ASM #252 CGC 9.8 Record Sale - something fishy going on? - Holder Tampering Incident confirmed by CGC 50 50

[Sigur Ros]

The video I saw a couple days ago, the one where they brought up the old argument of putting the cert number on the inner sleeve, they (9.9newstand) also stated after being questioned, the seller went silent and removed at least one listing (Hulk 340 I think), so it's pretty clear the seller is scamming CGC and thus, buyers.  That part is settled.

But if there is anyone to blame here it's CGC.  They took someone's word for granted when they could have simply glanced at the 9.4 book, and it cost an innocent collector $15,000+.  And now we see they aren't the only victim.

Save the "it's only .001 percent of the books that CGC fails on!!" excuses that always come up (Hi Vintage)(zzz).  Ask these victims if they care what percentage they fall into. They got screwed.  And we all know that no amount of procedural upgrades, actual tamper-evident cases, or new (and quickly laid off) QC managers will fix things.  Nothing is going to change.

CGC doesn't check reholders.  Period.

Now the world knows and can do what they want with that reality.

[Prince Namor]

On 12/20/2023 at 7:31 AM, VintageComics said:

You've already been locked out of the movie forum for trolling and you keep trolling me to get a response from me. 

Responding to you is trolling?

On 12/20/2023 at 7:31 AM, VintageComics said:

I'm going to point out why I don't respond, again:

Uh... you ARE responding...

On 12/20/2023 at 7:31 AM, VintageComics said:

I stated that if even NASA, a company with the highest QC standards in any industry can't provide a perfect product then how can anyone expect CGC QC to provide a perfect product. So I asked how many QC problems are acceptable?

You replied with something entirely irrelevant and illogical, explaining that NASA has tighter QC than CGC.

Duh, no Shizzle Sherlock. 

My point still stands. It's Apples and Oranges. The cost of QC perfection at NASA is astronomical but protects lives. The cost of QC perfection at CGC is managing some hourly wage employees properly.

Just because YOU don't understand what was written, doesn't make it untrue.

On 12/20/2023 at 7:31 AM, VintageComics said:

Back to ignoring you. 

Responding isn't ignoring. 

And I made a statement, based on what someone wrote on the Internet, and it was YOU who were unable to respond to it amicably. 

[Timed]

One of my biggest concerns now, is if this fraud tactic has been used for any type of books, not only MJ ones. I don't see why not; there would be less money to be made but definitely still money.

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:44 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Ya I don't know the situation in totality, I appreciate the clarification, but to the point I really don't think CGC does either.... Perhaps.

CGC will have records for every book they've graded and how many have needed to be returned for QC errors.

How many people complain publicly on one forum is likely not representative of the ratio at all.

That's all I meant.

But the public question I posed to everyone still stands:

What percentage of error is acceptable for a large volume business?

It's a great question, it's a discussion we've had here before and one where many people involved in large volume businesses have discussed in the past. I just can't remember what conclusion of allowable percentage of errors we'd arrived at in the past. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:44 PM, Sigur Ros said:

They took someone's word for granted when they could have simply glanced at the 9.4 book

 

On 12/19/2023 at 7:44 PM, Sigur Ros said:

CGC doesn't check reholders.  Period.

What facts do you base this belief on?

On 12/19/2023 at 7:44 PM, Sigur Ros said:

Save the "it's only .001 percent of the books that CGC fails on!!" excuses that always come up (Hi Vintage)(zzz)

Um. Tough bananas if you don't like people asking questions? 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:49 PM, VintageComics said:

CGC will have records for every book they've graded and how many have needed to be returned for QC errors.

How many people complain publicly on one forum is likely not representative of the ratio at all.

That's all I meant.

But the public question I posed to everyone still stands:

What percentage of error is acceptable for a large volume business?

It's a great question, it's a discussion we've had here before and one where many people involved in large volume businesses have discussed in the past. I just can't remember what conclusion of allowable percentage of errors we'd arrived at in the past. 

Start a new thread asking for opinions.  This thread isn’t about what level of QC isn’t acceptable.

[Prince Namor]

Unlike the cost for NASA, CGC having a higher standard of QC control is MUCH easier and MUCH cheaper.

Plain and simple as that.

Look at the errors, just that we've seen on this forum. SLOPPY, easy to spot errors - not just small label errors, but sloppy Srawberry Shortcake #1 books in a Venom #1 holder type of errors.

THAT can be fixed easily.

IF CGC wants to spend the minimal amount of money to do it. 

[ThothAmon]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:49 PM, VintageComics said:

It's a great question

If you do say yourself. Not the issue in this thread however. The fact that someone could scam CGC like this is not going to make me stop using them but does shake some confidence that the certification process turns the comic into a “bearer bond” of sorts. Not good for commerce. 

[Chip Cataldo]

#1 - CGC doesn't care if someone got ripped off, whether it's through fault of their own or not.

#2 - People on this forum like to argue, with everyone always trying to prove they're right in every post.

#3 - Overall, this place is one tenth of one percent of the hobby and anything here won't move the needle in any aspect.

#4 - CGC doesn't care in general (with Mike being the exception, but he kinda HAS to). They're a money-printing machine.

Edited December 20, 2023 by Chip Cataldo

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:52 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

Start a new thread asking for opinions.  This thread isn’t about what level of QC isn’t acceptable.

What is everyone's psychotic obsession with surgical control of every conversation?

The discussion was a natural tangent from a relevant post in this thread so I'll ask the question here. 

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 12/19/2023 at 6:48 PM, Timed said:

One of my biggest concerns now, is if this fraud tactic has been used for any type of books, not only MJ ones. I don't see why not; there would be less money to be made but definitely still money.

Exactly 💯 it takes a village, but it has to be "just" as well. This will at least keep people checking if nothing else. CGC can either reply or not, but won't Lord willing keep the public from exercising those freedoms, in this case my opinion is justly.

By and by the following:

I saw on a social app what @VintageComics alluded to about 1+1=5, a post that asked, "why are mark jewelers important?" And added, " I get why newsstands are a thing, but advertisements" someone replied how they were distributed which was then referenced as "well I know that but who cares!" To which the third party entered to say it's another fleece of a niche in a collector hobby.

It's getting to where no one is civil, the boards are very civil sometimes. I guess a village takes all kinds to amicably work together.

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:56 PM, VintageComics said:

What is everyone's psychotic obsession with surgical control of every conversation?

The discussion was a natural tangent from a relevant post in this thread so I'll ask the question here. 

It wasn’t a natural tangent.  You just decided to drag it up again here.  It’s irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

 

 

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 12/19/2023 at 6:56 PM, VintageComics said:

What is everyone's psychotic obsession with surgical control of every conversation?

The discussion was a natural tangent from a relevant post in this thread so I'll ask the question here. 

I agree, we've already found two books, and unless others have found more to speak of well then speak up. Natural progression or not we can drop it for the time being. Since I'm the one who brought it up, the amount of errors   being "reported in thread and you by CGC!"

 

[ADAMANTIUM]

Another possible avenue of discussion is awaiting cgc reply,  or if there will be one and any time soon. Not with pitchforks imo 😂

Unless they look into the guys submissions and decide to ban him, then he sues, and.

Otherwise it might end up private info?

[sledgehammer]

On 12/19/2023 at 6:48 PM, Timed said:

One of my biggest concerns now, is if this fraud tactic has been used for any type of books, not only MJ ones. I don't see why not; there would be less money to be made but definitely still money.

Significant money. Am I wrong, or did the custom label program end?

If it didn’t, maybe one good change would be to only allow custom labels on raw submissions, and not re-holders.

I’m sure that there will also be increased scrutiny, on multiple re-holders done by one submitter.

Either way, this thread will be nothing other than helpful in getting things improved. A big reason why it happened is the fact that GPA documents the history of sales with certification numbers. It’s a great tool, and I thank them very much!

@gpanalysis

Edited December 20, 2023 by sledgehammer

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 8:00 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

It wasn’t a natural tangent.  You just decided to drag it up again here.  It’s irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

At least 3 separate boardies are ragging on CGC for how 'problematic' their QC is. 

It's completely natural for someone to ask "how problematic is too problematic?" 

If you don't like the discussion, just don't respond to it. 

[psucl99]

If fraud did indeed take place with the ASM252, the big question is how the seller managed to take the book out of the slab & inner sleeve, replace with a different MJ copy and reseal everything without CGC figuring out the slab was tampered with?!

CGC either really screwed up with their inspection for the reholder OR it was such a good reseal job that it went unnoticed which is super scary for everyone who relies on CGC slabs being tamper proof!

 

[Timed]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:03 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Another possible avenue of discussion is awaiting cgc reply,  or if there will be one and any time soon. Not with pitchforks imo 😂

Unless they look into the guys submissions and decide to ban him, then he sues, and.

Otherwise it might end up private info?

There is no way the submitter would sue. Blatant fraud has taken place here and he would be laughed at on the way to jail.

On 12/19/2023 at 7:04 PM, sledgehammer said:

Significant money. Am I wrong, or did the custom label program end?

If it didn’t, maybe one good change would be to only allow custom labels on raw submissions, and not re-holders.

I’m sure that there will also be increased scrutiny, on multiple re-holders done by one submitter.

Either way, this thread will be nothing other than helpful in getting things improved. A big reason why it happened is the fact that GPA documents the history of sales with certification numbers. It’s a great tool, and I think them very much.Either way, this thread will be nothing other than helpful in getting things improved. A big reason why it happened is the fact that GPA documents the history of sales with certification numbers. It’s a great tool, and I thank them very much.

@gpanalysis

Well, the NM 98 that was swapped did not have a custom label on the new slab, so... 

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:04 PM, sledgehammer said:

Significant money. Am I wrong, or did the custom label program end?

If it didn’t, maybe one good change would be to only allow custom labels on raw submissions, and not re-holders.

I’m sure that there will also be increased scrutiny, on multiple re-holders done by one submitter.

Either way, this thread will be nothing other than helpful in getting things improved. A big reason why it happened is the fact that GPA documents the history of sales with certification numbers. It’s a great tool, and I think them very much.Either way, this thread will be nothing other than helpful in getting things improved. A big reason why it happened is the fact that GPA documents the history of sales with certification numbers. It’s a great tool, and I thank them very much.

@gpanalysis

Ya I get how everyone is still looking for the "smoking gun or a fix period!" I racked my brain until I asked a silly question and will await and see if someone besides cgc figures it out.

Some may call that speculation all around, and yet, the boards have played great detectives before.

Even if I'm proving useless

[sledgehammer]

On 12/19/2023 at 7:08 PM, psucl99 said:

If fraud did indeed take place with the ASM252, the big question is how the seller managed to take the book out of the slab & inner sleeve, replace with a different MJ copy and reseal everything without CGC figuring out the slab was tampered with?!

No one has said that he was able to get the book out of the inner sleeve. The inner sleeve, from a lower graded book, was put into a slab from a higher graded book.

Edited December 20, 2023 by sledgehammer