Popular Post lou_fine Posted January 19, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted January 19, 2022 On 1/18/2022 at 8:06 AM, Troy Division said: A certified grading company got paid to give the grades the customer wanted in exchange for money / clout. Haven't we had enough talk to last a lifetime about the grading of the Promise Collection pedigree books here already? s-dali, chrisco37, Larryw7 and 2 others 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlyweaknesskryptonite Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 On 1/19/2022 at 12:25 AM, lou_fine said: On 1/18/2022 at 10:06 AM, Troy Division said: A certified grading company got paid to give the grades the customer wanted in exchange for money / clout. Haven't we had enough talk to last a lifetime about the grading of the Promise Collection pedigree books here already? Cat, lou_fine and troydivision1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troydivision1 Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 to keep the desire for an open dialogue going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beyonder123 Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 They themselves said they would respond. They shouldn't have said anything if they were going to try and make this fly under the radar. troydivision1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theCapraAegagrus Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 Every member of the boards waiting for a response from CGC: Galen130 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galen130 Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 On 1/21/2022 at 11:28 AM, theCapraAegagrus said: Every member of the boards waiting for a response from CGC: I’m not…I really don’t care. I think it’s time I start my own grading company. It will be called YGWYPF, or maybe ‘Shenanigans R Us’. 🤙👍 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theCapraAegagrus Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 On 1/21/2022 at 1:32 PM, Galen130 said: I’m not…I really don’t care. I think it’s time I start my own grading company. It will be called YGWYPF, or maybe ‘Shenanigans R Us’. 🤙👍 How about Number Roulette Grading Company? Galen130 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galen130 Posted January 21, 2022 Share Posted January 21, 2022 On 1/21/2022 at 11:41 AM, theCapraAegagrus said: How about Number Roulette Grading Company? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Toro Rojo Posted January 22, 2022 Share Posted January 22, 2022 Bumping this because CGC really needs to respond to this, whether they want to or not. Beyonder123 and MetalPSI 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troydivision1 Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 On 12/30/2021 at 8:46 PM, CGC Mike said: I will check into this. CGC is closed tomorrow so, it's possible I won't have a statement until next week. It has now been 14 business days (1 day shy of three working weeks). Beyonder123 and MetalPSI 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theCapraAegagrus Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMan Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 i don't feel like reading this whole thread. What's the question that was ask of CGC that everyone wants an answer to? ADAMANTIUM 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troydivision1 Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 On 1/24/2022 at 11:21 AM, NoMan said: i don't feel like reading this whole thread. What's the question that was ask of CGC that everyone wants an answer to? Posting @Qalyar Questions from - Page 1, Post 8 "I have two concerns here, neither of which is "Bad Idea is synonymous with stupid gimmicks," because that's self-evident at this point. The census report on this book is extremely, extremely concerning. Why was CGC willing to assign grades here at all? This is, all other nonsense aside,a published cover-only book. Yes, a blank acetate cover, but whatever, that's not the point. CGC has previous advised that the Sensational She-Hulk #14 Brian Bolland variant would only be eligible for slabbing with a CVR no-grade. For those who aren't familiar with this book, they originally printed Sensational She-Hulk #14 with the wrong cover. To "fix" the problem, Marvel printed the Bolland cover without any interior pages (but with interior cover text that is unique to this printing) as a sort of weird giveaway item. They're actually kind of hard to find in good condition, and I'm sure there are collectors of the title or of Bolland's work who would like to have copies graded. So why is a book intentionally produced as a cover-only item, but with legitimate unique cover and interior art work, not considered eligible to be assigned grades; but this book, intentionally produced as a cover-only item but with no art or text or any production elements at all except for staples, qualify for grading beyond the CVR no-grade label?? Perhaps more importantly, how is there the full spectrum of grades on these? I find it, shall we say, extremely unlikely that they submitted copies that just happened to result in 1 book scoring almost every possible non-9.8 grade from 0.5 to 10 (there is no copy in 1.8), with all the rest in 9.8. Which means that there was some arrangement between Bad Idea and CGC to issue labels to these books in those specific grades. There are two options there, and neither is very satisfying: Are the labels legitimate grades that reflect defects or the lack thereof in the slabbed acetate? If so, were there other copies of these acetate books submitted but not slabbed (not like we'd know, really)? In particular, pre-screening isn't even normally available for 9.9 and 10 grades, so how did unique, specific copies in these grades come to pass? As for the lower graded books, were books intentionally manipulated by adding defects to produce the requested grades? If so, did Bad Idea perform this manipulation, or did CGC? The alternative is that these aren't real grades, and CGC acceded to Bad Ideas gimmick and simply created slabs in each grade upon request. This is far more disturbing, but I suspect is what actually occurred. If so, what assurances do we have that publishers cannot do this in future with books that have actual content? Let's say that I self-publish a book tomorrow. Can I pay to ensure that copies exist in every specific grade? How much? What if -- instead of just a cover -- it's an 8-pager that's entirely blank acetate? What if its blank acetate except for a printed title? Is there some threshold of actual content above which CGC actually grades books versus handing out specifically-purchased grade labels? Or was this a service that was only available to Dinesh and Bad Idea? @CGC Mike I'm sorry to be a curmudgeon here in what was probably thought of as just a silly gimmick. But especially after a year with concerns about QA across the board and concerns about double standards as displayed by the Promise Collection books, this is not just a silly gimmick. Yes, I get it, that this is a dumb piece of acetate and not a "real" comic book, but CGC has given these slabs their imprimatur. As a customer of CGC, and on behalf of other customers of CGC, I'd really appreciate some explanation as to why this was allowed to take place ... and some assurance that it is not simply possible to buy grades from what was and ought to be this neutral authentication and grading company." VintageComics and jimbo_7071 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMan Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 you know I'm not sure this is the correct thread, and if it's not, please accept my humble apologies. I started watching that video about 'HA/video game sales/Wata grading-sales scam and it's kinda eye opening. if the maker of this video is correct in his accusations, this is not good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poekaymon Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 I realize I'm in the minority, but I can't say I care about this at all. It was obviously some fun and games; at worst, mistimed--probably woulda been better on April Fools Day. I do think it's pretty dumb, but not worth 9 pages of pitchforks. Lord Gemini 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMan Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 On 1/24/2022 at 9:28 AM, Troy Division said: Posting @Qalyar Questions from - Page 1, Post 8 "I have two concerns here, neither of which is "Bad Idea is synonymous with stupid gimmicks," because that's self-evident at this point. The census report on this book is extremely, extremely concerning. Why was CGC willing to assign grades here at all? This is, all other nonsense aside,a published cover-only book. Yes, a blank acetate cover, but whatever, that's not the point. CGC has previous advised that the Sensational She-Hulk #14 Brian Bolland variant would only be eligible for slabbing with a CVR no-grade. For those who aren't familiar with this book, they originally printed Sensational She-Hulk #14 with the wrong cover. To "fix" the problem, Marvel printed the Bolland cover without any interior pages (but with interior cover text that is unique to this printing) as a sort of weird giveaway item. They're actually kind of hard to find in good condition, and I'm sure there are collectors of the title or of Bolland's work who would like to have copies graded. So why is a book intentionally produced as a cover-only item, but with legitimate unique cover and interior art work, not considered eligible to be assigned grades; but this book, intentionally produced as a cover-only item but with no art or text or any production elements at all except for staples, qualify for grading beyond the CVR no-grade label?? Perhaps more importantly, how is there the full spectrum of grades on these? I find it, shall we say, extremely unlikely that they submitted copies that just happened to result in 1 book scoring almost every possible non-9.8 grade from 0.5 to 10 (there is no copy in 1.8), with all the rest in 9.8. Which means that there was some arrangement between Bad Idea and CGC to issue labels to these books in those specific grades. There are two options there, and neither is very satisfying: Are the labels legitimate grades that reflect defects or the lack thereof in the slabbed acetate? If so, were there other copies of these acetate books submitted but not slabbed (not like we'd know, really)? In particular, pre-screening isn't even normally available for 9.9 and 10 grades, so how did unique, specific copies in these grades come to pass? As for the lower graded books, were books intentionally manipulated by adding defects to produce the requested grades? If so, did Bad Idea perform this manipulation, or did CGC? The alternative is that these aren't real grades, and CGC acceded to Bad Ideas gimmick and simply created slabs in each grade upon request. This is far more disturbing, but I suspect is what actually occurred. If so, what assurances do we have that publishers cannot do this in future with books that have actual content? Let's say that I self-publish a book tomorrow. Can I pay to ensure that copies exist in every specific grade? How much? What if -- instead of just a cover -- it's an 8-pager that's entirely blank acetate? What if its blank acetate except for a printed title? Is there some threshold of actual content above which CGC actually grades books versus handing out specifically-purchased grade labels? Or was this a service that was only available to Dinesh and Bad Idea? @CGC Mike I'm sorry to be a curmudgeon here in what was probably thought of as just a silly gimmick. But especially after a year with concerns about QA across the board and concerns about double standards as displayed by the Promise Collection books, this is not just a silly gimmick. Yes, I get it, that this is a dumb piece of acetate and not a "real" comic book, but CGC has given these slabs their imprimatur. As a customer of CGC, and on behalf of other customers of CGC, I'd really appreciate some explanation as to why this was allowed to take place ... and some assurance that it is not simply possible to buy grades from what was and ought to be this neutral authentication and grading company." thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Iceman399 Posted January 24, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted January 24, 2022 On 1/24/2022 at 1:23 PM, Poekaymon said: I realize I'm in the minority, but I can't say I care about this at all. It was obviously some fun and games; at worst, mistimed--probably woulda been better on April Fools Day. I do think it's pretty dumb, but not worth 9 pages of pitchforks. How much did Bad Idea pay CGC for these grades? How much do you or I have to pay CGC for grades? Why is CGC pulling these "fun & games" when there are serious TAT & QC issues? This is a very slippery slope from what should be an independent 3rd party grading company, grading only what is in front of them and not being paid to give acetate specific grades. If it was a joke they sure shouldn't have released them to the public and allowed them to be for sale. MetalPSI , steveinthecity, troydivision1 and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poekaymon Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 On 1/24/2022 at 2:22 PM, Iceman399 said: Why is CGC pulling these "fun & games" when there are serious TAT & QC issues? Same reason you care about grading funny books when the world is on the literal brink of world war 3, inflation is running rampant, income disparity is growing exponentially, and we continue to be amidst a global pandemic after 2 years--life goes on (until it doesn't). People are still out there making comedies, my kid still cries for treats, and collectors still bicker about whether they deserved a 9.x. CGC's "fun and games" or "prank" or "stunt" or whatever you want to call it here doesn't mean they aren't working on QC issues or don't take the rest of the business seriously. Much ado about nothing, imo. Larryw7, I like pie, Juno Beach and 1 other 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beyonder123 Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 On 1/24/2022 at 2:20 PM, Poekaymon said: CGC's "fun and games" or "prank" or "stunt" or whatever you want to call it here doesn't mean they aren't working on QC issues or don't take the rest of the business seriously. Only they aren't taking their company seriously because if suspicions are confirmed, a company has the ability to contact CGC and literally purchase grades. It's not "fun and games, or a prank, or a stunt. It was a bad business decision they refuse to explain themselves for. They advertise themselves as impartial. They should stick to that. El Toro Rojo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post troydivision1 Posted January 25, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted January 25, 2022 (edited) On 1/24/2022 at 1:23 PM, Poekaymon said: I realize I'm in the minority, but I can't say I care about this at all. It was obviously some fun and games; at worst, mistimed--probably woulda been better on April Fools Day. I do think it's pretty dumb, but not worth 9 pages of pitchforks. To each their own. Personally, I find it upsetting that CGC® (Certified Guaranty Company®) took money from a customer and gave them the EXACT grades they wanted. I'll ask this - Is this the first time they've done this OR the first time they have been caught doing it? Edited January 25, 2022 by Troy Division Juno Beach, El Toro Rojo, s-dali and 3 others 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
