any way satisfactory? Could CGC have made that anymore complicated if they tried? How much has the opportunity for operator error been magnified here, do we think? Surely it would have been better to stick with the actual book titles, dates and numbers, and find an alternative way to recognise and connect any reprinted key book status?

I will be interested to see whether concerns like these - which I have been raising now for a year - will be covered and addressed in the announcement.

Aside of the concerns regarding the census recording, I will also be interested to see if CGC address any of my other core concerns in their communication. They say that they are doing this out of a love for the wonderful 'foreigns', and they want to bring them to wider attention. That is actually very noble, and I agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly. They are indeed, wonderful, beautiful things, and worthy of wider recognition, but as what they are, not what they are not. How can relegating a book's actual title to a footnote on the slab label, and absent completely from the census record, be a sign of love? Is that not disrespectful? How can labelling a book printed six years after the original as the '1st appearance' be correct? After all, there is a world of difference between the following three phrases:

• Origin and 1st appearance of the Incredible Hulk
• Reprints the origin and 1st appearance of the Incredible Hulk
• 1st appearance of the Incredible Hulk in a Norwegian title

Isn't there?

Which will CGC go for, do you think, of those three options?

I guess we'll find out soon....

The 'Norwegian Edition'....of what!  There isn't a 1968 US book called 'Koloss' for this to be the Norwegian edition of!

 

 

Keep up the good work Steve. This is a complete fiasco. Rather than proclaiming their professionalism this manifests itself as a gigantic pretence. Either employ a " Foreign  Comics/Reprints" expert or admit that they are not up to the task.

Edited February 16, 2022 by Redshade

[steve566]

On 2/16/2022 at 12:13 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

This book predates their strategy change, so they would have gone with the actual book title Gary. AUS Reprints lists it as 'Superboy Comics' but they may have gone for the GCD title which is just 'Superboy'. I haven't seen the indicia myself, so don't know what that says - if anything. 

@steve566 Steve - any idea which is the correct title for this one?

I'm not too familiar with superboy but if that is the superboy 1 cover then the new labeling strategy would call it Superboy 1 Australian edition.. word on the street is Heritage is going to hold an all foreign edition auction so it seems like the CGC announcement will be in alignment with the heritage auction announcement