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

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/19/2021 at 5:17 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Matt read the post and has advised that the planned announcement has been pushed back due to other priorities. It does seem from his response that the change will go ahead however, albeit perhaps with some additional tweaks which will no doubt be explained in the announcement when it comes. He did point out that what we see on the census at the moment for slabs like Gadzukes is not the finished design so don't read too much into my earlier illustration - that will change.

I don't support the basic premise of the change myself, I think I've made that fairly clear, so for me the finessing of the strategy is unlikely to make much difference. But there is no point being critical of examples of what is clearly not a finished design, so, I will step back and await the formal communication.

The only other comment I would make at this point is to question the wisdom of launching a new labelling strategy prior to deciding on the final design and communications. It means that submitters of non-US publications which reprint certain US original content will not really know what to expect when their submissions are returned in the interim. But there you go, I'm not in charge.

I've made my case, and it has been heard. So I'll wait for the announcement, have a final moan, and then leave it!

Still no sign of any official announcement on this.

I saw this book on eBay today:

 

You'd have to wonder what a father might do for his son for Christmas, who let slip that he would "Love a TTA #13, the first appearance of Groot".

"Ah, here's one! He's going to love this"

Anyway, as is now standard CGC labelling practice, Mystic #40 is now Tales to Astonish #13 and is the first appearance of groot:

 

It was graded on the eleventh of last month. All the usual head scratchers are there on the Verification Tool record:

• The wrong title
• The wrong issue number
• The right date
• The right publisher
• The wrong variant status - the UK Edition of what? A variant of what? Do CGC understand what the word 'variant' means?
• The actual title of the comic relegated to 'Label Text'
• Key comments - the first appearance of Groot - no, a reprint of the first appearance of Groot

 

This is a complete misrepresentation, as I've said over and over again. 

I was told by Matt Nelson that the census records were "not the finished state". Currently, still, they are completely inaccurate and have been now for over a year.

"Mystic" has two 'L Miller' records on the census - one 'Co', one 'Son':

 

Neither record shows our issue #40:

Presumably, our Mystic #40 is buried in the TTA#13 'L Miller' record here, even though Miller never published that title:

Yep, looks like it:

 

I'm a reasonable bloke, but I cannot fathom this strategy. CGC may well be planning an announcement and some remedial census record work. We don't know what that will comprise, or when it will happen.  

In context, and I the only one who thinks this is an absolute disaster? How on Earth can a grading company contrive to create records against publishers of titles that they never produced? Under what circumstances is it reasonable to label and record 'Mystic #40' as 'Tales to Astonish #13'? How is that not misrepresentation?

I think this strategy is doing a great disservice to non-US publishers and publications. It is disrespectful.

Matt knows my feelings on this, so there is little point tagging him as, presumably, I will get the same answer as before. I will continue to bang the drum every so often until we at least get an official statement, explaining the strategy and intentions for record keeping. I think that's the least we deserve.

 

[Get Marwood & I]

Guys - as representatives of the UK based members here, whose home produced books are being consciously mislabelled by CGC, could you read the above two posts and tell me what you think of this? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill or is there a principle here to uphold? 

Please, let me know what you think by posting. Maybe if Matt sees a consistent message from us it might influence the decision making or at least bring forward an official explanation

@goldust40 @rakehell @Albert Tatlock @Redshade@nmtg9@Kevin.J@Garystar@Pantodude@Malacoda @Ken Aldred @Comicopolis@Boz ska G G s © ® ™@batmiesta@valiantman

Anyone else reading who has a firm view either way, especially if you haven't already posted in the thread, please - dive in. 

[rakehell]

On 11/23/2021 at 11:56 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Please, let me know what you think by posting.

Yeah. This is all wrong. Don't know where to start, basically. 

On 11/23/2021 at 11:32 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

I think this nonsense strategy is doing a great disservice to non-US publishers and publications.

I agree completely. Some strange people collect these things, not because they are reprints of first appearances of US characters, but because they are worth collecting in their own right. If I had a Mystic 40 that I wanted slabbing, I'd want it to come back saying 'Mystic 40' not 'TTA 13'.

This kind of thing just illustrates a negative aspect of US based collecting: everything has to be some sort of copy of an American original, otherwise no one will want/understand/pay money for it.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 11/23/2021 at 12:11 PM, rakehell said:

This kind of thing just illustrates a negative aspect of US based collecting: everything has to be some sort of copy of an American original, otherwise no one will want/understand/pay money for it.

Thank you Elsie!

That is why I call it disrespectful - I don't think those in the US who formulated the strategy completely get it, because it is not 'their' book that is being misrepresented. 

The UK produced Mystic #40 would not exist if the US created TTA #13 did not precede it. At least not with that content. That is why a graded Mystic #40 should have an appropriate label notation - "Reprints material previously published in TTA #13 (Marvel Comics)" - something like that. When did readily apparent fact go out of fashion as a labelling concept?

[Redshade]

On 11/23/2021 at 11:56 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Guys - as representatives of the UK based members here, whose home produced books are being consciously mislabelled by CGC, could you read the above two posts and tell me what you think of this? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill or is there a principle here to uphold? 

Please, let me know what you think by posting. Maybe if Matt sees a consistent message from us it might influence the decision making or at least bring forward an official explanation

@goldust40 @rakehell @Albert Tatlock @Redshade@nmtg9@Kevin.J@Garystar@Pantodude@Malacoda @Ken Aldred @Comicopolis

Anyone else reading who has a firm view either way, especially if you haven't already posted in the thread, please - dive in. 

This is the first time that I have seen this and my immediate thought was "what UTTER stupidity". The comic is called Mystic and it is no 40 end of.
On a side note, during my downsizing I sold my Mystic  40 for £200 ish several years ago. I see this issue (perhaps even the same issue) has an asking price of £5000.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 11/23/2021 at 12:21 PM, Redshade said:

This is the first time that I have seen this and my immediate thought was "what UTTER stupidity". The comic is called Mystic and it is no 40 end of.

It's frankly comical, heh heh, that we have to argue for calling a thing by what it is and not by what it is not. Isn't it?

On 11/23/2021 at 12:21 PM, Redshade said:

On a side note, during my downsizing I sold my Mystic  40 for £200 ish several years ago. I see this issue (perhaps even the same issue) has an asking price of £5000.

ABBA once said "Money, money, money, must be funny, in a rich man's world". Could it be that calling Mystic #40, which reprints the first appearance of Groot - 'Tales to Astonish #13', which is the first appearance of Groot - has artificially inflated the price? Or encouraged sellers to list it so aggressively? 

Here is how the eBay seller has described the item:

"Tales to Astonish 13 cgc 5.0 L.Miller & Son Ltd 1963 super rare printed reprinted cover only 3 years later for Mystic 40 uk edition."

What role have CGC played here, in establishing the facts about these comics? Have they spread confusion, do we think? Is that a reasonable opinion to hold - that CGC are spreading and perpetuating confusion?

[Get Marwood & I]

It is interesting that CGC make the distinction here between a first printing and a reprint:

  

That is the way to do it.

Why do they record the actual book title and note the reprint status on this US produced True Believers #1, but not Mystic #40 and other non-US publications like it? Why get it right on an arguably worthless modern reprint, and consciously wrong on an arguably significant vintage item?

[goldust40]

On 11/23/2021 at 12:27 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

It's frankly comical, heh heh, that we have to argue for calling a thing by what it is and not by what it is not. Isn't it?

ABBA once said "Money, money, money, must be funny, in a rich man's world". Could it be that calling Mystic #40, which reprints the first appearance of Groot - 'Tales to Astonish #13', which is the first appearance of Groot - has artificially inflated the price? Or encouraged sellers to list it so aggressively? 

I owned a copy of that book as well. There are two on the census, so it's either the one you've posted or the other one listed. The copy I had I sold for a pittance (I regret selling it) and it ended up in the U.S. (I spotted it at a dealer's table when I attended a convention there years ago).

I can't argue that it's all an attempt by CGC to bypass facts regarding what constitutes something that is separate from the norm. It does simplify things for them but also creates other issues - I tried to find information about the Mystic 40 on GPA, and had no luck. Would it be under TTA or Mystic (British Title)? I couldn't find it under either, and there was no entry for the book, so if there are recorded sales they haven't been logged in, which could technically be construed as marginalization.

That Mystic 40 would be considered a curio by the U.S. market, which in effect it is, and it may well be very scarce indeed. But it isn't a Tales To Astonish 13, it's a comic that contains the Groot story amongst other tales.

Quote

That is why a graded Mystic #40 should have an appropriate label notation - "Reprints material previously published in TTA #13 (Marvel Comics)" - something like that. When did readily apparent fact go out of fashion as a labeling concept?

Yep. It needs to be called that so as to retain its importance to that section of the market rather than it being subsumed by the main focus of the market. It's a reprint book published for a separate readership that would otherwise have had no access to American comic books, which means it is of historical and cultural significance. Not a great deal of it to those who aren't bothered obviously, but let's not airbrush it out of existence!

[Redshade]

On 11/23/2021 at 12:21 PM, Redshade said:

This is the first time that I have seen this and my immediate thought was "what UTTER stupidity". The comic is called Mystic and it is no 40 end of.
On a side note, during my downsizing I sold my Mystic  40 for £200 ish several years ago. I see this issue (perhaps even the same issue) has an asking price of £5000.

So not my issue, but it appears to be this recent sale that has been quickly slabbed.

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/313679223792?hash=item4908bd1bf0:g:U70AAOSwUKVhQxxA

 

 

Edited November 23, 2021 by Redshade

[Get Marwood & I]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:02 PM, goldust40 said:

I owned a copy of that book as well. There are two on the census, so it's either the one you've posted or the other one listed. The copy I had I sold for a pittance (I regret selling it) and it ended up in the U.S. (I spotted it at a dealer's table when I attended a convention there years ago).

I can't argue that it's all an attempt by CGC to bypass facts regarding what constitutes something that is separate from the norm. It does simplify things for them but also creates other issues - I tried to find information about the Mystic 40 on GPA, and had no luck. Would it be under TTA or Mystic (British Title)? I couldn't find it under either, and there was no entry for the book, so if there are recorded sales they haven't been logged in, which could technically be construed as marginalization.

That Mystic 40 would be considered a curio by the U.S. market, which in effect it is, and it may well be very scarce indeed. But it isn't a Tales To Astonish 13, it's a comic that contains the Groot story amongst other tales.

Yep. It needs to be called that so as to retain its importance to that section of the market rather than it being subsumed by the main focus of the market. It's a reprint book published for a separate readership that would otherwise have had no access to American comic books, which means it is of historical and cultural significance. Not a great deal of it to those who aren't bothered obviously, but let's not airbrush it out of existence!

I was hoping you would add your two-penneth Andy. Eloquently put, as always - thank you 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:07 PM, Redshade said:

"COMIC HAS A SMALL PIECE MISSING FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE SPINE". So not my issue.

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/313679223792?hash=item4908bd1bf0:g:U70AAOSwUKVhQxxA

 

 

Sells for £92 when listed as Mystic #40...

....sits listed at five grand when - legitimately, due to the CGC label - it is titled TTA #13:

 

Thanks CGC 

[Redshade]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:18 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Sells for £92 when listed as Mystic #40...

....sits listed at five grand when - legitimately, due to the CGC label - it is titled TTA #13:

 

Thanks CGC 

I just came across this when I was searching for the one I sold which doesn't show up. Strange. It was just a meh! comic to me in 2014 when the film came out and so I listed it (I think) at £1 start and let the market decide what the "value" was.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:33 PM, Redshade said:

I just came across this when I was searching for the one I sold which doesn't show up. Strange. It was just a meh! comic to me in 2014 when the film came out and so I listed it (I think) at £1 start and let the market decide what the "value" was.

We've all done it Stephen.

The £5K graded copy hasn't sold of course, but would anyone bet against it selling in the current market? And if so, what role have CGC played in making such a sale price possible? They gave the seller a legitimate reason to list it solely as 'TTA#13'. They could have done that anyway of course, the seller, but CGC have legitimised it with their label. Haven't they?

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

I'll be frank.

1. I can't add anything on top of what Andy has stated that would shed any further earth shattering light. I concur with his opinion on it.

2. I have no passion for the SA whatsoever so it's hard for me personally to care that much or feign outrage.

3. However I respect those whose focus of collecting it is and can absolutely understand the frustration.

Finally and probably most importantly, I am jaded and worn out by the QC and labelling issues at CGC over the last few years which seem to be getting worse as time goes by. I am fed up with it, so much so that I took my own small action to deal with the problem.....i.e. I refuse to submit books personally to CGC anymore. I haven't submitted for 18 months and I will not submit in the future. I'm done with the nonsense.

Sure I will continue to collect and occasionally barter CGC graded books, but the headache of submission and the Pandora's box of what comes after is for younger people.

I'm too old for nasty surprises and drama.

[Redshade]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:38 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

We've all done it Stephen.

The £5K graded copy hasn't sold of course, but would anyone bet against it selling in the current market? And if so, what role have CGC played in making such a sale price possible? They gave the seller a legitimate reason to list it solely as 'TTA#13'. They could have done that anyway of course, but CGC have legitimised it with their label. Haven't they?

I can't belive that CGC are mislabelling items in this way, of course they should be challenged, especially if a buyer purchases this as a result of such erroneous nomenclature.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:43 PM, Boz ska G G s © ® ™ said:

I'll be frank.

1. I can't add anything on top of what Andy has stated that would shed any further earth shattering light. I concur with his opinion on it.

2. I have no passion for the SA whatsoever so it's hard for me personally to care that much or feign outrage.

3. However I respect those whose focus of collecting it is and can absolutely understand the frustration.

Finally and probably most importantly, I am jaded and worn out by the QC and labelling issues at CGC over the last few years which seem to be getting worse as time goes by. I am fed up with it, so much so that I took my own small action to deal with the problem.....i.e. I refuse to submit books personally to CGC anymore. I haven't submitted for 18 months and I will not submit in the future. I'm done with the nonsense.

Sure I will continue to collect and occasionally barter CGC graded books, but the headache of submission and the Pandora's box of what comes after is for younger people.

I'm too old for nasty surprises and drama.

Thanks Paul, I suspect a number of us share that overall jaded view whether we submit often or not. 

Regarding your point two, or your number two, if we're trying to add levity, I want to be clear that, as the loudest drum banger, I'm not outraged. I know it can come across that way when reading the written word, but I'm as calm as a cucumber myself as I hope the little interspersed jokes and light heartedness in some of my posts show. But I do think this is wrong, and I do think it is worth pursuing with CGC. 

When a few more have commented, as I hope they will, I'm going to send a link to Matt and ask if he will comment further or at least give us a date for the promised official communication. Our homegrown books are being labelled wrongly by the biggest comic grading company in the world. It's been going on for a year or so now. We can't just stand by and let that pass without a fight, can we?

[Redshade]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:51 PM, Redshade said:

I can't belive that CGC are mislabelling items in this way, of course they should be challenged, especially if a buyer purchases this as a result of such erroneous nomenclature.

Not to mention the possible legal ramifications if a subsequent purchaser decided to sue for misrepresentation. Americans are notorious for their litigious propensities are they not?

Edited November 23, 2021 by Redshade

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 11/23/2021 at 1:52 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Thanks Paul, I suspect a number of us share that overall jaded view whether we submit often or not. 

Regarding your point two, or your number two, if we're trying to add levity, I want to be clear that, as the loudest drum banger, I'm not outraged. I know it can come across that way when reading the written word, but I'm as calm as a cucumber myself as I hope the little interspersed jokes and light heartedness in some of my posts show. But I do think this is wrong, and I do think it is worth pursuing with CGC. 

When a few more have commented, as I hope they will, I'm going to send a link to Matt and ask if he will comment further or at least give us a date for the communication. Our homegrown books are being labelled wrongly by the biggest comic grading company in the world. We can't just stand by and let that pass without a fight, can we?

I agree and I admire your devotion to the UK aspect.

As a kid UK books with the DC T & P stamp, or the Marvel actual pence variant was all I knew. I never actually ever came across a truly British variant with a shilling price for example IIRC.

Once I became an adult collector I completely shied away from books with UK price/variant stamps  and morphed into some sort of purist snob collecting only American cents copies.

Then later I became devoted to the GA and PCH.  

All that said I applaud wholeheartedly your adherence to the UK aspect of the hobby and wish you all good fortune in getting the powers to get their act together.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 11/23/2021 at 2:14 PM, Redshade said:

Not to mention the possible legal ramifications if a subsequent purchaser decided to sue for misrepresentation. Americans are notorious for their litigious propensities are they not?

I'm sure CGC will have that aspect covered as they make mistakes all the time that have potential financial implications. And they would no doubt argue that they have the title 'Mystic #40' on the label, albeit not prominently, so the buyer was being told. But perhaps there is a distinction between a mistake - e.g. not identifying a valuable 35 cent variant as such - and a conscious, process driven misrepresentation. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 11/23/2021 at 2:18 PM, Boz ska G G s © ® ™ said:

I agree and I admire your devotion to the UK aspect.

As a kid UK books with the DC T & P stamp, or the Marvel actual pence variant was all I knew. I never actually ever came across a truly British variant with a shilling price for example IIRC.

Once I became an adult collector I completely shied away from books with UK price/variant stamps  and morphed into some sort of purist snob collecting only American cents copies.

Then later I became devoted to the GA and PCH.  

All that said I applaud wholeheartedly your adherence to the UK aspect of the hobby and wish you all good fortune in getting the powers to get their act together.

Cheers Paul. I get flack sometimes because I believe in the books and fight accordingly. There are very few UK collectors posting here on this forum so if you post the loudest you sometimes get accused of putting yourself on a pedestal and stuff like that. That's why I'm trying to get others to comment - so CGC can hear many voices, not just one. 

On that point, I'll hold off posting for a bit - see if others fill the gap