Mike's Rack Posted August 10, 2022 Share Posted August 10, 2022 On 8/10/2022 at 1:54 PM, revat said: he's being facetious I think. I mistakenly said people should call Blackrock, though I should have said Blackstone (the owners of CGC). Blackrock of course used to be owned by Blackstone. But they can call Larry Fink too, I don't mind. If I had known the founder of Blackstone was named Peter Peterson I would have tried to get some mileage out of that too… THE_BEYONDER 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted August 11, 2022 Author Share Posted August 11, 2022 @Buzzetta trying to get some of your questions officially answered here. It took cgc 25 days to admit they dun screwed da pooch on invisible books. Hopefully we'll get a quicker and better result here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzetta Posted August 11, 2022 Share Posted August 11, 2022 On 8/10/2022 at 10:44 PM, Iceman399 said: @Buzzetta trying to get some of your questions officially answered here. It took cgc 25 days to admit they dun screwed da pooch on invisible books. Hopefully we'll get a quicker and better result here. Another board member private texted me something that I forgot... Do you remember or know what the issue was when someone had added a cardboard wraparound to certain comics effectively making his own blanks for artists to draw on? I have a vague recollection of that and do remember it was spoken about on the boards but I cannot find anything. onlyweaknesskryptonite 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted August 11, 2022 Author Share Posted August 11, 2022 On 8/10/2022 at 10:47 PM, Buzzetta said: Another board member private texted me something that I forgot... Do you remember or know what the issue was when someone had added a cardboard wraparound to certain comics effectively making his own blanks for artists to draw on? I have a vague recollection of that and do remember it was spoken about on the boards but I cannot find anything. I recall but can't as well. Found this though Buzzetta and onlyweaknesskryptonite 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiparker824 Posted August 11, 2022 Share Posted August 11, 2022 I just want to know if I buy one of these UF4 acetate Frankensteins on eBay and detach the acetate cover and submit the book will I get back to a normal UF4 Facsimile blue label with a grade of a book that now has some extra holes? Or do I get a UF4 Acetate Variant coverless with a NG for a grade and a blue label? Or do I get a normal UF4 Facsimile purple label with a conserved notation? Or do I get a green label UF4 acetate variant with a qualified grade for the book minus the acetate cover removed? jcjames, Iceman399, Browns81 and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grendelbo Posted August 11, 2022 Share Posted August 11, 2022 (edited) When you sell out your standards to accommodate a gimmick (once again), you will lose credibility. It's sad. Edited August 11, 2022 by grendelbo southern cross 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaard Posted August 11, 2022 Share Posted August 11, 2022 I don't believe the word 'standards' has been in CGC's vocabulary for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigur Ros Posted August 11, 2022 Share Posted August 11, 2022 Why bother with a cover at all? May not get a 9.9 or 10, but... less stapling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADAMANTIUM Posted August 11, 2022 Share Posted August 11, 2022 just an fyi This thread title is so misleading that I'm surprised it is still here, CGC has done nothing of the sort, which is WHY it is a problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted August 11, 2022 Author Share Posted August 11, 2022 @CGC Mike just our daily bump in the search of answers. onlyweaknesskryptonite 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jyoders19 Posted August 12, 2022 Share Posted August 12, 2022 Why are retailers even allowed to submit books that have never gone onsale anywhere? When did that become a thing, just taking them off the printer and straight to CGC? Really defeats the whole purpose. Nick Furious 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ-4 Posted August 12, 2022 Share Posted August 12, 2022 On 8/9/2022 at 1:54 PM, Iceman399 said: CGC says that this was allowed because of a previous book "Stray Dogs" that had a acetate cover and extra staples. This came from diamond like that. This was not old stock that was unsold and then repurposed. That argument is garbage. This line 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaard Posted August 12, 2022 Share Posted August 12, 2022 So far, from what I can tell, 2 reasons for doing this have been given...the Stray Dogs thing and the fact that Crain did the artwork on the acetate. Both are downright stupid. MetalPSI and southern cross 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barth Posted August 12, 2022 Share Posted August 12, 2022 (edited) Delete Edited August 12, 2022 by Barth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted August 12, 2022 Author Share Posted August 12, 2022 Thanks for this answer. Hopefully the rest of the questions in this thread can be answered as well @CGC Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan. Posted August 12, 2022 Share Posted August 12, 2022 On 8/10/2022 at 10:47 PM, Buzzetta said: Another board member private texted me something that I forgot... Do you remember or know what the issue was when someone had added a cardboard wraparound to certain comics effectively making his own blanks for artists to draw on? I have a vague recollection of that and do remember it was spoken about on the boards but I cannot find anything. CGC graded them NG. Buzzetta 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leadkern Posted August 13, 2022 Share Posted August 13, 2022 On 8/9/2022 at 4:54 PM, Iceman399 said: Well it saddens me that @CGC Mike has informed us that CGC has changed their stance on married covers. I am not throwing Mike under the bus as he is just the messenger and has been a great help to the forums. What we know: You can staple a new cover to an old book and get a blue label with no annotations of extra staples. It was done by the "artist" on an acetate cover What we don't know: Can I do my own stapling? (as I would be the manufacturer) Do I have to have a 'print run'? (Can we do 1 of 1's)? How old of a book can I add a cover too? (This book was printed in 2021 and cover added in 2022) Does it have to be a con exclusive? Does it have to be an acetate cover? How much does it cost to get a 9.9 or 10.0? How will the label read? If I put an acetate cover on a Batman 1 from 1940 and the grade is a 9.8. Should I expect the label to read Batman 1 Iceman399 Variant CGC 9.8 1940 How many extra staples are acceptable? Can the cover from one book be added to the same book that is coverless with additional staples and still get a Blue label? Will CGC be able to differentiate between a coverless acetate and a regular copy with extra staple holes? How will these be graded? Does this mean that next year we can then put a foil cover over top of the acetate over top of the stock cover? CGC says that this was allowed because of a previous book "Stray Dogs" that had a acetate cover and extra staples. This came from diamond like that. This was not old stock that was unsold and then repurposed. That argument is garbage. I'll add more to this post as answers become clear, and if anyone else has any other questions they'd like asked feel free to post so that we can seek all the answers on this monumental change in comic grading. I hope we can get some real answers as I am working on a 1 of 1 acetate cover and I can't wait for CGC to put it in a nice shiny blue label holder. this. all of this. its absolutely disgusting that CGC is allowing this. Its so obviously the wrong decision that I feel slightly crazy that they keep digging in on the wrong one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted August 18, 2022 Author Share Posted August 18, 2022 @CGC Mike I trust cgc upper management has come up with answers to the vast questions. Maybe they can just admit they were wrong and this whole situation can poof like any mention of negativity. Larryw7 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
