• 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.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Heritage/ CGC Fraud?!

Started by clarkkentdds,

88 posts in this topic

awe4one

awe4one

Posted
Posted

Considering the outcry last time, don't you think CGC should be looking for restoration more closely? Especially on any comics that were offered from the Cage collection? They apparently take photos of all comics before grading. They could use that to compare. The mark is a dead giveaway. Of course they would "want" to check beforehand.... I bet the Census hasn't been changed this time either.

 

Hey, it's their credibility on the line again.....

 

Smelly indeed.....

 

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seank

seank

Posted
Posted

If those aren't the same book, I'll eat a bug. There's no way that two penciled "P"s could be that similar on two different books that old. Plus, the 8.5 looks much brighter than the 8.0. It makes me definitely think "cleaned and pressed."

 

As so many have said here before, "Buy the book, not the label."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hammer-migration

hammer-migration

Posted
Posted

True, J.C. BUT, $2K here an there MAY be a considerable amount to a Heritage EMPLOYEE who is in the position to bid and win their auction books (as the rules DO allow...on a regular basis). How many, in the same situation could resist the temptation of doing so being in that enviable position of having close-inspection priviledges and seeing defets upclose that could be REMOVED, resubmitted, and meet with a more favorable grading assessment.

We've already agreed that not all 9.4s are "created equal". The same holds true for 0.5s, 10.0s, and every grade in between. How fortunate for a lucky few to be able to confer with an in-house restoration expert, on which books have potential, be allowed to bid accordingly, win them, an profit handily by luck of close proximity and (sorry to say it) ridiculous Auction rules HEAVILY weighted against the cream of the crop being available to NON-employees at palatable auction prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted

The book is brighter for the same reason all of Heritage's books appear brighter than they did six months ago. They've been overexposing their catalogue photos. Everything is about twenty percent brighter than it is in real life.

 

While it's obvious the book has had some work done, I would be shocked if the book were cleaned and pressed. Owing to the nature of the process, a book that has been cleaned and pressed has been disassembled. Once a book has been taken apart, CGC, or anyone doing resto detection, will automatically assume the book has had work done. It's a major red flag and is something that they look for automatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe_collector

joe_collector

Posted
Posted

>>True, J.C. BUT, $2K here an there MAY be a considerable amount to a Heritage EMPLOYEE who is in the position to bid and win their auction books

 

Yeah, it still amazes me that people still bid on Heritage auctions, given that Heritage and their employees are allowed to bid and re-buy the comics. Now that this sort of internal arbitrage is proving quite profitable,

 

I doubt that any non-Heritage winners will be getting any deals, and certainly outside winnings will have 100% of the overgraded CGC books accounted for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CosmicBob

CosmicBob

Posted
Posted

I thought Steve B said that pressing generally involves putting the comic in a big press or piling lots of weight on it. It shouldn't need to be disassembled for that, should it?

 

And not all cleaning should need disassembly. If you use some kind of eraser on the mark, why would you have to disassemble the comic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
awe4one

awe4one

Posted
Posted

I thought Steve B said that pressing generally involves putting the comic in a big press or piling lots of weight on it. It shouldn't need to be disassembled for that, should it?

 

Apparently not. In his defense of grading the other Cage comics, he indicated there was no way to determine a pressed comic if done correctly (using books or weights). And taking a stain off a cover doesn't require disassembling I believe but I'll let the experts on this forum elaborate further.

 

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
awe4one

awe4one

Posted
Posted

Yeah, it still amazes me that people still bid on Heritage auctions, given that Heritage and their employees are allowed to bid and re-buy the comics. Now that this sort of internal arbitrage is proving quite profitable,

 

And pretty damn bold if you ask me. How long has it been between this and the last instance of supposed CGC/Heritage complicity? A little over 3 months maybe? I guess the coinees may be right.....everyone thinks us comics guys are insufficiently_thoughtful_persons. mad.gif

 

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted

Considering the outcry last time, don't you think CGC should be looking for restoration more closely?
Not all restoration is detectable, nor does CGC or others in the industry consider every technique to be restoration.

 

Especially on any comics that were offered from the Cage collection?
The graders aren't given that information, and if they were, it would bias the grade.

 

They apparently take photos of all comics before grading. They could use that to compare. The mark is a dead giveaway.
The graders aren't given that information, and if they were, it would bias the grade.

 

Hey, it's their credibility on the line again.....
Their credibility is intact to people willing to objectively listen to all sides on an issue and process information before coming to a conclusion. The amazing part of CGC's process--which they openly and publicly shared long before there ever was a Heritage--is that it's structured in what appears to me to be the optimal way to eliminate external bias.

 

Do they follow their own process for every customer? Nobody knows, although I've heard plenty of hypotheticals from people with no actual knowledge of what they're accusing CGC of. The last public outcry on this topic hardened Borock to what the ignorant masses have to say; he gave enough answers to get the point across, yet people still wouldn't believe it. What can they do to make people believe them other than tell you exactly what their process is?

 

If this were a court, the case would be thrown out within 10 minutes due to lack of evidence. Note that I'm only defending CGC here; Heritage's role is slightly shady in this. But they publicly admit they do it, so like it or lump it I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted

Hehe, yep, I'm saying what I'm sure they wish they could say. tongue.gif

 

I've been accused of being biased towards CGC before...I've pointed out their weaknesses often enough in these forums for objective people to hopefully realize that isn't the case. Objectivity and open-mindedness is my undying goal when it comes to complex issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted

A couple of observations: i) if the book had been cracked out of the 8.0 slab, and went through a proper pressing, then this may well explain the .5 increase in the 8.5 slab; ii) if the stain and Nic Cage comments were included in the 8.0 slab, and not the 8.5 slab, then it may be more an issue of CGC's recent policy of "no comments" than an actual cleaning. In other words, it is possible that the brighter cover, and the abscense of the stain at the ten cents may be corrections made through a graphics design tool like photoshop. Why? For aesthetic purposes. If you compare some of the scans Heritage took of books a year ago, it appears they took a few lessons in prepping the images before listing the comics. For the most part, their comics a year ago were much darker, and very little post-production went into the scans before listing. In the last year, I have noticed a big improvement in the presentation of all the scans appearing in the Heritage catalogue.

 

With regards to the Superman #5 in question, If you zoom the area of the cover of where you find the cover price/ten cents overture, you will notice an area above the 10 that looks like a stain, but it appears to have a faded appearance, as if it was lightened digitally. This would also explain the change in the hue/saturation of the yellows in the cover. The colours in the 8.5 look artificial, and it is in my opinion, that it might well have been achieved through some photo manipulation. Glancing at the scans one final time, I would say this book only went through a press, and that stain still exists, but becuase CGC no longer includes comments on their labels, this is why the book bears no comment about the stain. I believe the absence of the Nic Cage comment on the label was addressed in the previous post on the Marvel Mystery debate by CGC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe_collector

joe_collector

Posted
Posted

>>it is possible that the brighter cover, and the abscense of the stain at the ten cents may be corrections made through a graphics design tool like photoshop. Why? For aesthetic purposes. If you compare some of the scans Heritage took of books a year ago, it appears they took a few lessons in prepping the images before listing the comics.

 

If this is true, then I'd say "lessons" is a mild term, and it's more like gross misrepresentation.

 

That is, IF they manipulated the comic's appearance through some sort of graphics package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing