Heritage/ CGC Fraud?!

[PovertyRow]

Arman - I was actually responding to the Its almost impossible to make any kind of CGC label 'shade' comparison from earlier/ later books when you also factor in things like storage conditions, exposure to sunlight etc.

 

I agree that storage conditions etc can impact colors, but the differences between the cgc plastic itself is what I was going for and this is what I was responding to.

[Bronty]

Bruce, it's not just you. The books with older invoice #s have a different shade of blue label than the newer ones. I have noticed this myself. The more recently graded books have a considerably lighter label in my experience.

[Aman619]

oh.

.

.

.

.

.

.

never mind.

,

,

,

,

,

,[!@#%^&^]!

[PovertyRow]

[!@#%^&^]!

 

HEY! I heard that!

[clobberintime]

Not going to really add anything to the conspiracy theories here but just a few thoughts and notes. I seriously doubt that there is an overt "deal" between the 2 parties - however there is the appearance of inpropriety which can be just as bad. It just does not look good. I still buy from heritage - they put up some hard to find stuff and sometimes there are deals. They do manipulate scans though. I have noticed it on many books. For example look at the last FF ann. 1 they sold. Cover was made to look near white! The cover is supposed to be a very light blue and they brightened it up so much that it appeared white. Have seen this done a several othr books too. But I am sure lots of folks do that.

[joe_collector]

Their back cover scans are getting stupid, as they've lightened them up so much, that you can't even make out where the cover ends and the white background begins.

 

Must be made out of Chameleon Paper.

[comicwiz]

I think its naive of anyone to believe that Heritage does not do anything to a "raw" scan to improve its appearance. This is an auction house who's bread and butter is consignment. Heritage must excercise a certain level of quality control for all books on auction, as their customer must be satisfied that Heritage has done everything to maximize their clients return on investment.

 

I don't have any proof that the image was manipulated, but I DO KNOW for a fact that the cover's hue/saturation levels are not balanced on the 8.5. If its a scanner calibration issue, then its A DEFINITE ISSE as the stain which was previously evident in the 8.0 is no longer visible. It is in my opinion that the "fading" evident in the 8.5 (when compared to its earlier 8.0 scan) is not something that can be possibly achieved through a simple scanning procedure, or buying a better scanner! The image itself needs to be manipulated to achieve these results. It is also in my opinion that there appears to be some reworking of contrast on the 8.5 scan. The other thing worth mentioning is that "circular" and "square" objects, like the cover price overture, and the CGC label, can easily be manipulated seperately from the rest of the book, as any half-decent photo imaging tool will contain a circular and square marquee in its toolset.

 

I'm rehashing these points as I have my doubts that CGC or Heritage is involved in any fraudulant activity, as the subject implies. The other point worth noting is that I have purchased CGC books on ebay many times, that exhibited defects that were not evident on the scan. Whatever the reason, not all sellers are able to do their own image-hosting, and have to rely on mediocre imaging techniques. Because most sellers have a "no refund" policy on CGC items, disagreement over a grade is something that must be resolved prior to placing a bid. To avoid the fiasco of disagreement, I opt to use the same barrage of questions for raw books as I do with CGC books before placing my bid.

[seank]

Regarding fraud, misrepresentation, and "puffing":

 

Fraud is a big and complex issue with many legal elements that must be proven to make a valid case. "Puffing" is basic sales talk that doesn't reach the level of fraud but isn't quite the whole truth. (See, for example, any conversation with an automobile salesman.) What Heritage (with or without CGC as a co-conspirator) may be doing here may be ethically suspect, but probably doesn't come up to the level of fraud. First, there has to be an intent to deceive. Heritage is selling a book that was graded 8.5 (or 8.0) by CGC. They are representing that they're selling an 8.5 (or an 8.0) book. For this to be fraud, they would have to sell you a book that is 6.0 while claiming it's 8.5. For CGC books, that could be possible. I've seen some artfully worded auctions on eBay in which this could happen. For raw books, proving the misrepresentation would be difficult given the variety of grading opinions and the subjective nature of grading. So essentially, if Heritage is stating that a book is CGC 8.5 and the book you get is CGC 8.5, then no fraud. If the book was originally 8.0 then mysteriously became 8.5, there's something going on, but it ain't fraud.

 

If you folk are interested, I'll do some research into what's required for a true fraud cause of action and post it here.

[aardvark88]

Disagree w/ bronty. Would say the newer Cgc labels are darker blue compared to last year's.

[fantastic_four]

They could also remove some dirt/soiling with wonder bread

Wonder bread takes off cover soiling? REALLY? I've never heard that, but I've been wondering for quite a while if there was a way of removing dirt which left nothing behind. Subtractive procedures like this should NOT be considered restoration; any kind of removal procedure which leaves no detectable trace above the microscopic level should be fair game.

[greggy]

Wonder bread takes off cover soiling? REALLY?

 

Sean L. (zillatoy) mentioned that the last time regarding the other cage book that had the pencil mark removed.

[fantastic_four]

And I dont think they retouched anything on the book. You have to believe that Heritage would not be THAT stupid! Its not worth it. Especially since that doesnt actually improve the actual book---something they seem to have BETTER methods of accomplishing!!!

Last year Heritage announced that Matt Nelson was going to be working with them in some capacity which I don't think they disclosed in the public announcement I saw. I just searched the weekly newsletter archive and the press release sections of Heritage's site, but couldn't find the announcement I had seen last year. I distinctly remember seeing it, though, because I've conversed on and off with Matt for the last few years and thought it sounded like great news for him. I'm pretty sure the announcement came within 2-4 months after Ed Jaster joined Heritage.

 

Since Matt is mostly known for restoration work, and since he is extremely skilled at techniques which are extremely minimal and not detectable above the microscopic level, I also remember thinking that they were bringing him on board to do light work on books. I do remember the article not saying exactly what he'd be doing, and I remember that I either e-mailed him to congratulate him or I meant to do it. If my memory is serving me correctly and Heritage and Matt hooked up for a while, then it's possible that they pulled back from a public relationship with him once they realized that some people wouldn't be happy with the notion that they're cracking books out of slabs and performing nonintrusive and subtractive procedures on them to make them look better. Keep in mind that this is all hypthetical speculation; I have no idea what Heritage is or isn't doing. But I am very sure they publicly announced a relationship with Matt last year not longer after Jaster joined.

 

I don't see this as big a deal it's being made out to be on Heritage's end, but I'm still undecided about it. I do know that the vast majority of collectors have a negative viewpoint of EVERY type of restoration, no matter what type it is, more out of ignorance and/or fear than out of an informed opinion about restorative procedures. If Heritage has been doing the kind of work on books it's being rumored they're doing, I lean heavily towards the probability that they're getting more negative press than they deserve for such minor procedures, but it's an ethical dilemma that still has territory yet to be explored (at least in these forums), so I may change my mind about it later. Pressing, erasing, and invisible cleaning; it's all so minor and undetectable that I find it difficult to see why we should get worked up about it.

[BronzeBruce13]

Wonder bread takes off cover soiling? REALLY? I've never heard that, but I've been wondering for quite a while if there was a way of removing dirt which left nothing behind. Subtractive procedures like this should NOT be considered restoration; any kind of removal procedure which leaves no detectable trace above the microscopic level should be fair game.

 

Straight from SB's mouth when I questioned him about some of the Heritage books. I mentioned that on my first submission over 2 years ago, I had lightly erased some minor soiling not knowing I could damage the surface... and he recommended NOT using an eraser. He suggested bread instead. I think he mentioned WonderBread™, but I'm not positive. I doubt it matters as long as its soft.

 

I also remember Zillatoy mentioning it as well. I have not tried it and I don't know to what extremes it will improve a book either... only that its said to help in certain instances.

 

I have a feeling more "CGC legal tricks/techniques" will surface now that its being discussed. In fact, have you read MN's site and what services he offers to do that is not considered restorative work? I only wish I would have saved a few keys I thought were better than the grade and squished 'em for a month under 200 graphic novels and fed them bread 'til they shined brighter

[rob_react]

Beyond the conspiracy, they do have someone doing resto detection on their raw books, so that could be the "official" job description.

[fantastic_four]

Beyond the conspiracy, they do have someone doing resto detection on their raw books, so that could be the "official" job description.

Yes, absolutely. I remember thinking that too now that I remember back. But I also remember that the only reason I knew about him working with them is because it was in one of those press release e-mails Heritage sends out...I'm not sure why I can't find that announcement anymore on their site with all the rest of the old ones listed there.

 

Matt Nelson is an upstanding guy in my experience...if the industry decides this light removal type of work is unethical, I fully expect he'll change his approach to doing it.

[Kevin Boyd]

As I understand it, many restoration experts like Matt Nelson and Susan Cicconi offer an "unrestoration" service as well (i.e. removing professional restoration from books).

 

I have no idea if this is the case, but if I ran a major auction house, and I knew that the purple label was the kiss of death, then I would definitely consider hiring or having a business relationship with a restoration expert so that they could be on hand to (a) detect restoration before submitting the books to CGC and (b) if possible, professionally REMOVE that restoration (preferrably before but most likely after CGC has graded the book and detected restoration - basically telling the person where to look).

 

IMO I don't see how either practice could be considered unethical.

 

Whether or not the seller discloses that the book was unrestored or pressed or touched up with Wonder bread or whatever is another issue altogether. Since there is currently no standard practice on revealing the history of individual books for sale then I would say that they are not under any kind of imperatives (moral or legal) to reveal that information to potential buyers.

 

Kev

 

 

 

 

 

 

[joe_collector]

>>I have no idea if this is the case, but if I ran a major auction house

 

I would hope that if you ran an Auction House, you'd make it your business to provide the best auction system, maximize your customer service and get the best quality books available.

 

Instead of "doing a Heritage" and competing with buyers and sellers by internally purchasing listed books and then reselling them, resubmitting them, or otherwise keeping their dirtly little toes in a few different pools.

 

I've said it before, but Heritage needs to decide if they're an auction house, an arbitrage business or a buyer and seller of Heritage-owned comics, since the balancing act can't continue forever, and they know it.

[Smokinghawk]

My 3-year-old son will "unrestore" any book of your choosing, for only $1.

 

[hammer-migration]

...Pay no attention to those bidding employees behind the curtain! The great and powerful Mega$aur has spoken! (Mega has the best inventory on the planet but the manner in which they're offered DOES leave much to be desired). Could you imagine having Matt's abilities and be given free reign to BID and WIN books that he can examine all day long, to see what subtle improvements can be made to nudge a grade up a notch or two? Like giving a fox the keys to the henhouse. Nothing against Matt. Opportunity knocks, and you can play by the rules (as skewed as they are), you've got to answer the door. The failing, the disappointment and disillusionment to bidders is all RULES (or should I say, lack of them) induced. There's no fraud. The rules just aren't what everyone is used to. You don't like rules that HEAVILY favor the "house", don't play the game.

[Bugaboo-migration]

You don't like rules that HEAVILY favor the "house", don't play the game.

Exactly. I've never even put my token on the game board. They've had a couple of books that I wanted, but I refuse to play by those rules.