The Maxx Aschan Received Universal Grade - 10 Others Received Qualified Grades 6 6

[Shaun03]

I sent in 11 of The Maxx ashcans to be graded. When I received them back 10 of them had been graded as qualified and while I'm not a professional grader, I think they received reasonable grades for their condition. One of them came back as a universal grade and was very low. The book looks better than some of the others that were graded in the 7-8 range, but it received a 4.0. CGC's own description of qualified is:

A Qualified label is used by CGC for collectibles that have a significant defect that needs specific description, or to note an unauthenticated signature (one which was not witnessed by CGC). For example, a comic book with a missing coupon that otherwise grades 6.0 will receive a Qualified grade, avoiding a considerably lower grade. CGC would give this book a Qualified grade of 6.0 and a Label Text notation “COUPON MISSING FROM PAGE 10, DOES NOT AFFECT STORY.” Or, if the book is signed on the cover it may be noted as “NAME WRITTEN ON COVER IN MARKER.”

I reached out to CGC to ask about it, and if they would regrade it as qualified. Their response was simply that it is up to the grader to decide to how to grade it. Even if someone is not familiar with the ashcans, knowing that all of them were signed and numbered, it is clear that there is a signature and number, not some random marks. Along with that, 10 others in the same box that was sent in were graded as qualified. I'm not sure why they would even have a qualified category if their graders can just choose not to use it if they don't want to. It's a bit frustrating to have just one come back like this after spending the money for a professional service.

Has anyone else experienced this with the ashcans, or with any comic that was signed but not witnessed by CGC? Did you send it back in and get it graded as qualified? If so, did you leave it in the holder when you sent it back in, or did you remove it and send it back in? Would putting a note in the box asking for a qualified grade help?

Edited August 14, 2022 by Shaun03

[Shaun03]

Hey Steamed. I understand that, and that is what I am asking about. Ten of the books were graded as qualified, which I am happy with. It is the one that was graded as universal, my mistake for saying modern, that I am asking about. I will edit the original post to say universal. When I look at the submission page it says modern and not universal so I had the wrong term for the labels themselves stuck in my head.

CGC is telling me that it is up to the grader to use whichever label they want and that they cannot guarantee me anything if I were to send it back in. It could be regraded as qualified, or it could come back again with a universal label.

[zzutak]

On 8/14/2022 at 6:33 AM, Shaun03 said:

One of them came back as a universal grade and was very low.

I imagine you have a reason for being rather vague and not including a pic, but providing the actual numerical grade received or a pic of the encapsulated book would help us help you. 

[shadroch]

On 8/14/2022 at 6:59 AM, Steamed Hams said:

Correct. They started giving people this option a few years ago. They count the sig as a defect and downgrade accordingly for a Blue.

The books owner has the option. I don't think the grader has an option.  It doesn't sound like the books owner asked for this.

[zzutak]

While we're waiting for Shaun to provide a pic of the subject book/label. I'll leave y'all with this.    Everyone remembers Steve, right? 

[KirbyTown]

On 8/14/2022 at 8:33 AM, Shaun03 said:

I'm not sure why they would even have a qualified category if their graders can just choose not to use it if they don't want to.

Their public policy may be It's Up To The Grader, but I have yet to see a "Jack Kirby written..." that wasn't Blue.

At first I thought this might be related to eminence, but I've decided that the Green label is essentially a warning:

"Hey now, we see what you're doing; the guy's still breathing, buddy. To avoid future disappointment, we gently encourage you to participate in one of our not-at-all-profitable Private Signings."

[KirbyTown]

On 8/14/2022 at 11:02 AM, Steamed Hams said:

He hasn't worked for CGC in 15 years

So glad he's at MCS now 🥳

[KirbyTown]

On 8/14/2022 at 11:03 AM, Steamed Hams said:

That's because they're not on the cover.

...and who knows if it's legit anyway, which is even worse. "STAN LEE'S PERSONAL TAILOR. SS UNNECESSARY"

Edited August 14, 2022 by KirbyTown

[KirbyTown]

On 8/14/2022 at 11:11 AM, Steamed Hams said:

So add "usually" to my prior post

Noted 👍

[zzutak]

On 8/14/2022 at 9:02 AM, KirbyTown said:

I have yet to see a "Jack Kirby written..." that wasn't Blue.

Ask and ye shall receive! 

When it comes to CGC, there's almost always an exception to the rule.    But you're right -- the overwhelming majority of Kirby cover sigs have been certified with Universal (Blue Label) grades. 

[KirbyTown]

On 8/14/2022 at 11:19 AM, zzutak said:

Ask and ye shall receive! 

Thank you, sir 🙏

Also and all that

Edited August 14, 2022 by KirbyTown

[zzutak]

On 8/14/2022 at 9:24 AM, Steamed Hams said:

I never said they weren't out there, but Kirby died before signing on the cover became popular.

If I'm not mistaken, Jack Kirby passed away in 1994.  Creator cover signatures "became popular" as a result of creator appearances at comic book conventions, and comic conventions became more common after Overstreet produced his first Comic Book Price Guide in 1970.  Fandom definitely did not begin with the founding of CGC or the introduction of Signature Series labels. 

[zzutak]

On 8/14/2022 at 9:41 AM, Steamed Hams said:

CGC helped popularize signing on the front cover, obviously.

True enough, although it's probably more accurate to say that CGC commoditized/monetized creator signatures -- something that, prior to the founding of CGC in 2000, were generally requested purely out of admiration and respect. 

[Shaun03]

I see I missed a lot. I wasn't trying to be vague, I thought I was descriptive in what the issue was. I have no problem posting pictures though if they help. Below you'll see the yellow ashcan is the one that has a universal grade. I'm not experienced enough with grading to say it deserves a 7 or 8 or 7.4 getting down to the tenths. I will say that I do not personally feel that is a 4.0 book. I have also included a picture of one of the blues that received a 7.5 with a qualified label. I think the yellow is in better shape than that one, but at least as good of shape and certainly not 3.5 on the scale lower. I've also included a snippet from the CGC grading page showing that out of the group only one was given a universal label.

The reason there was no picture from the start is because I'm interested in knowing if anyone has experienced this with other comics, whether they are Maxx ashcans or any book not signed in front of CGC, and were they able to get it regraded with a qualified label? If so, did you send it back in still in the slab with some sort of note or something asking to be regraded as qualified? Or did you crack it open and send it back in raw and take your chances? I'm leaning away from sending it back in without removing it from the slab because it seems like they would either refuse to regrade it and just send it back, or would open it and regrade it as universal because that is what the label is now. Unless someone has done this before and there is a way to request them to regrade it as qualified.

[MetalPSI]

I had requested a blue 2 be graded with a blue label, it came back a 6.0, probably would have been a 9.2 green

Thats how I thought it worked, not sure why they "decided" to go with a blue for that yellow. Very odd 

Nice grabs on the 1 and 3 blacks! What are the numbers on those if you don't mind sharing? We are keeping track of how many are accounted for, it would be appreciated @Shaun03

[Shaun03]

Thanks. No problems sharing. I've included pictures of the labels below in case I mistype the number. I also included the black #2 I have, in case you don't have it, it was graded when I bought it. I'm not sure why the pictures are posting upside down.

EDIT: I just got to thinking you might mean the number written on the cover so I added that in parenthesis after the CGC number.

1 - 4078327006 (On cover: 27)

2 - 0798275002 (On cover: 5)

3 - 4078327007 (On cover: 9)

Edited August 14, 2022 by Shaun03

[Shaun03]

I didn't receive any grader notes for any of the ashcans. The only kind of notes were the comments shown in the snippet about name and number written on cover.

[zzutak]

Thanks for the pic, Shaun.  Condition-wise, your Universal 4.0 looks comparable to your Qualified copies.  Since there are absolutely no Grader Notes (other than the "written on cover" notation), it's impossible to know what the CGC Grader saw.  I can tell you this with certainty, though: a cover signature in marker is, by itself, not nearly enough to result in a Universal (Blue Label) Grade of 4.0.

For what it's worth, I've never seen a book with an unwitnessed cover signature awarded a Qualified (Green Label) Grade less than 7.0.  That's not to say that such encapsulations don't exist, only that I've never seen one.  So this may explain the choice of labels, but it doesn't explain the numerical grade. 

Finally, Qualified Grades are awarded at the discretion of the CGC Grader; they cannot be requested by the submitter.  I hope this helps. 

[Shaun03]

On 8/14/2022 at 4:00 PM, zzutak said:

Thanks for the pic, Shaun.  Condition-wise, your Universal 4.0 looks comparable to your Qualified copies.  Since there are absolutely no Grader Notes (other than the "written on cover" notation), it's impossible to know what the CGC Grader saw.  I can tell you this with certainty, though: a cover signature in marker is, by itself, not nearly enough to result in a Universal (Blue Label) Grade of 4.0.

For what it's worth, I've never seen a book with an unwitnessed cover signature awarded a Qualified (Green Label) Grade less than 7.0.  That's not to say that such encapsulations don't exist, only that I've never seen one.  So this may explain the choice of labels, but it doesn't explain the numerical grade. 

Finally, Qualified Grades are awarded at the discretion of the CGC Grader; they cannot be requested by the submitter.  I hope this helps. 

Thanks for explanation and the examples. It seems silly to me to create an entirely different label with a specific reason spelled out and then not use that criteria. Maybe it really is a 4.0 book though and there is something that I am not seeing. I did miss another red cover when I went through my collection though so I guess I'll crack it open and send it back in with that one and see what happens. I appreciate the help from you, and everyone so far.

[Gaard]

"It's the grader's choice."

What is the criteria?