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

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/21/2022 at 8:59 PM, Redshade said:

Blimey mate! Have you seen the price of a first class stamp these days?

It's about eight pound fifty now, isn't it?

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/21/2022 at 9:02 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

It's about eight pound fifty now, isn't it?

Nine sixty, recorded. 

[Beyonder123]

I'm happy they took the time to do a whole write up on the subject. But very disappointed things are carrying on as usual. Also thought this was pretty hilarious. Last to the game, but still the industry leader? 

 

[Beyonder123]

At least the Disney books are being labeled correctly I guess?

 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/22/2022 at 1:44 AM, Beyonder123 said:

At least the Disney books are being labeled correctly I guess?

 

Why though? Why not do that for all books?

[Get Marwood & I]

@Aman619 posted this comment over in my Marvel UKPV thread:

On 4/21/2022 at 6:21 PM, Aman619 said:

I just read the announcement hoping you'd all be pleased at progress, but seems your number one issue hasn't been resolved.  Still no foreign titles in the database for searching.  I haven't caught up on all the posts here today, but IS there a database out there that has all the foreign titles and issue numbers and US key story reprints already completed?  Seems to me that with the research done, CGC could be persuaded to work out a perfect solution that's searchable the way they have it now but also under each individual foreign title and issue#... The database could be hosted so that collectors can check it first to figure out the CGC listing time and issue and country.

Seeing the scans in the announcement though is very exciting.  Im more interested in them than I was... or though I would be,  These can be the new hot variants!

The database searching isn't really my number one issue, Aman. I disagree with the core principles that underpin the entire approach.

I appreciate that the announcement looks very slick, and that it will be enticing to many. That's a good thing, undoubtedly - bringing the books to wider attention and increasing awareness. But if the basic principles that underpin the labelling and recording approach are wrong, then it doesn't really matter how good it looks, how much effort went into it, or how true the desire was. 

This is a very peculiar way to classify 'international comic books' (the title of their announcement):

The top two are the same thing - books that were published by and for an overseas market. The third set - the Price Variants - are published in the US for distribution in a non-US market. They should not feature in the article at all. It is the most clumsy way to categorise separate entities that I can imagine and creates the false perception that the US produced UK, Canadian and Australian Price Variants are somehow part of the whole 'foreign' thing. They are clearly not, as I have been battling to show in my time here. And there are US Price Variants too, don't forget. It's all so vague and unnecessary and it muddies the waters and the distinctions that exist between book types. There are original first printing books produced in the US and there are non-US published books which reproduce US original content under license. Two categories, which you can sub-divide into home grown books and those targeted for overseas distribution.

What do we think when we see the word 'unique'? What does it imply here? It's so badly thought out. Here is CGC's definition for 'Unique Editions':

And here is the definition for the 'Foreign Editions'

Why on Earth would you seek to artificially split these books into these categories? They are all non-US published books which reprint or make reference to original US content. I can see part of the cover of Amazing Spider-Man #42 in the 'Unique Edition' example. Why then is that not a 'Foreign Edition' and labelled as ASM #42, as the Koloss example is? It is such an unnecessary contrivance, and fraught with danger and the potential for misunderstanding.  CGC are creating categorisation types out of thin air, which do not exist. How arrogant, is that? 

All non-US published books are 'unique to their country of origin', aren't they? 'Out of This World #17 is a UK Alan Class publication which is unique to the UK. It is neither a 'Foreign Edition' or a 'Unique Edition'. It doesn't have to be categorised with consideration to anything but itself. A note stating the reproduction of any key original story content is all that is needed.

I don't think CGC have chosen their examples well, for the announcement. Look at this:

Why would you use a Canadian Price Variant (or newsstand, as @Lazyboy would say) and a US Direct Edition to illustrate the price difference? If you knew what you were doing, comparing apples with apples, you would use the US Newsstand Edition, like so:

 

It's so lazy and shows a lack of care and, possibly, a lack of true understanding. How long has this announcement been in the making? And how can you say that Price Variants were "typically printed in the United States" when by definition they all were printed as part of the same original print run? This again implies an instinctive lack of knowledge.

The statement "CGC classifies price variants the same as their US counterpart” further implies that they are not part of the same print run and are somehow of 'foreign' origin. Of course they are labelled the same - they're the same book from the same print run, just with a different price for overseas distribution. These are the basics that CGC are getting wrong here.

Why are Disney an exception to the rule?

If they can be labelled by their foreign title with the US title displayed in the label text, why not adopt that common sense approach for all books? Why the contrivance?

Now, if CGC plan to amend the census as is implied here...

...then does that not invalidate the reason for the 'labelling as the US edition' strategy in the first place? If users will be able to identify the books in both categories, why would they need to use the US title as the headline title at all?

So, Aman, my objection is that the whole thing has been poorly conceived and founded on illogical foundations which are full of contradictions and misleading elements. Yes, CGC deserve huge credit for the focus, effort and spotlight that they are attempting to shine on these little known about books. But the way they are going about it is catastrophically bad for the books - all of them, US originals too - and the hobby.

If we look at this final comment here:

Do we believe that?

Here is one example of where they do not listen, in my opinion. CGC say they want to place a 'first appearance' designation on a non-US publication that reprints original US material:

My position is that the only book that deserves that designation - the first appearance of Hulk, for example - is the original US book in which his first appearance was made. To give that designation to a later overseas reprint is massively misleading as well as disrespectful to the US original. But it is important to some for the first appearance of a character in a publication from their country to be recognised. So the solution is to add two words - 'in' and 'Country'. So it becomes as follows:

• Hulk #1 (US original) - "First appearance of the Hulk"
• Greek Hulk Comic - "First appearance of the Hulk in Greece"

Something like that makes the issue go away, and preserves the intentions, but they choose not to do it. They choose to be wilfully misleading. Some of these non-US books look old. Inexperienced collectors will buy them assuming they have the first Hulk. It's just not right.

I can and have proposed an alternative to every strategy aspect that CGC have adopted here and they have ignored them all. The use of additional wording on a strategic basis ("reprints" etc) makes the overall approach water tight. Yet they refuse to listen.

This is how I feel about it all. I have a specific spot in my garden that is important to me, with a small shrine to a thing loved. CGC come along and say they want to pay homage to it too - and spread the word. They build the most wonderful looking shrine. It is slick and professional looking. I see them beaming with pride, for what they have built in its name. But they have built it in the wrong spot, and using the wrong materials. There are no foundations, so it will crumble. I have the unenvious task of telling them that, knowing how their hearts will sink - they put so much into it!

Wrong is wrong.

Their strategy is wrong. In the pursuit of a gimmick - to allow the lazy to find all books that reprint key US content - they have created this monster which manages to disrespect books from both camps. A US original can no longer claim to be the first appearance alone, and the non-US reprint isn't good enough to be known by its own title. 

Think about it. If you label factually, and literally, you cannot go wrong. Build a link in your census to allow collectors to see what books reprint US original content. But if you adopt CGC's strategy, the possibilities for confusion are endless. They have deviated from their core purpose - respect the books, preserve data integrity, eliminate misconceptions, promote accurate understanding. 

It's a disaster, I think. That's my take on it. That's my attempt to fight for the integrity of the books, and how they should be recognised and understood. 

[rakehell]

On 4/22/2022 at 9:52 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Their strategy is wrong.

So is this (or should I say 'Rong')-

To help with such an immense and murky history of comic books, CGC has teamed with Rob Rong (@ForeignComicKeys on Instagram), a leading international comic book collector who provided his expertise and extensive database to accurately identify and categorize the country of origin and publisher for each comic, two critical factors in certification. Additionally, CGC researches the contents of each international comic book it grades, which may vary widely for a particular issue printed in multiple countries.

I don't want to denigrate a guy with an Instagram page just because I've never heard of him, but is he the only one they consulted with? What about the GCD? I know it ain't perfect, but at least they're trying to maintain an accurate record. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/22/2022 at 10:08 AM, rakehell said:

So is this (or should I say 'Rong')-

To help with such an immense and murky history of comic books, CGC has teamed with Rob Rong (@ForeignComicKeys on Instagram), a leading international comic book collector who provided his expertise and extensive database to accurately identify and categorize the country of origin and publisher for each comic, two critical factors in certification. Additionally, CGC researches the contents of each international comic book it grades, which may vary widely for a particular issue printed in multiple countries.

I don't want to denigrate a guy with an Instagram page just because I've never heard of him, but is he the only one they consulted with? What about the GCD? I know it ain't perfect, but at least they're trying to maintain an accurate record. 

Oh, that's priceless Daphne.

Rob Rong.

They're rong and we've been robbed 

I'm sure he's a great guy with enormous experience. Have CGC put it to good use, though?

[Get Marwood & I]

@rakehell

Daphne, help me out here.

Is the announcement telling us that only non-US books that share an original US cover will get labelled as the US edition? Not content - only cover? And does the cover have to be a 'key'?

[rakehell]

On 4/22/2022 at 10:16 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Is the announcement telling us that only non-US books that share an original US cover will get labelled as the US edition? Not content - only cover?

That was how I read it, yes. It offends my OCD beyond measure.

On 4/22/2022 at 10:16 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

And does the cover have to be a 'key'?

That's the implication, but it's only an implication. The whole thing feels like it just wasn't properly thought through. Like they'd made an arbitrary decision (or a series of unconnected and mismatched arbitrary decisions) and then had to look like they'd done it on purpose so came up with this vague, wishy-washy explanation when what they really want to do is pretend that foreign comics that aren't instantly recognizable as "keys" don't really exist as independent items.  

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/22/2022 at 10:27 AM, rakehell said:

That was how I read it, yes. It offends my OCD beyond measure.

It's fairly offensive without it 

On 4/22/2022 at 10:27 AM, rakehell said:

That's the implication, but it's only an implication. The whole thing feels like it just wasn't properly thought through. Like they'd made an arbitrary decision (or a series of unconnected and mismatched arbitrary decisions) and then had to look like they'd done it on purpose so came up with this vague, wishy-washy explanation when what they really want to do is pretend that foreign comics that aren't instantly recognizable as "keys" don't really exist as independent items.  

I think that's fair comment. The idea to promote books which reprint original US keys is fine - but they made a bad initial strategic move and then have seemingly tried to fit a design around it. 

So does that mean this will not be recorded as AF15 then, given that it doesn't share the cover?

@steve566 Steve - what's your take?

[rakehell]

On 4/22/2022 at 10:35 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

It's fairly offensive without it 

But not offensively fair 

On 4/22/2022 at 10:35 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

The idea to promote books which reprint original US keys is fine - but they made a bad initial strategic move and then have seemingly tried to fit a design around it. 

Yes. Exactly. 

On 4/22/2022 at 10:35 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

So does that mean this will not be recorded as AF15 then, given that it doesn't share the cover?

Based on what they say in their self-promotional ad-burst, no. No it will not. Looks like it's all about the cover swipe.

[steve566]

On 4/22/2022 at 5:35 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

It's fairly offensive without it 

I think that's fair comment. The idea to promote books which reprint original US keys is fine - but they made a bad initial strategic move and then have seemingly tried to fit a design around it. 

So does that mean this will not be recorded as AF15 then, given that it doesn't share the cover?

@steve566 Steve - what's your take?

That one will be labeled as “out of this world 17”…they are doing a cover only approach.. if the cover is not af15 then it won’t get that label.. i believe that issue may get a notation that it contains the af15 story inside.. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/22/2022 at 1:54 PM, steve566 said:

That one will be labeled as “out of this world 17”…they are doing a cover only approach.. if the cover is not af15 then it won’t get that label.. i believe that issue may get a notation that it contains the af15 story inside.. 

So a cover only swipe could get the respective US title, but a full story reprint with original cover doesn't. That makes sense!

How's it going down in your world Steve, the announcement?

[wardevil0]

On 4/22/2022 at 8:58 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

So a cover only swipe could get the respective US title, but a full story reprint with original cover doesn't. That makes sense!

How's it going down in your world Steve, the announcement?

This policy means this issue, El Sorprendente Hombre Araña #121, is labeled as Amazing Spider-Man #102... while the next issue from the same run is labeled El Sorprendente Hombre Araña #122.  Catering to the "cover set" crowd seems to be the driving force.  Is that really the main effort of international comics collecting?

[wardevil0]

Also, this one apparently would not be marked as ASM 101/102, because its cover is redrawn from an interior panel instead of the cover.  Labeling comics by anything other than the actual given title is just a mess.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/22/2022 at 2:09 PM, wardevil0 said:

This policy means this issue, El Sorprendente Hombre Araña #121, is labeled as Amazing Spider-Man #102... while the next issue from the same run is labeled El Sorprendente Hombre Araña #122.  Catering to the "cover set" crowd seems to be the driving force.  Is that really the main effort of international comics collecting?

 

Spot on, Wardevil. I'd like to hear an argument to the contrary. 

Why would you do that? Unless I am misunderstanding the future intentions, you will never see a consecutive issue run of the actual series title in the census or on the book labels. Only those issues that do not have a US key cover reproduced will have their actual publication title recorded. 

This is two plus two is five stuff, surely? Given how long it has taken for the announcement to come, we shouldn't be asking these types of questions at this stage, and second guessing what will happen should we?

Why is it important to herald and separate a reprinted US key cover on one book, but not the actual story reprinted in another (if the cover is unique)? Isn't it more important to flag key content in 'foreign' books with covers which don't give the game away?

[steve566]

On 4/22/2022 at 8:58 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

So a cover only swipe could get the respective US title, but a full story reprint with original cover doesn't. That makes sense!

How's it going down in your world Steve, the announcement?

I’m glad they made the announcement to explain their position.. it’s no big surprise to most of us that collect foreign comics since they started labeling them like this over a year ago.. I think it will at least bring more awareness to the comics which is great in my opinion. I’m a bit confused about the Disney thing and also for some reason some magazine sized comics are still receiving the old style labels.. the big take away for me is that CGC is interested in getting involved in foreign comics and that it is a work in progress

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/22/2022 at 2:15 PM, wardevil0 said:

Also, this one apparently would not be marked as ASM 101/102, because its cover is redrawn from an interior panel instead of the cover.  Labeling comics by anything other than the actual given title is just a mess.

Which makes your point valid - is this really just about pimping up the reproduction of famous original US covers?

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/22/2022 at 2:17 PM, steve566 said:

I’m glad they made the announcement to explain their position.. it’s no big surprise to most of us that collect foreign comics since they started labeling them like this over a year ago.. I think it will at least bring more awareness to the comics which is great in my opinion. I’m a bit confused about the Disney thing and also for some reason some magazine sized comics are still receiving the old style labels.. the big take away for me is that CGC is interested in getting involved in foreign comics and that it is a work in progress

Getting involved? They're the self proclaimed market leaders Steve!