I’m beating a dead horse
0

18 posts in this topic

I understand people have issues with qualified labels regarding missing MVS’ or coupons, and I do agree that an incomplete book should be graded as such.  
 

I own a Thor 337 that is in Amazing condition but carting an unwitnessed signature from Walt Simonson.  
 

I agree the green labels aren’t visually appealing, but are green label signature books treated as harshly as incomplete books?

 

Im honestly considering going for a red label.  
 

thanks for your opinions.  

C4FFEB54-CCDE-492C-9DA0-6D7104A61D5A.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ExNihilo said:

Those guys don't do red labels anymore.  Now it's a yellow label that says "verified signature"

I understand that.  As far as I know CGC has never done red labels.  I was referring to CBCS Red Label.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BoogieWoogie said:
4 hours ago, Jared2Hundo said:

I understand that.  As far as I know CGC has never done red labels.  I was referring to CBCS Red Label.  

That's what he's referring to too. That red label no longer exists.

That's correct - the other grading company is using yellow labels for books that they THINK are legit autographs that no one witnessed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, valiantman said:

That's correct - the other grading company is using yellow labels for books that they THINK are legit autographs that no one witnessed.

I will defend them here... signature authentication is a science. There's a reason why it can be used to identify someone. Yes, talented forgers exist and some are so good that they can food experts but that is vanishingly rare. Signature authentication has been a thing in the collectibles world for decades, especially for sports and celebrity memorabilia, and it's trustworthy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BoogieWoogie said:
1 hour ago, valiantman said:

That's correct - the other grading company is using yellow labels for books that they THINK are legit autographs that no one witnessed.

I will defend them here... signature authentication is a science. There's a reason why it can be used to identify someone. Yes, talented forgers exist and some are so good that they can food experts but that is vanishingly rare. Signature authentication has been a thing in the collectibles world for decades, especially for sports and celebrity memorabilia, and it's trustworthy. 

But the industry leader (by about 95%) has established that yellow means witnessed, and the-other-guys also established that yellow was "witnessed" while red was "verified" in their world for years.

To switch to yellow being both "absolutely sure" and "we are fairly confident in our methods" is a purely "unscientific" move... completely done for marketing purposes, and seems like it can only confuse the public (as evidenced by this topic).

 

Edited by valiantman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, BoogieWoogie said:

I will defend them here... signature authentication is a science. There's a reason why it can be used to identify someone. Yes, talented forgers exist and some are so good that they can food experts but that is vanishingly rare. Signature authentication has been a thing in the collectibles world for decades, especially for sports and celebrity memorabilia, and it's trustworthy. 

For me, it's the element of human error and a persons ability to do whatever to fool the system.  It introduces even the smallest percentage of doubt.  A witnessed signature has none of that.  It eliminates the human error element and the only way to get a forged sig authenticated is through unethical behavior from a witness.  If that day ever comes, well, the whole system falls apart.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPUYuwSRwB8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jared2Hundo said:

I understand that.  As far as I know CGC has never done red labels.  I was referring to CBCS Red Label.  

This is a pedantic post on my part, but yes I realize you were referring to the "Voledemort" Red Label.  I was just pointing out that it's no longer red, but instead falls under their yellow label with different verbiage on it.

Also, for informative purposes, CGC did have a red label in its earliest year before switching to blue labels.

(Then) "Voldemort" Red Label => (Now) "Voldemort" Yellow Label

(Then) CGC Red Label => (Now) CGC Blue Label

That all being said, I would much rather get a "Voldemort" Yellow Label in your case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ExNihilo said:

Also, for informative purposes, CGC did have a red label in its earliest year before switching to blue labels.

...

(Then) CGC Red Label => (Now) CGC Blue Label

The original CGC red label (which was for universal moderns 1975-2001) can be seen here: http://cgcdata.com/labels

Also, CGC briefly had a "Wizard First" program (2004-2005) where they would quickly grade books directly from the printer and assign Wizard First 9.5 (which meant anywhere from CGC 9.2 to 9.9) and a red label.

Theoretically there was Wizard First 10 (which really was equivalent to CGC 10, but only 2 books ever got that grade) and Wizard First 9.0 (which meant CGC 9.0 or lower).

Wizard First red labels from CGC looked like this:

1753772612_0708656114_3001.jpg.ecbfe7d8695c9dbd5bbfb95e882f5dd8.jpg

Edited by valiantman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, waynemel said:

That book should be pressed/cleaned and then slabbed.  Classic book.  I would say to go with cbcs and get it verified.  I have done so for some of my books and looks great.  

Thanks for the feed back.  The photo doesn’t really do it justice.  I press everything I send into CGC via their pressing service.  This will be my first cbcs experience.  I’m definitely getting it verified. I slab all of my keys! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2021 at 9:15 AM, BoogieWoogie said:

I will defend them here... signature authentication is a science. There's a reason why it can be used to identify someone. Yes, talented forgers exist and some are so good that they can food experts but that is vanishingly rare. Signature authentication has been a thing in the collectibles world for decades, especially for sports and celebrity memorabilia, and it's trustworthy. 

Since the comic creator community is so small, I always thought it would be easier if they just asked the creator directly if it's their signature, perhaps reaching out through companies and editors. How hard could it possibly be to get Jim Lee or Toddy to look at a picture and say "ya that's me"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2021 at 10:34 AM, ExNihilo said:

This is a pedantic post on my part, but yes I realize you were referring to the "Voledemort" Red Label.  I was just pointing out that it's no longer red, but instead falls under their yellow label with different verbiage on it.

Also, for informative purposes, CGC did have a red label in its earliest year before switching to blue labels.

(Then) "Voldemort" Red Label => (Now) "Voldemort one-punch" Yellow Label

(Then) CGC Red Label => (Now) CGC Blue Label

That all being said, I would much rather get a "Voldemort" Yellow Label in your case.

keep talking about a subject that has already been discussed or decided I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I still don't understand what happened

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, shrutib said:

keep talking about a subject that has already been discussed or decided I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I still don't understand what happened

Cute. Except there is no link to Lancaster Kitchens 

God I miss those. Really really miss them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, brentdevil said:

Since the comic creator community is so small, I always thought it would be easier if they just asked the creator directly if it's their signature, perhaps reaching out through companies and editors. How hard could it possibly be to get Jim Lee or Toddy to look at a picture and say "ya that's me"

Those guys have signed thousands upon thousands of books.  They can tell you "yeah, that looks like my sig", but they can't say with 100% certainty that they signed it.  Someone with enough bad intention and discipline could learn to forge those signatures.  I would say that most sigs you could say with near certainty are who they claim to be.  Like OP's is most definitely Walt Simonson and I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would argue otherwise.  There's just no money in forging his signature.  The sole benefit of the CGC witnessed signature program is that it's witnessed to as near a 100% degree as possible.  Like I said, the ONLY way the witness program falls apart is if some unethical person takes the time to be a witness and then starts swapping books or doing something behind the scenes.

58 minutes ago, shrutib said:

keep talking about a subject that has already been discussed or decided I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I still don't understand what happened

Which part are you seeking clarification on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ExNihilo said:

Those guys have signed thousands upon thousands of books.  They can tell you "yeah, that looks like my sig", but they can't say with 100% certainty that they signed it.  Someone with enough bad intention and discipline could learn to forge those signatures.  I would say that most sigs you could say with near certainty are who they claim to be.  Like OP's is most definitely Walt Simonson and I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would argue otherwise.  There's just no money in forging his signature.  The sole benefit of the CGC witnessed signature program is that it's witnessed to as near a 100% degree as possible.  Like I said, the ONLY way the witness program falls apart is if some unethical person takes the time to be a witness and then starts swapping books or doing something behind the scenes.

Which part are you seeking clarification on?

Funny enough I have actually seen a CGC signature "forged" once with a lax witness. This was back in the 2000s when they were outsourcing it to a comic book store to handle (who took a little commission fee on top of it). For all those reasons I can see why they do it themselves, I assume they've gotten far stricter about it now. I don't know if it would be totally poor form for me to tell the story or name the store, I mean they certainly weren't super helpful to me personally but it still is a crappy thing to name names, I guess...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0