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

[jsilverjanet]

On 12/20/2023 at 12:55 PM, WolverineX said:

this story is better than the wife stealer thread from last year. ..

wasnt that this year?

[GDN]

On 12/20/2023 at 11:20 AM, Jim Doerfler said:

In full transparency, I'm listing a SW8 CGC 9.8 MJ on eBay tonight on auction.  I recently purchased the book from its original owner for an incredible deal.  Graded in 2020.  Had no idea that it was worth so much as there were no sales on GPA when I bought it. 

I'm here on the forums and on Instagram if there are questions about the book and its authenticity (@doerf_mn).

Good luck with the sale.  I'll be interested to see how much a fair auction of that book goes for.

[comicwiz]

Trying to come up with solutions here requires more than just rolling-up their sleeves. 

If we believe that someone has found a way to explot the reholdering process, we need to examine the areas that have convoluted this to the degree where it can allow this type of exploitation to occur.

Historically, what this means is a two-part tamper evident case design. The inner well, which contains the comic and label. The outside, hard plastic holder or slab. When combined the two form the basis of CGC's tamper evident slab. 

The design has changed since 2000, but the one inherent issue that remains is the possibility of the outside holder being damaged, either during transit from mishandling or accidental dropping at a show. These things happen.

The one other issue is the possibility of comics inside the inner well shifting in a manner where they can sustain minor damage, and sometimes all the way to serious structural damage.

So in this instance, it appears someone has found a way to subvert the process by allegedly sending a lower grade book, likely still sealed witin the inner well, with a label showing a higher grade than it's believed to merit. 

When that person submits their complaint, it might sound something like "hey I noticed you didn't note it's a MJ variant." Oh, and btw, the case arrived crack when I got it. He's instructed to send it in. It's believed that during the process of reholdering, the book is taken for the submitters word, put in a new hard case with an updated label. 

The methods or approaches may vary with mileage, but generally this is the gist of it.

How much of this lands on a decision, where the submitter may have opportunistically chosen a lower grade with blunted/soft corners or the kind of damage that could happen from shifting? When the receiver at CGC notices this, how much of this is CGC remembering the submitter told them the case got damaged, and perhaps not wanting to need to address the downgrade, and deciding at that moment, to just proceed with a reholder despite the book looking lesser in grade than the label indicates?

When we talk about solutions, we need to maybe lift away some of the veneer here to expose some of the splintering, ugliness and truth about CGC's slab. Having an in-house conservator/presser and fixer of all things like this can only go so far in situations where damage is sustained inside a slab. If this person has exposed what we believe is going on, then it's also an exploitation of things left for too long with not enough attention and thought in correcting before someone figured out a way to game it.

Edited December 20, 2023 by comicwiz

[Chip Cataldo]

On 12/20/2023 at 1:46 PM, Hot Nickels said:

The fact that CGC has yet to even acknowledge that they are aware of someone potentially defrauding the system and that they are investigating, suggests, to me at least, that they have uncovered a lot more fraud by this account and potentially others. They may want to announce a new more secure slab and/or a series of new security policies along side an admission that they were duped to soften the PR blow

...or that they don't care at all, which is the obvious conclusion. They sold grades to companies on two different occasions (which should have completely destroyed their reputation) and after the initial hubbub died down, everyone forgot about it. People will forget about this in a couple months as well.

[trademarkcomics]

On 12/20/2023 at 11:29 AM, comicwiz said:

Trying to come up with solutions here requires more than just rolling-up their sleeves. 

If we believe that someone has found a way to explot the reholdering process, we need to examine the areas that have convoluted this to the degree where it can allow this type of exploitation to occur.

Historically, what this means is a two-part tamper evident case design. The inner well, which contains the comic and label. The outside, hard plastic holder or slab. When combined the two form the basis of CGC's tamper evident slab. 

The design has changed since 2000, but the one inherent issue that remains is the possibility of the outside holder being damaged, either during transit from mishandling or accidental dropping at a show. These things happen.

The one other issue is the possibility of comics inside the inner well shifting in a manner where they can sustain minor damage, and sometimes all the way to serious structural damage.

So in this instance, it appears someone has found a way to subvert the process by allegedly sending a lower grade book, likely still sealed witin the inner well, with a label showing a higher grade than it's believed to merit. 

When that person submits their complaint, it might sound something like "hey I noticed you didn't note it's a MJ variant." Oh, and btw, the case arrived crack when I got it. He's instructed to send it in. It's believed that during the process of reholdering, the book is taken for the submitters word, put in a new hard case with an updated label. 

The methods or approaches may vary with mileage, but generally this is the gist of it.

How much of this lands on a decision, where the submitter may have opportunistically chosen a lower grade with blunted/soft corners or the kind of damage that could happen from shifting? When the receiver at CGC notices this, how much of this is CGC remembering the submitter told them the case got damaged, and perhaps not wanting to need to address the downgrade, and deciding at that moment, to just proceed with a reholder despite the book looking lesser in grade than the label indicates?

When we talk about solutions, we need to maybe lift away some of the veneer here to expose some of the splintering, ugliness and truth about CGC's slab. Having an in-house conservator/presser and fixer of all things like this can only go so far in situations where damage is sustained inside a slab. If this person has exposed what we believe is going on, then it's also an exploitation of things left for too long with not enough attention and thought in correcting before someone figured out a way to game it.

I agree with making some kind of a change, but every change CGC makes to their cases costs one hundred billion dollars to implement, so I doubt we see anything soon. 

[sledgehammer]

On 12/20/2023 at 8:32 AM, VintageComics said:

 

The entire reason the book was sent in was to verify the MJ insert. 

as far as I have been able to see, the only place that this was asserted, was in the video. In that video, 9.9 had a message conversation with this crooked seller. that crooked seller has admitted that he is the one that bought the book for just over $2000

There was nothing in the grader notes that indicated that book had a Mark jewelers insert. there was nothing in the slab that indicated it had an insert.

His mention of that being the reason the book was sent to CGC, is complete BS.

If he had sent the book to CGC raw, it would not have gotten the same certification number. I think that you'll be able to admit that much.

So there is no way that he could have made the case, that there was an MJ insert in this slab, unless he had already shifted the inner sleeve, into the slab that used to hold that beautiful 9.8 ASM 252.

The easiest way for him to avoid scrutiny, would have been to simply request a custom label, on a slab that he had put back together, and sealed, that now included a lower grade ASM 252 WITH a Mark jewelers insert.

it would be easiest, to make note of the fact that it appears now to him, like the Mark jewelers insert, had been missed in the past.

but thanks for the advice on not speculating and sticking with facts.

Edited December 20, 2023 by sledgehammer

[Sigur Ros]

On 12/20/2023 at 2:21 PM, jsilverjanet said:

wasn't there a post once about someone receiving books that the case was not sealed)

I personally don't remember that discussion but I do remember a couple IG/YouTubers with the issue a couple years ago. One of them received a submission of about 6 or 8 books... none of the clamshells were in one piece.  Tried to find it recently for a discussion elsewhere but couldn't.  

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 12/20/2023 at 3:11 PM, Sigur Ros said:

I personally don't remember that discussion but I do remember a couple IG/YouTubers with the issue a couple years ago. One of them received a submission of about 6 or 8 books... none of the clamshells were in one piece.  Tried to find it recently for a discussion elsewhere but couldn't.  

I remember seeing a post here about multiple slabs arriving unsealed. 

[VintageComics]

Cool. Let's start with this first:

On 12/20/2023 at 2:56 PM, sledgehammer said:

There was nothing in the grader notes that indicated that book had a Mark jewelers insert. there was nothing in the slab that indicated it had an insert.

I assume you're talking about the 1st book here? You're saying that the original ASM #252 CGC 9.8 label made no mention of an MJ insert, right? It was just labelled as a newsstand.

Great. We have a starting point. 

The 2nd ASM #252 CGC 9.8 label DID get an MJ insert notation on the label. 

That means CGC added the notation to the 2nd label, and we know it was CGC that did it because the book was imaged on the CGC site so that means it went through CGC's hands to add the MJ designation to the 2nd label and it was imaged on the CGC site as such. 

Am I missing anything so far?

Next:

On 12/20/2023 at 2:56 PM, sledgehammer said:

So there is no way that he could have made the case, that there was an MJ insert in this slab, unless he had already shifted the inner sleeve, into the slab that used to hold that beautiful 9.8 ASM 252.

Nobody has disputed that the book was 'shifted' - SWAPPED is a better word. He SWAPPED OUT the true CGC 9.8 without an MJ insert and SWAPPED IN an inferior grade book with an MJ insert. 

Are we on the same page so far?

Good, next:

On 12/20/2023 at 2:56 PM, sledgehammer said:

The easiest way for him to avoid scrutiny, would have been to simply request a custom label, on a slab that he had put back together, and sealed, that now included a lower grade ASM 252 WITH a Mark jewelers insert.

So you're saying that the submitter sent in the now swapped out nicer ASM #252, swapped in an inferior one with an MJ insert in the book, requested a custom label for the slab.

A slab he managed to reassemble in some way to avoid the appearance of tampering and included a lower grade copy WITH AN MJ INSERT in the tampered slab. 

Cool, I think we're on the same page so far. 

----------------------------------------------

So, WHY did CGC add the MJ notation to the 2nd label when it wasn't on the 1st label?

The only thing I can guess that would trigger CGC to add the notation to the 2nd label when it wasn't on the 1st label, is the submitter requesting CGC to 'fix' a 'mistake' that he created fraudulently, or by resubmitting the book for regrading.

We all agree that it's very unlikely the book was resubbed for regrading and that it's FAR more likely the book either got reholdered or reviewed for the 'mistake' of CGC 'missing the MJ insert' the first time, and the new book was re-encapsulated with the same CGC certification number but now an MJ insert notation. 

You're saying that CGC didn't do their due diligence, didn't check the inside of the book for an MJ insert,  just took the seller's word for it, peeked through the sealed inner holder, resealed the book in a new outer holder with the new custom label and an MJ insert notation and called it a day. 

So your contention is that CGC added the MJ notation without inspecting the book for an MJ insert, is that correct? 

Did I understand you correctly?

Edited December 20, 2023 by VintageComics

[VintageComics]

On 12/20/2023 at 2:56 PM, sledgehammer said:

The easiest way for him to avoid scrutiny, would have been to simply request a custom label, on a slab that he had put back together, and sealed, that now included a lower grade ASM 252 WITH a Mark jewelers insert.

There are two problems with this theory. 

1)We've already seen other books from this seller that have been tampered with, that didn't have a custom notation which leads us to believe that the custom notation wasn't the loophole (or at least the only loophole) and 

2) how did CGC get notified that there was an MJ insert in the book unless someone brought it up to CGC's attention?

[OJ Pimpson]

On 12/20/2023 at 11:44 AM, Chip Cataldo said:

...or that they don't care at all, which is the obvious conclusion. They sold grades to companies on two different occasions (which should have completely destroyed their reputation) and after the initial hubbub died down, everyone forgot about it. People will forget about this in a couple months as well.

I’m not sure about that. It’s very possible that you are right however I think back to other “scandals” and I agree, they definitely appear to wink wink guarantee a certain number of 9.9 and 10 graded books to some of their more prominent retail partners when they do gigantic submissions of retail exclusives. But these books are generally graded correctly. The problematic part of it is that the vast majority of the time when your average Joe sends in a submission they’re books are rarely even given consideration for the 9.9 or 10. Once these books have reached the graders threshold for a 9.8 the grading is over and it is given a 9.8. I agree that this is a problem but in the end I just don’t care that Comic Tom has been given a couple of 10 graded copies of his foil exclusive of some meaningless book that I wouldn’t have received.
 

Personally, I view this situation differently, I have lost some confidence in Their core product. They have demonstrated that they cannot guarantee that the book in their slabs has actually been graded. Who knows how long this has been being exploited and by how many parties and how many fraudulent books are just floating around out there. Are there any in my box right now? And the major point is that this fraud isn’t occurring with a worthless Comic Tom Foil Exclusive. It involves some of the most sought after books amongst those in the community. In my opinion, any major book like this cannot be purchased online unless from a very well known and well respected seller. For the most part These books now have to be examined in person before any purchase
 

which leads to the question of CGC’s relevance. If I basically need to entirely regrade a book before I buy it why do I need them. Without confidence in their guarantee they are worthless.

 

Maybe I was delusional, but this is the first time I’ve felt this way and I have to believe that at least a small part of the community feels this way as well

[VintageComics]

On 12/20/2023 at 2:16 PM, MAR1979 said:

On 12/20/2023 at 1:05 PM, Stefan_W said:

 

I am pretty sure that the only thing that would prevent it entirely would be to have the criminal justice system involved and sniffing around him. 

That is more unlikely than CGC allocating even a single thin dime to investigate.

Dude, why are you always so negative toward CGC? Did they spit in your cornflakes? 

CGC will absolutely investigate someone that is defrauding the company and imitating or mucking with their holders, and I'd bet the reason they're quiet is because they're investigating. 

I've been a part of some of these investigations.

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 12/20/2023 at 3:54 PM, VintageComics said:

Dude, why are you always so negative toward CGC? Did they spit in your cornflakes? 

CGC will absolutely investigate someone that is defrauding the company and imitating or mucking with their holders, and I'd bet the reason they're quiet is because they're investigating. 

I've been a part of some of these investigations.

What are the chances we get an official CGC statement at some point?

[VintageComics]

On 12/20/2023 at 3:49 PM, Hot Nickels said:

they definitely appear to wink wink guarantee a certain number of 9.9 and 10 graded books to some of their more prominent retail partners when they do gigantic submissions of retail exclusives. But these books are generally graded correctly. The problematic part of it is that the vast majority of the time when your average Joe sends in a submission they’re books are rarely even given consideration for the 9.9 or 10.

As someone who submits WAY more books than the average Joe, I can say that this view is not correct. 

I've received 9.9's when I expected only 9.8's, and I've submitted books in the hope of 9.9's (and expected them) and only got 9.8s.

So they HAVE handed out 9.9s when the books deserve them. Remember, these graders are also comic fans and if a book is exceptional, they will notice it just like any of us would. 

That's been my experience. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/20/2023 at 3:59 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

What are the chances we get an official CGC statement at some point?

That's a question for CGC. I can't answer that. 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:00 PM, VintageComics said:

That's a question for CGC. I can't answer that. 

Is it better than a .001% chance?

[Heronext]

If CGC had an investigative unit, like U.S. postal inspectors, what would it be called?

[ThothAmon]

On 12/20/2023 at 3:38 PM, VintageComics said:

Cool. Let's start with this first:

I assume you're talking about the 1st book here? You're saying that the original ASM #252 CGC 9.8 label made no mention of an MJ insert, right? It was just labelled as a newsstand.

Great. We have a starting point. 

The 2nd ASM #252 CGC 9.8 label DID get an MJ insert notation on the label. 

That means CGC added the notation to the 2nd label, and we know it was CGC that did it because the book was imaged on the CGC site so that means it went through CGC's hands to add the MJ designation to the 2nd label and it was imaged on the CGC site as such. 

Am I missing anything so far?

Next:

Nobody has disputed that the book was 'shifted' - SWAPPED is a better word. He SWAPPED OUT the true CGC 9.8 without an MJ insert and SWAPPED IN an inferior grade book with an MJ insert. 

Are we on the same page so far?

Good, next:

So you're saying that the submitter sent in the now swapped out nicer ASM #252, swapped in an inferior one with an MJ insert in the book, requested a custom label for the slab.

A slab he managed to reassemble in some way to avoid the appearance of tampering and included a lower grade copy WITH AN MJ INSERT in the tampered slab. 

Cool, I think we're on the same page so far. 

----------------------------------------------

So, WHY did CGC add the MJ notation to the 2nd label when it wasn't on the 1st label?

The only thing I can guess that would trigger CGC to add the notation to the 2nd label when it wasn't on the 1st label, is the submitter requesting CGC to 'fix' a 'mistake' that he created fraudulently, or by resubmitting the book for regrading.

We all agree that it's very unlikely the book was resubbed for regrading and that it's FAR more likely the book either got reholdered or reviewed for the 'mistake' of CGC 'missing the MJ insert' the first time, and the new book was re-encapsulated with the same CGC certification number but now an MJ insert notation. 

You're saying that CGC didn't do their due diligence, didn't check the inside of the book for an MJ insert,  just took the seller's word for it, peeked through the sealed inner holder, resealed the book in a new outer holder with the new custom label and an MJ insert notation and called it a day. 

So your contention is that CGC added the MJ notation without inspecting the book for an MJ insert, is that correct? 

Did I understand you correctly?

Send out the fast bowler. 
 

Edited December 20, 2023 by ThothAmon

[uncannyjames]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:02 PM, Heronext said:

If CGC had an investigative unit, like U.S. postal inspectors, what would it be called?

 

[ThothAmon]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:08 PM, uncannyjames said:

 

Can’t top that!