• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

CBCS vs Itself, maybe CGC instead?
1 1

Started by ROBTOTHEC,

21 posts in this topic

ROBTOTHEC

ROBTOTHEC

Posted
Posted (edited)

I bought the TOS #49 at Motor City last may.  I get home and compare it to a Thor #165 i submitted myself that to me looked 8.5/9.0?  Can anyone explain how these are both 7.0?

Should I send one or both to CGC instead?   I'm baffled and very disappointed. 

 

tos497.0.thumb.jpg.83cabe7e54c4574cc61be3024ae4d169.jpgtos49b.thumb.jpg.c288a48db2608c213ac4427dd5241a4e.jpgthor165cgc7.0.thumb.jpg.a4760aaa4777cc7e5dd75ab1a3c77561.jpgthor165cgc7_0b.thumb.jpg.97c9d18621f02779ebfc51adfca2c3e5.jpgI bought the TOS #49 at Motor City Con last May.  I get home

 

There is nothing hidden.  Back covers show just like front.  No tears or creases, etc...

 

 

Edited by ROBTOTHEC
addl info
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ROBTOTHEC

ROBTOTHEC

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 10/1/2022 at 4:02 PM, darkstar said:

The 49's spine is a mess, no way that is an 8.5 or a 9. 

Right, that is why I said the Thor #165 looks like 8.5/9.0!  Either way how can the same grading company call them both 7.0?   This is what makes professional grading so frustrating and not accurate. 

Edited by ROBTOTHEC
addl info
Link to comment
Share on other sites
namisgr

namisgr

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 10/1/2022 at 3:58 PM, ROBTOTHEC said:

There is nothing hidden.  Back covers show just like front.  No tears or creases, etc...

What about the interior of the Thor?

From what I can see of the front cover, the lower right corner crease and slight blunting would put it around the 8.0 range for me.

Edited by namisgr
Link to comment
Share on other sites
thehumantorch

thehumantorch

Posted
Posted
On 10/1/2022 at 2:18 PM, ROBTOTHEC said:

The notes say nothing about any interior tears or writing or anything else. 

 They note what they want and their notes seem to be hit or miss.  
 

You’re grading a book inside a case and there could be defects on the covers or inside that are hidden by the case.  
 

I have a startling terror tales 11 that looks better than the assigned 4.5 grade but it has spaghetti stains on an interior page.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoMan

NoMan

Posted
Posted
On 10/1/2022 at 12:58 PM, ROBTOTHEC said:

I bought the TOS #49 at Motor City last may.  I get home and compare it to a Thor #165 i submitted myself that to me looked 8.5/9.0?  Can anyone explain how these are both 7.0?

Should I send one or both to CGC instead?   I'm baffled and very disappointed. 

 

tos497.0.thumb.jpg.83cabe7e54c4574cc61be3024ae4d169.jpgtos49b.thumb.jpg.c288a48db2608c213ac4427dd5241a4e.jpgthor165cgc7.0.thumb.jpg.a4760aaa4777cc7e5dd75ab1a3c77561.jpgthor165cgc7_0b.thumb.jpg.97c9d18621f02779ebfc51adfca2c3e5.jpgI bought the TOS #49 at Motor City Con last May.  I get home

 

There is nothing hidden.  Back covers show just like front.  No tears or creases, etc...

 

 

the entire inside of the comic is hidden

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Administrator
CGC Mike

CGC Mike

Posted
  • Administrator
Posted
On 10/1/2022 at 6:20 PM, Chaz G. said:
On 10/1/2022 at 5:34 PM, Zoinks said:

Isn't it against the rules to post CBCS slabs here?

Don't think so, but it is against the rules to sell them here.

Actually, it is against the terms of use.

20.  Posting images of competitors books, or promoting a competitors company in any way.  

However, the OP is asking about whether or not he should send these to CGC.  This is different than just posting an image of a competitors book in the "this week in your collection thread."  So, I am going to allow it.  

What I am not going to allow is the President of CBCS to come to our forum and Defend in any way the grades on these books.  Especially since he has been warned about similar issues in the past.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pantodude

Pantodude

Posted
Posted (edited)

There are some 8.5 CGC slabs for SA books with that much of a crease and blunting in the right front corner (assuming other corners are in better shape).  If that is the main problem here, depending on the price differential btwn 7.0 and at least 8.5 (I have no idea), may be worth a shot subbing to CGC.  

For example:

lf?set=path%5B2%2F3%2F4%2F6%2F6%2F23466428%5D&call=url%5Bfile%3Aproduct.chain%5D

And here's an 8.5 w/ more issues overall than your book:

lf?set=path%5B2%2F4%2F8%2F3%2F1%2F24831079%5D&call=url%5Bfile%3Aproduct.chain%5D

Edited by Pantodude
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ROBTOTHEC

ROBTOTHEC

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 10/1/2022 at 4:43 PM, thehumantorch said:

 They note what they want and their notes seem to be hit or miss.  
 

You’re grading a book inside a case and there could be defects on the covers or inside that are hidden by the case.  
 

I have a startling terror tales 11 that looks better than the assigned 4.5 grade but it has spaghetti stains on an interior page.

Since I was the owner of the book when I sent it in, I paged through the entire book as well as the other 9 that I sent.  I pre-graded what I thought they would be.  Having

said that I have been unbelievably accurate with about 40-50 that I have submitted to CGC.  I had pretty big variances with the ones I sent to CBCS.  In no way did I think this book was

a 7.0 or close or I never would have submitted it.  I had the same with a Batman #227 that I was sure was an 8.0.  Even the CBCS rep that was at the convention when I submitted kept

saying, "that's a really nice copy especially with the black cover."  I asked him if he thought it was an 8.0 and he said I'm not supposed to say but I think you're pretty spot on.  It came back 6.0!??

So yes, I think I am going to crack them open and send them to CGC.  I've been much happier with them. 

Edited by ROBTOTHEC
missed a word
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Tony S

Tony S

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)

Funny no one has mentioned grading notes.  They exist and they are there for all to see on CBCS books. 

The TOS 49 is just a loosely graded book. It happens. The TOS 49 is also a book graded fairly early on by CBCS. Unlike CGC, CBCS does not list the date a book was graded. But I can tell by the serial number that the TOS 49 was graded the first 15-16 months CBCS was open. I forget exactly when, but CBCS had been open about 16-18 months and had to revamp their web site. For reasons never explained  the original serial number sequencing could not be carried over to the new website. The original serial numbers were all numbers. After the website revamp serial numbers contain a few letters.  BTW, when looking up grading notes on those "old" serial numbers you have to add "00-" in front of the serial number listed on the label.

I believe the Thor has a hard to spot defect noted in the grading notes and 7.0 is probably pretty close to what CGC would give it.  Enlarge the picture and look at the area under Warlocks elbow. Then compare that to the note "lot (left) front cover color loss spotting". 

CBCS called it "color loss spotting". Looks like pretty good size fingerprints and smudges to me.  CGC is and always has been pretty hard on fingerprints, so the OP might be disappointed with the grade if resubmitted to CGC. 

Interesting aside, the TOS 49 you cannot look up grading notes.  There was discussion that a few serial numbers/sequences did not carry over to the new website. This must be one of those that did not carry over.  

So my vote to the OP is leave it them both alone. CGC is all but certain to grade the TOS 49 lower and likely to grade the Thor 165 near the same. 

Edited by Tony S
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Balls

Dr. Balls

Posted
Posted
On 10/1/2022 at 4:52 PM, CGC Mike said:

What I am not going to allow is the President of CBCS to come to our forum and Defend in any way the grades on these books.  Especially since he has been warned about similar issues in the past.  

I’m kinda hoping for a grading company presidential throw-down…

A9795238-99EA-41D8-AE4E-9346F1B75924.gif.c1b8bc0d229a372a0fb4ac94771dfda9.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sigur Ros

Sigur Ros

Posted
Posted
On 10/1/2022 at 10:22 PM, ROBTOTHEC said:

So yes, I think I am going to crack them open and send them to CGC.  I've been much happier with them. 

I've seen enough YT videos and QC threads to know you have a shot at hitting 9.8 with CGC.  ;)

Anyway, here are the notes on the Thor:

Screenshot_20221003-065343_Chrome.thumb.jpg.4844cd4c9a7f02e515b804c18ea3ea36.jpg

I find them to be more consistent and accurate, but you can always try CGC instead.

Report back though so we can see the look on your face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ROBTOTHEC

ROBTOTHEC

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 10/1/2022 at 6:02 PM, NP_Gresham said:

The Thor seems to be heavily stained around the price box

That 7.0 looks a bit of a gift to me.

I don’t see the 8.5 at all

Heavily Stained?   If anything there is a very slight barely noticeable "rubbing" transfer.  There is no type of staining unless I misunderstand what it is you are trying to point out?thor165c.thumb.jpg.0e2fa8c6fd28ab85183d303b6dd944c5.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cat

Cat

Posted
Posted
On 10/4/2022 at 10:02 PM, Dr. Balls said:

Oh my, I missed all the action. What happened with Timely?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
1 1
Go to topic listing