Label Modifications

[drbanner]

So will Friesen list the conservation work he's performed on each book, or will CGC have to play a guessing game?

 

I'm sure Chris will provide detailed lists of his work to his clients...who may, or may not, pass that information along to CGC should they choose to submit.

[skybolt]

So will Friesen list the conservation work he's performed on each book, or will CGC have to play a guessing game?

 

I'm sure Chris will provide detailed lists of his work to his clients...who may, or may not, pass that information along to CGC should they choose to submit.

 

So if Friesen is performing staple replacement work, would he try to position the staples perfectly so it's difficult to spot, or will he do it in a way where CGC can easily detect it?

 

If this infomation isn't directly passed on to CGC, then I doubt whether the original submitter would give CGC this data.

[burntboy]

I have to disagree here...I think making the labels more technical in nature make certification more precise and thus create a "this is the actual state of the book" attitude that collectors will actually embrace rather than distance themselves from...

 

Gimme a break. Jim is talking about "new collectors", who barely understand the current, rather simplistic, system. To be honest, I don't know ALL of the ramifications of the myriad potential label combinations that will present themselves under this new system, and I'm not sure anyone does.

 

So how does anyone think the average guy on the street will understand it?

 

 

 

the "newbie" or "seasoned" collector who don't/didn't want anything to do with RESTORED books, need look no further than the APPARENT on the label. if it's there, it means it was FORMERLY labeled RESTORED, whether it is now described as CONSERVED, RESTORED or TRIMMED, it was once destined for a PLOD.

 

don't want anything to do with restored books, then just stay away from anything in an APPARENT label.

 

kinda/sorta/maybe interested - you now have a LOT of info to digest, but at least it's all there for your consideration.

 

i was befuddled at first, but thought that if you don't want resto'd books, it's not that hard to stand clear if you just pay a bit of attention...............what's confusing is the myriad of new label designations that you might have to wade through, IF INTERESTED..................IMHO

[The Black Hand ®]

About staple replacemet. Although it should be discosed, it's one thing that doesn't bother me all that much particularly since the alternative, rusty staples eating away at delicate paper, is a horrible thing. I'b buy books like that.

[burntboy]

[i just don't see this change as bad for new or old collectors...

 

Sure it is...any new collector that looks at a slab is more than likely to be attracted by, and understand, the colors than a complicated numbering scheme. CGC is catering to die-hard collectors with this change. And if limiting the appeal of their slabs is the goal? They've succeeded tremendously...

 

Jim

 

i already said it once before, but what the hell;

 

"NEW COLLECTORS" who aren't interested in "restored" books need look no further than the word APPARENT and then get the heck out of Dodge - end of story..................because it'll either be restored, conserved (restored) or trimmed (restored). nothing else to really have to understand.

 

the confusion is for those seemingly few collectors who might want to purchase one of the new APPARENT books - but i guess i feel that the additional info can only be helpful in understanding what you'd be getting. the toughest part will be trying to establish prices for all the new apparents and that's something that will shake out over time. i suspect something like Matt Nelson's value chart from his site might be similar to what we'll see over a few years. and i always felt that it made sense. the less resto, the higher percentage of non-resto a book should garner.................

[burntboy]

CGC is making collecting safer by fine tuning their labels with more data...yeah the colors are changing but the data will be more precise..

 

I keep hearing this, but I don't really see it for the 95%+ of the market that deals exclusively in unrestored, Universal CGC books. What are they getting out of this stupidity?

 

Joe, that's an interesting point you have there.

 

if 95% of the market only deals with unrestored books, then why are we all in such an uproar over changes that will likely only affect the other 5%??

 

you don't want/care about resto'd books - stay away from all old purple labels and all new Apparent labels - simple.................

[Red Hook]

I still think this small change to the labels would make it easier to distinguish, especially in a scan on ebay. Simply place the "Apparent" designation in a white box with blue type. Could do the same with qualified grade.

 

[Red Hook]

And I'll repost my redesign of the back of the label.

 

[Sal]

one of the main reasons defenders of this change touted in the months prior to the release of the new labels was that the Purple colour "stigmatised" the book by being different.

 

(shrugs)

 

i am failing to see how differentiating the bulk of the label in any way will alleviate this particular concern, even if i agree with Red's design modification suggestion.

 

 

of course, i think the whole "purple stigma" issue is a non-starter, but it's not me you have to convince, unfortunately

[Ron_Nasty]

RESTORED CONSERVED APPARENT HAMMERED CGC'D PGX'D

 

STAY AWAY FROM THIS!!!

[nearmint]

Here's the gist of what I'll be emailing to Scott:

 

I'm cool with eliminating the purple label. I do believe there's a stigma against them.

 

I don't like the word CERTIFIED to describe unrestored books. All books are certified by CGC, and there's nothing about that word that denotes unrestored in my mind. Stick with the UNIVERSAL label, or go to an UNRESTORED label. That would be the most descriptive.

 

I don't like the delineation between RESTORED and CONSERVED. Tear seals, reenforcement, ect. are clearly restoration. Let's keep the restored label and forget about conserved. As a result, there's no need for the APPARENT label. Keep the RESTORED label.

 

I'm a big fan of the ten-point scale, but not the 11-point scale. Books with the least amount of resto should be given a "1" on the scale, not a zero. Books with "zero" resto are unrestored! So the scale should be 1-10, not 0-10.

 

That's it. Blue labels all around that simply say UNRESTORED or RESTORED, with a ten-point scale to illustrate the degree of restoration. The result are labels that do provide more info than the old labels, but at the same time keep it simple.

[UnDeadChihuahua-migration]

So will Friesen list the conservation work he's performed on each book, or will CGC have to play a guessing game?

 

I'm sure Chris will provide detailed lists of his work to his clients...who may, or may not, pass that information along to CGC should they choose to submit.

 

For the work to qualify as Conservation, the book would have to go directly from PCS to CGC along with a letter stating what was done.

 

So comic owners could choose to gamble on submitting the books themselves in the hopes of getting a universal grade. But if the conservation is found, the book would then be considered restored instead of conserved.

[skybolt]

Here's the gist of what I'll be emailing to Scott:

 

I'm cool with eliminating the purple label. I do believe there's a stigma against them.

 

I don't like the word CERTIFIED to describe unrestored books. All books are certified by CGC, and there's nothing about that word that denotes unrestored in my mind. Stick with the UNIVERSAL label, or go to an UNRESTORED label. That would be the most descriptive.

 

I don't like the delineation between RESTORED and CONSERVED. Tear seals, reenforcement, ect. are clearly restoration. Let's keep the restored label and forget about conserved. As a result, there's no need for the APPARENT label. Keep the RESTORED label.

 

I'm a big fan of the ten-point scale, but not the 11-point scale. Books with the least amount of resto should be given a "1" on the scale, not a zero. Books with "zero" resto are unrestored! So the scale should be 1-10, not 0-10.

 

That's it. Blue labels all around that simply say UNRESTORED or RESTORED, with a ten-point scale to illustrate the degree of restoration. The result are labels that do provide more info than the old labels, but at the same time keep it simple.

 

You know what Jeff, I wouldn't mind it if your scenario was adobted. The conserved/resto thing is really confusing to a lot of us.

[Timulty]

one of the main reasons defenders of this change touted in the months prior to the release of the new labels was that the Purple colour "stigmatised" the book by being different.

 

(shrugs)

 

i am failing to see how differentiating the bulk of the label in any way will alleviate this particular concern, even if i agree with Red's design modification suggestion.

 

 

of course, i think the whole "purple stigma" issue is a non-starter, but it's not me you have to convince, unfortunately

 

Wasn't that the purpose of those labels? I mean, you wanted to avoid a restored comic due to 1: Perceived Worth 2: Possible bad restoration techniques?

[PovertyRow]

Wasn't that the purpose of those labels? I mean, you wanted to avoid a restored comic due to 1: Perceived Worth 2: Possible bad restoration techniques?

 

It depends. Paying full "unrestored market value" is foolish, of course. But "perceived worth"? If one perceives it to be worth, say 25% of guide and you can get it for that, you're doing fine.

 

The thing with the grading is "Pro" restoration implies the proper materials (and hopefully techniques) are used. It is, unfortunately, one of the problems with a slabbed restored. You can't really examine what you are getting beyond the front and back surfaces.

[whetteon]

one of the main reasons defenders of this change touted in the months prior to the release of the new labels was that the Purple colour "stigmatised" the book by being different.

 

i am failing to see how differentiating the bulk of the label in any way will alleviate this particular concern, even if i agree with Red's design modification suggestion.

 

And that's the whole point. The market decided that PLOD books weren't worth the same price as Blue labels. So trying to fix the "stigma" that is associated with PLOD books is half-arsed backwards. It's like being disappointed that used cars don't get the same value as new cars so the solution of placing used and new cars in the same car lot can only be meant to confuse the issue enough to possibly get just one more sell out of the customer.

 

The market has spoken on PLODs. I guess various individuals weren't happy about that.

[joe_collector]

It's like being disappointed that used cars don't get the same value as new cars so the solution of placing used and new cars in the same car lot can only be meant to confuse the issue enough to possibly get just one more sell out of the customer.

 

That's a pretty fair comparison.

[action1kid]

Oh that is such a good point!

[nearmint]

one of the main reasons defenders of this change touted in the months prior to the release of the new labels was that the Purple colour "stigmatised" the book by being different.

 

i am failing to see how differentiating the bulk of the label in any way will alleviate this particular concern, even if i agree with Red's design modification suggestion.

 

And that's the whole point. The market decided that PLOD books weren't worth the same price as Blue labels. So trying to fix the "stigma" that is associated with PLOD books is half-arsed backwards. It's like being disappointed that used cars don't get the same value as new cars so the solution of placing used and new cars in the same car lot can only be meant to confuse the issue enough to possibly get just one more sell out of the customer.

 

The market has spoken on PLODs. I guess various individuals weren't happy about that.

 

No one has said that PLODS should sell for the same price as blue labels. Literally, NO ONE.

 

The problem is that books with only slight resto often don't sell any better than books with moderate or extensive, when clearly a book with a small tear seal is not in the same category as a book with major piece replacement.

[joe_collector]

The problem is that books with only slight resto often don't sell any better than books with moderate or extensive, when clearly a book with a small tear seal is not in the same category as a book with major piece replacement.

 

Then why is everyone so hellbent on getting rid of the PURPLE label and the CGC RESTORED notation? All that info could easily be displayed on the current design, and without the need to screw up the CGC color-coded standards that have been in place for six years.