I think CGC should slow down with the Pedigree designations. They are cheapening it. 1 1

[jimbo_7071]

On 10/13/2023 at 4:00 PM, lou_fine said:

Correct me if I am wrong which would not be surprising, but I believe the overwhelming majority of the copies that we have seen here on the boards from these 3 "pedigree" collections would grade out only in the CGC 5.5 to 7.5 grade range, with very very few in CGC 9.0 or above. 

I haven't studied the collections, but my only Cookeville is an 8.0.

This is the only probable Cookeville I've seen for sale lately; it's a 9.0.

I've seen many mid-grade books out there, too, though. Once more books get slabbed, it'll be easier to get a handle of the distribution of grades.

I haven't seen enough slabbed Eldon books to get a clear idea of the average grade, but I have seen some nice ones.

Of the 466 Harold Curtis books sold in the May 2006 Heritage auction, 206 were 7.5 or above. Of those, 57 were 9.0 or above. So it was no Mile High collection, but there were more nice ones than what your post suggested.

[zzutak]

On 10/13/2023 at 1:00 PM, lou_fine said:

Correct me if I am wrong which would not be surprising, but I believe the overwhelming majority of the copies that we have seen here on the boards from these 3 "pedigree" collections would grade out only in the CGC 5.5 to 7.5 grade range, with very very few in CGC 9.0 or above.  Definitely nothing or nowhere even close to what we would see from the overwhelming majority of the Church, Allentown, or Promise pedigrees.

Would both technically correct but somewhat inaccurate be a possibility?   

From a strict CGC-certified grade perspective, The Harold Curtis Collection is probably the nicest of the three, with approximately 40% of the books in CGC 7.5 VF- or better, 40% of the books in various shades of FN (CGC 5.0 VG/FN to CGC 7.0 FN/VF), and 20% of the books in CGC 4.5 VG+ and under.  The cited percentages are based on these 476 archived HA sales.

I've always regarded the New Hampshire books as an exceptional collection.  However, because the collection consists primarily of westerns (which, as a genre, have always had relatively low market values), very few of the books have ever been certified.  Of the 175 archived HA sales, only about 3 dozen involved CGC certified books (but almost all were CGC 7.5 VF- or better).  Like you, I've always regarded the Cookeville and Eldon collections as more mid-grade than high-grade compilations (from a strict "percent of collection" perspective).  However, each collection does have stunning high-grade examples.

The differences of opinion regarding "pedigree worthiness" being expressed here may stem from a misreading/misunderstanding of Criterion #4 of CGC's four pedigree criteria:

As one can see, criterion #4 above (the high-grade criterion) has an interesting qualifier; namely, that a large portion of a pedigree collection may be technically mid-grade, as long as most of those mid-grade specimens are the best known examples of the issue.  I regard this qualifier as "wiggle room" that wasn't necessary when CGC declared it's first ten approved/recognized pedigrees in 2000. 

[darkstar]

On 10/12/2023 at 7:18 PM, manetteska said:

Which Pedigree(s) do you feel cheapen "it"?

The Stan Lee's Personal Hairdresser Collection was the nail in the coffin.

[Superman2006]

On 10/13/2023 at 7:04 PM, darkstar said:

On 10/12/2023 at 7:18 PM, manetteska said:

Which Pedigree(s) do you feel cheapen "it"?

The Stan Lee's Personal Hairdresser Collection was the nail in the coffin.

But that's a collection, and not a pedigree.  I don't recall seeing any CGC requirements to get a collection notation on the label. It might just take a phone call to the right person at CGC and the promise to slab a specified number of books (possibly thousands?). Maybe someone else can shed more light on CGC's requirements for a collection notation.

[lou_fine]

On 10/13/2023 at 7:43 PM, Superman2006 said:

Maybe someone else can shed more light on CGC's requirements for a collection notation.

Lucky for you that I had a lot of free time on my hand today and was able to do in-depth detailed research to find out the answer for you as per an astute boardie here:    

On 10/13/2023 at 7:43 PM, Superman2006 said:

It might just take a phone call to the right person at CGC and the promise to slab a specified number of books (possibly thousands?).

 

[lou_fine]

On 10/13/2023 at 2:50 PM, zzutak said:

The Harold Curtis Collection is probably the nicest of the three, with approximately 40% of the books in CGC 7.5 VF- or better, 40% of the books in various shades of FN (CGC 5.0 VG/FN to CGC 7.0 FN/VF), and 20% of the books in CGC 4.5 VG+ and under.  The cited percentages are based on these 476 archived HA sales.

As I had alluded to rather poorly may I say, the use of any auction archives to estimate the "average" condition for these 3 pedigrees would be clearly skewed to the upside since there is much less incentive to have the lower grade copies go through the expensive certification process.  Especially in the case of so many of the raw copies from these 3 collections that we have seen on the boards here before they came up with the CGC pedigree designation for them.    

 

On 10/13/2023 at 2:50 PM, zzutak said:

As one can see, criterion #4 above (the high-grade criterion) has an interesting qualifier; namely, that a large portion of a pedigree collection may be technically mid-grade, as long as most of those mid-grade specimens are the best known examples of the issue.

Totally agree with this qualifier when it was used for the Lost Valley Collection which consisted primarily of books from the much harder and rarer to find time period of the latter part of the 1930's.    

Edited October 14, 2023 by lou_fine

[zzutak]

On 10/13/2023 at 9:49 PM, lou_fine said:

As I had alluded to rather poorly may I say, the use of any auction archives to estimate the "average" condition for these 3 pedigrees would be clearly skewed to the upside since there is much less incentive to have the lower grade copies go through the expensive certification process.

In general, I'd agree (although I'd replace "low grade" with "low value" as the greatest disincentive to certification).  However, according to CGC, the Harold Curtis Collection consisted of exactly 519 books, and nearly all (507 of 519 books) were auctioned by Heritage on May 11, 2006.  Hence, in this specific case, the HA archives actually allow for a very accurate characterization of the entire collection.  Here's an accurate breakdown (that refines the approximate one provided in my post above):  From a grade perspective, The Harold Curtis Collection is probably the nicest of the three, with 40% of the books in CGC 7.5 or better, 35% of the books in various shades of FN (CGC 5.0 to CGC 7.0), and 25% of the books in CGC 4.5 and under.

   

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

Just on a slightly different tack.....

All pedigree collections don't appeal to me. There are some where if I get just one book from it I would be ecstatic....there are some nice solid peds that lean toward my PCH proclivities where it's certainly doable to achieve several books over the years...and there are peds what I would not touch with a ten foot pole...such as Promise for example..

Just my personal opinion.

[Robot Man]

I would like one but I would need a bit longer pole than ten foot…

[Marty Mann]

On 10/13/2023 at 4:38 PM, ThothAmon said:

Marty’s collection is a perfect example, pedigree status for sure if only in my book. 
 

Thank you for your kind words...but at least some of  the collecting community knows my collection exists.

[darkstar]

On 10/13/2023 at 9:43 PM, Superman2006 said:

But that's a collection, and not a pedigree.  I don't recall seeing any CGC requirements to get a collection notation on the label. It might just take a phone call to the right person at CGC and the promise to slab a specified number of books (possibly thousands?). Maybe someone else can shed more light on CGC's requirements for a collection notation.

I don't care about collections or pedigrees, I just find that notation to be funny whenever I see it on a label.

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 10/14/2023 at 3:55 PM, darkstar said:

It might just take a phone call to the right person at CGC and the promise to slab a specified number of books

Freudian slip?

[Kevin76]

People still can't seem to tell the difference between a pedigree and a "From the collection of..."  

[jimjum12]

On 10/13/2023 at 8:04 PM, darkstar said:

The Stan Lee's Personal Hairdresser Collection was the nail in the coffin.

But think of the stories that man could tell... I mean, only the hairdresser knows for sure  GOD BLESS ... 

-jimjum12(a friend of jesus)

[Terry JSA]

On 10/13/2023 at 4:38 PM, ThothAmon said:

Marty’s collection is a perfect example, pedigree status for sure if only in my book.

I also agree. Marty’s collection should become a pedigree.

[bronze johnny]

On 10/14/2023 at 11:07 PM, jimjum12 said:

But think of the stories that man could tell... I mean, only the hairdresser knows for sure  GOD BLESS ... 

-jimjum12(a friend of jesus)

I don’t know because my barber always tells me their problems.

[Marty Mann]

On 10/15/2023 at 4:16 PM, Terry JSA said:

I also agree. Marty’s collection should become a pedigree.

Thank you for your kind words....but I'm afraid it'll never happen.

[pemart1966]

On 10/13/2023 at 5:50 PM, zzutak said:

Would both technically correct but somewhat inaccurate be a possibility?   

From a strict CGC-certified grade perspective, The Harold Curtis Collection is probably the nicest of the three, with approximately 40% of the books in CGC 7.5 VF- or better, 40% of the books in various shades of FN (CGC 5.0 VG/FN to CGC 7.0 FN/VF), and 20% of the books in CGC 4.5 VG+ and under.  The cited percentages are based on these 476 archived HA sales.

I've always regarded the New Hampshire books as an exceptional collection.  However, because the collection consists primarily of westerns (which, as a genre, have always had relatively low market values), very few of the books have ever been certified.  Of the 175 archived HA sales, only about 3 dozen involved CGC certified books (but almost all were CGC 7.5 VF- or better).  Like you, I've always regarded the Cookeville and Eldon collections as more mid-grade than high-grade compilations (from a strict "percent of collection" perspective).  However, each collection does have stunning high-grade examples.

The differences of opinion regarding "pedigree worthiness" being expressed here may stem from a misreading/misunderstanding of Criterion #4 of CGC's four pedigree criteria:

As one can see, criterion #4 above (the high-grade criterion) has an interesting qualifier; namely, that a large portion of a pedigree collection may be technically mid-grade, as long as most of those mid-grade specimens are the best known examples of the issue.  I regard this qualifier as "wiggle room" that wasn't necessary when CGC declared it's first ten approved/recognized pedigrees in 2000. 

You don't get much more wiggle room than "Page quality must be nice as well."  

[Marty Mann]

On 10/17/2023 at 4:32 PM, pemart1966 said:

You don't get much more wiggle room than "Page quality must be nice as well."  

Would this be considered a "...nice as well" page?

[pemart1966]

On 10/18/2023 at 1:47 PM, Marty Mann said:

Would this be considered a "...nice as well" page?

 

That's a question for CGC not me.