CGC recognizing “modern” books in Pedigrees 0

[DougC]

TLDR: CGC has become the defacto authority on recognizing Pedigrees; unfortunately, they have also been poor stewards of that responsibility.

Bias: I own 500+ “modern” comic books from the Savannah Pedigree and another 50+ from the Twin Cities, Fantucchio, and a couple Pedigrees not CGC recognized that are considered “modern”. Also, for reference, this is a post I made almost ten years ago about hoping to get my X-Men run recognized.

Since its inception in 2000 CGC has been a driving force in the comic book world and outside of the recent (and very), blatant money focused variety of encapsulation shenanigans they have been an overall positive influence, with the major exception being that of a refusal to acknowledge all of the books in pedigrees. This single action has had devastating results and harmed an entire generation of collectors for no other reason than ideological gatekeeping by boomers who refuse to come to terms with the circumstance that time itself drives forward despite their best efforts to prevent it.

Prior to CGC, collectors of Pedigrees have always had the same gatekeeping conversations…in the 60’s and 70’s many believed only books from the golden age should be acknowledged since Marvel books from the 60’s are not really keys. In the 80’s and 90’s Silver age finally gained wide acceptance with few detractors left to man the purity gates. Obviously in the 2010’s only mid-bronze was begrudgingly viewed as acceptable (a decision solely enforced by CGC), but never “moderns”… NEVER! WE MUST MAINTAIN THE DIGNITATY AND PURENESS OF COMICDOM, SHUN THE NEWBIES AND THE BOOKS THEY GREW UP WITH, SHUN THEM! AFTER ALL, 1973 WAS JUST FIVE YEARS AGO (circa; 2010s cigar smoking mustache twirling CGC suits).

In 2011, the Savannah Pedigree was acknowledged and CGC immediately set precedent that any post 1985 book would not be included. No official statement was ever given as to why, but when I asked at the booths during multiple conventions, I was told that:

“Comic books printed during the modern time frame are just too new to be considered part of any pedigree, in some cases millions of copies were produced, and due to direct marketing most of these examples were never purchased from a newsstand. These factors do not fall In line with what a pedigree should represent”

-This is from memory of multiple conversations had 10+ years ago

This was also partially acknowledged in a 2012 forum post from ASK CGC:

The original thread this was pulled from can be found here:

https://boards.cgccomics.com/topic/247790-pedigree-noted-on-moderns

The Savannah Pedigree encompassed over 40 thousand books and large portions of them were from 1986-2010. These modern examples where from both the newsstand and direct editions with many deep runs having multiple copies. Due to the size of this collection HA did not issue the large format COA for every book and stopped attempting to encapsulate moderns after the first batch did not receive the designation. I know of many examples were the HA receipt/COA was lost and entire runs of modern Savannah books could no longer be authenticated (the entire run of Nomad, last half of Namor, most of Silver Surfer, and some New Warriors and Quasar, all low value direct editions from the 90s). I am hopeful that these could still appear on the market someday with their authentication.

This mindset would also continue to destroy the moderns in the Twin Cities Pedigree sold by HA; but slightly change for the Fantucchio Pedigree. In the thread referenced above an updated post in 2017 provided proof that what was then viewed as “keys” were allowed to be slabbed under the pedigree designation. The example presented was Batman TAS #12. Unfortunately what is viewed as a “key” changes with popularity and the New X-Men #133 (1st app of Dust; a now $350 book) from Fantucchio was not encapsulated and lost during a raw bundle sale (I was out bid on this lot).

So why bring up this meandering rant now? I never liked the look of pedigree labels (mainly colors) and was trying to break the online submission form to allow a custom label and select the pedigree option at the same time. To do this I was using a run of bronze X-Men when I found out I could now select the pedigree option for all Modern books (previous I could not do this).

I created a thread about my shenanigans trying to get some clarity in ASK CGC here:

https://boards.cgccomics.com/topic/517290-pedigree-designation

While some specific questions were answered, ala the X-Men #1 (1991) could receive a pedigree designation they were purposefully vague when I asked about all moderns. After some deliberation, I decided to bite the bullet and make a very selected submission of books drawing only from newsstand versions with the HA large COA from the Savannah Pedigree. If this is successful then I will make another submission of direct edition books with the HA receipt or COA, Comiclink receipt (for Fantucchio), HA receipt or COA for Twin Cities, and finally various already encapsulated books from 2011 to today (many custom label books I had reslabbed) with the Savannah HA COA.

My overall hope is twofold:

1. That this will shine a brighter light on modern books that were part of pedigrees but denied the designation by CGC therefore giving collectors that grew up with these books a chance to own something that might have been out of reach from their favorite titles.
2. These books will be preserved as part of their rightful pedigree and not lost to time as so many have already.

So what is the downside?

I was lucky enough to receive a copy of books (that I had asked about) in the Savannah Pedigree and my fear is this:

1. CGC will still only recognize what they deem as “keys” regardless of newsstand/direct edition.
2. CGC will only recognize modern newsstand copies
3. CGC will only recognize direct edition copies if they are “keys”
4. CGC doesn’t have an actual stance and the grader that day will make a very subjective judgement based on their personal feelings of what they believe should be “allowed” in a pedigree.

Using X-Men (1991) as an example, there are multiple copies of each book until #24, and then it is sporadic until all single copies at #52 going forward. There are both newsstand copies and direct edition copies up until at least #16 (that is the last newsstand copy I have); #30 has two copies listed and one of them is a newsstand as it was encapsulated then auctioned on ebay in 2011 with a COA. Ghost Rider (1990) has the same pattern though thins out much sooner to single copies. Darkhawk is an outlier as it has only direct edition copies of every issue except two additional newsstand copies for issues #13 and #14 (I own these). Sleepwalker only has direct editions even though it is from the same time period. Multiple books post 1993 have two copies of issue #1, an example of this is Ghost Rider 2099 (1994) which has a second copy of #1 that is a newsstand, with the entire run in direct editions. I have been told there is a large cache of DC newsstands from the early 2000s when Harley Quinn received her own series but I have never seen them in person. I believe outside of increasingly rare second copies of first issues, most of the newsstand copies stopped being collected in mid-1994, as the GR in question is the last newsstand that I have actually seen with a HA COA.

In the interest of full transparency, I have submitted 13 books that have been cleaned and pressed, have the full HA COA, and are newsstand editions, which have the best chance of receiving a 9.8. These are all Marvel and from 1991-1992 (my next submission will be more DC focused if these all get the label).

1. X-Men (1991) #1
2. X-Men (1991) #2
3. X-Men (1991) #3
4. X-Men (1991) #4
5. X-Men (1991) #5
6. X-Men (1991) #6
7. X-Men (1991) #7
8. X-Men (1991) #8
9. X-Men (1991) #9
10. X-Men (1991) #10
11. X-Men (1991) #11
12. Darkhawk #13
13. Ghost Rider #15

Edited May 22, 2023 by DougC
format

[Terry JSA]

If a book is apart of a recognized pedigree, it should be acknowledged. Shouldn’t matter if it’s new or not. Just my .

[southern cross]

In the past, us collectors didn't need a grading company to tell us what a pedigree was. Books in collections were given pedigree status where the collectors and the market for them accepted them. 

There has been one collection of books that CGC said is a pedigree and I'm very doubtful of that. Also across the street that grading company issued a collection as a pedigree and I have a raw copy in the bronze age which has quite a bit of aging on the cover and I'm personally think it's dubious to call those set of books a pedigree. With that said I didn't pay a premium for the book.

If a silver age collection is deemed a pedigree and the collection has books up past the 90s and Jim lees X-Men.

Then all those books are from the pedigree collection as whether the collector bought them off a news stand, comic book store whatever. As long as it's a ORIGINAL collection of books then all books are from the pedigree.

[DougC]

So this was all a complete bust; despite CS stating that #1 & #4 would receive the pedigree, with the rest at the pleasure of the grader that day. None of them received the notation.

Quote

I just received grades back from a Pedigree submission (all had Heritage certs: Savannah). I was told through CS that at least #1 & #4 would receive it, but the others were "up to the graders", which is a terrible system.

All of the issues were pressed and cleaned by the same person and I have every confidence in their ability. Half of the order came back 9.6 or below with the exact same problems "light scuffing and bends to cover". I have never seen 9.6 grades consistently get grader notes (all of them had notes) like this and these were absolutely given additional "attention" due to a couple emails between CS, Graders, and myself.

The graders notes seem to be consistent with damage that comes from handling when removing the books from the bags without care or repeatedly doing so. I know this isn't punishment for trying to push the issue of CGC recognizing moderns in the Savannah pedigree but man it sure feels like it (especially going back on what was previously stated about #1 & #4).

 

[Sauce Dog]

If it was part of that pedigree collection it should get it. The cut off of 1985 makes no sense if the pedigree in question continues after that date and is well documented.