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

[Stefan_W]

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

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

My best guess is we will get a public statement once a solution and way forward is found. At least that is how I would handle it if I was running the show. 

Until then I am sure it is like a hornet's nest in those offices as people do their best to figure out what happened and how. Putting on the "if I was running the show" boots again, I would begin with checking the records to see if there was repetition in who was doing the re-slab if only to rule out internal stuff, and then go outwards from there. 

[DC#]

On 12/20/2023 at 12:54 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.

I know absolutely no one that works at CGC (except GCG Mike I suppose) - and I understand the frustration customers on this board or in general have with their mistakes, missteps, etc.    But my experience being on the inside of a very public company is that people can often jump to conclusions around events (perhaps with an agenda on occasion) or are just impatient because the company is not responding in the timeframe they would prefer.    But as stated by VintageComics - there are likely internal processes that are playing out and their PR or Exec team may feel going out too soon may impede some of those processes.      One of the hardest things to do when you are on the inside is to be patient when you are taking lumps in the public/media.

I also find it highly unlikely if not downright impossible to believe that CGC doesn't care.   It's makes for fun comments to stoke the flames in the place like this - but their entire business model is based on the integrity of the grading and the census.    They absolutely care.    If they lose the trust of the audience they lose the business.  

 

[Mutant Manatee]

I just noticed that the seller in question has made their eBay feedback private.  This just happened within the past hour.  You can no longer see what that recent negative comment said.

[sledgehammer]

On 12/20/2023 at 2:38 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?

no, you didn't understand me correctly.

You made the statement, that we ALL think that it is far more likely, that the book was submitted to be, or reviewed for the mistake of missing the MJ insert.

So you can answer this question for me, or anyone else can that has submitted thousands of books or even hundreds.

if I fill out a submittal form, and I tell CGC that I want them to check a book for an MJ insert, what makes you think they are going to do that for a reholdering fee?

I believe, and I could be wrong,  that they are going to insist on a grading fee for the book. If they insist on a grading fee, it is much more likely that someone is going to catch the fact that this is no longer, a 9.8 book. 

I believe that he is more likely to have submitted this book under false pretenses, of getting a custom label. 

The fee for a custom label would be $50.

If he submitted this book, under the pretense of checking for the MJ insert, and they decide that he is supposed to pay a grading fee on this book, the grading fee on this book would be roughly $500.

I believe it is much more likely, that he drew their attention to the potential of there being an MJ insert, after they already had their hands on this fraudulent slab that he had created. he may have even called them at some stage of the process, after he had seen a certain status, and craftily brought up the issue of what he thought might be the appearance of an MJ insert in the pages of this book, that weren't noted in the original grade notes.

 

 

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by sledgehammer

[sledgehammer]

"Jesus, he says that we might have missed the MJ insert. If we open the book up, and grade it, won't we have to charge him like $500?"

"Yeah, I mean we can see the MJ insert is there, I tell you what open up the book make sure it's there and give him the notation."

"God, I hate this job."

"Yeah, me too."

[AbsoluteCarnage]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:20 PM, Mutant Manatee said:

I just noticed that the seller in question has made their eBay feedback private.  This just happened within the past hour.  You can no longer see what that recent negative comment said.

I posted the feedback which as someone else mentioned unfortunately was left about "This buyer" and in such a manner the seller could likely have it removed but I'll save ya the time of going back 6 pages or so. 

Bottom line was getting whoever was bidding high on it to be on alert and it seems that the outcome of that was a success whether or not the feedback would stick.

[OJ Pimpson]

On 12/20/2023 at 12:59 PM, VintageComics said:

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. 

There has been a demonstrable decline in the number of 9.9 and 10 grades given out since 2017/18. And the further you go back the more 9.9 and 10s you will find. 
 

as to why, I’d theorize that as submissions were growing in the late 2010’s and when they grew exponentially during Covid that the time allotment given to a grader per modern book decreased or the quota on how many books they were expected to grade per hour increased. And in my opinion the time it would likely take a grader to reach the 9.8 threshold with a given book is dwarfed by the time it would take to determine if a 9.8 is a 9.9/10  So once the grader determined the book was a 9.8 they were done  

But that’s just my opinion. The precipitous drop in 9.9 and 10s however is a fact. 
 

 

I don’t want to derail this important thread so I’ll just leave it at that and you can have the last word if you wish

Edited December 20, 2023 by Hot Nickels

[VintageComics]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:45 PM, sledgehammer said:

no, you didn't understand me correctly.

OK, but it's not personal. It just wasn't clear to me what you were saying. 

On 12/20/2023 at 4:45 PM, sledgehammer said:

I believe, and I could be wrong,  that they are going to insist on a grading fee for the book. If they insist on a grading fee, it is much more likely that someone is going to catch the fact that this is no longer, a 9.8 book. 

Correct. If they regraded the book, it's very unlikely this book gets a 9.8 which leads me to believe it wasn't regraded. 

On 12/20/2023 at 4:45 PM, sledgehammer said:

if I fill out a submittal form, and I tell CGC that I want them to check a book for an MJ insert, what makes you think they are going to do that for a reholdering fee?

It depends on what you choose on the form. 

If you tell CGC that you think they made a mistake and missed the MJ insert, they won't technically regrade it as though you were paying a grading fee.They'll treat it as an internal error and reholder the book with the correct designation, but I am fairly certain if you notify them that they made a mistake and missed the MJ insert, they will inspect the book to make sure the MJ insert is in there before designating it as such. 

If you JUST send it as a straight reholder, say, telling them that the slab cracked when they returned the book to the submitter, they would just replace the holder. You COULD possibly even request a custom label I suppose, but then that still doesn't explain how the MJ insert designation got added to the new label because that's not a "straight reholder" procedure.

The sticky part in your theory is how the MJ designation got added. It doesn't make sense that they would just add the designation on the new label without looking inside the book to verify it was there.

I suppose it's POSSIBLE that they just forgot to look at the book for whatever reason, but it just sounds unlikely to me. 

In order to add that new MJ designation, I believe someone, somewhere inside CGC (likely a grader or pregrader) would have to check for the MJ insert before labelling it as such. 

 

Could they have caught the MJ designation and missed that it was a fugly 9.8? That's possible I suppose...but again, weird to me because I believe it would need to at least be a pre-grader inspecting the book for the MJ insert (counting pages) and so it seems unlikely. I don't think they would just have someone working in encapsulation do this work. Someone in encapsulation may not even know what an MJ insert is. 

It is a bit confusing because there are multiple combinations of possibilities, but I think we're on the same page now, aren't we?

[VintageComics]

On 12/20/2023 at 5:11 PM, Hot Nickels said:

There has been a demonstrable decline in the number of 9.9 and 10 grades given out since 2017/18. And the further you go back the more 9.9 and 10s you will find. 
 

as to why, I’d theorize that as submissions were growing in the late 2010’s and when they grew exponentially during Covid that the time allotment given to a grader per modern book decreased or the quota on how many books they were expected to grade per hour increased. And in my opinion the time it would likely take a grader to reach the 9.8 threshold with a given book is dwarfed by the time it would take to determine if a 9.8 is a 9.9/10  So once the grader determined the book was a 9.8 they were done  

But that’s just my opinion. The precipitous drop in 9.9 and 10s however is a fact. 

I think I've gotten at least 4 or 5 CGC 9.9s on vintage books since 2018 (and they were submitted with 9.9's in mind). 

How do you prove that the number of 9.9's has dropped as a fact? I'd love to know because that's useful info. 

[sledgehammer]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:15 PM, VintageComics said:

OK, but it's not personal. It just wasn't clear to me what you were saying. 

Correct. If they regraded the book, it's very unlikely this book gets a 9.8 which leads me to believe it wasn't regraded. 

It depends on what you choose on the form. 

If you tell CGC that you think they made a mistake and missed the MJ insert, they won't technically regrade it as though you were paying a grading fee.They'll treat it as an internal error and reholder the book with the correct designation, but I am fairly certain if you notify them that they made a mistake and missed the MJ insert, they will inspect the book to make sure the MJ insert is in there before designating it as such. 

If you JUST send it as a straight reholder, say, telling them that the slab cracked when they returned the book to the submitter, they would just replace the holder. You COULD possibly even request a custom label I suppose, but then that still doesn't explain how the MJ insert designation got added to the new label because that's not a "straight reholder" procedure.

The sticky part in your theory is how the MJ designation got added. It doesn't make sense that they would just add the designation on the new label without looking inside the book to verify it was there.

I suppose it's POSSIBLE that they just forgot to look at the book for whatever reason, but it just sounds unlikely to me. 

In order to add that new MJ designation, I believe someone, somewhere inside CGC (likely a grader or pregrader) would have to check for the MJ insert before labelling it as such. 

 

Could they have caught the MJ designation and missed that it was a fugly 9.8? That's possible I suppose...but again, weird to me because I believe it would need to at least be a pre-grader inspecting the book for the MJ insert (counting pages) and so it seems unlikely. I don't think they would just have someone working in encapsulation do this work. Someone in encapsulation may not even know what an MJ insert is. 

It is a bit confusing because there are multiple combinations of possibilities, but I think we're on the same page now, aren't we?

yes, I think we are. The only thing that you should keep in mind is that you've already admitted, that your reference is how things were done in the past. I don't think that either one of us is certain on how things are being done recently. 

[Chip Cataldo]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:20 PM, DC# said:

I also find it highly unlikely if not downright impossible to believe that CGC doesn't care.   It's makes for fun comments to stoke the flames in the place like this - but their entire business model is based on the integrity of the grading and the census.    They absolutely care.    If they lose the trust of the audience they lose the business.  

They don't. Two different times they graded an exclusive cover. Both times there was a single 10, three 9.9s and the rest 9.8s, IIRC. The odds of that are astronomical UNLESS it was planned out, and I'll bet it wasn't planned out for free. THAT destroys their business model..."the integrity of the grading and the census."

Facts don't back up the position that "they care." I don't care if it's an exclusive that barely any people give a crud about or a copy of Amazing Fantasy #15. The 9.8 grade should be the 9.8 grade should be the 9.8 grade. Every time. 

Oh, and big surprise...that hasn't "lost the trust of the audience" or lost them business. They continue to print money hand over fist.

[VintageComics]

On 12/20/2023 at 5:20 PM, sledgehammer said:

yes, I think we are. The only thing that you should keep in mind is that you've already admitted, that your reference is how things were done in the past. I don't think that either one of us is certain on how things are being done recently. 

I'll bet you $100 to your favorite charity that CGC won't put an MJ designation on a book that didn't have one before without inspecting the book. 

In conclusion, I haven't changed a single one of my germane points. You just misunderstood them, so I think YOU need to get YOUR facts straight before you muddy the discussion next time. 

[bc]

On 12/20/2023 at 5:25 PM, Chip Cataldo said:

They don't. Two different times they graded an exclusive cover. Both times there was a single 10, three 9.9s and the rest 9.8s, IIRC. The odds of that are astronomical UNLESS it was planned out, and I'll bet it wasn't planned out for free. THAT destroys their business model..."the integrity of the grading and the census."

Facts don't back up the position that "they care." I don't care if it's an exclusive that barely any people give a crud about or a copy of Amazing Fantasy #15. The 9.8 grade should be the 9.8 grade should be the 9.8 grade. Every time. 

Oh, and big surprise...that hasn't "lost the trust of the audience" or lost them business. They continue to print money hand over fist.

as reference...almost 2 years ago to the day

 

-bc

[DC#]

On 12/20/2023 at 2:25 PM, Chip Cataldo said:

They don't. Two different times they graded an exclusive cover. Both times there was a single 10, three 9.9s and the rest 9.8s, IIRC. The odds of that are astronomical UNLESS it was planned out, and I'll bet it wasn't planned out for free. THAT destroys their business model..."the integrity of the grading and the census."

Facts don't back up the position that "they care." I don't care if it's an exclusive that barely any people give a crud about or a copy of Amazing Fantasy #15. The 9.8 grade should be the 9.8 grade should be the 9.8 grade. Every time. 

Oh, and big surprise...that hasn't "lost the trust of the audience" or lost them business. They continue to print money hand over fist.

Cautious as I do not want to derail this thread.....but.....I am separating the issues/challenges around assigning grades which are still subject to human interpretation (and thus also susceptible to shenanigans) from the idea that CGC has a vested interest in preventing what amounts to counterfeiting.   Even a corrupt organization like the mob will take action against someone stepping on their turf.    

Again - for those sitting on the outside without the full view of the strategic and operational challenges the management team is balancing - we get to second guess every decision, question every motive, speculate at every turn, and damn with impunity because there are no repercussions for doing so.   

[jsilverjanet]

On 12/20/2023 at 3:20 PM, DC# said:

I know absolutely no one that works at CGC (except GCG Mike I suppose) - and I understand the frustration customers on this board or in general have with their mistakes, missteps, etc.    But my experience being on the inside of a very public company is that people can often jump to conclusions around events (perhaps with an agenda on occasion) or are just impatient because the company is not responding in the timeframe they would prefer.    But as stated by VintageComics - there are likely internal processes that are playing out and their PR or Exec team may feel going out too soon may impede some of those processes.      One of the hardest things to do when you are on the inside is to be patient when you are taking lumps in the public/media.

I also find it highly unlikely if not downright impossible to believe that CGC doesn't care.   It's makes for fun comments to stoke the flames in the place like this - but their entire business model is based on the integrity of the grading and the census.    They absolutely care.    If they lose the trust of the audience they lose the business.  

 

very true and having worked in customer service for over 30 years, sometimes like you said internal decisions are being made on how to handle and the extent of the problem

HOWEVER

this company has shown in the past none of that, in fact for very little regard to their customers

I could list instance after instance of many mistakes, opportunities for the company to do right, and for them to fall flat on their face

they have no real customer service team, they have no PR person when issues like this arise

this company has a poor track record and that is why maybe some of us aren't waving their pom poms for the CGC like others are

I have no interest whether CGC is at fault or not. Can the same be said of those who are giving CGC the benefit of the doubt?

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by jsilverjanet

[jsilverjanet]

what was that little catchphrase they had a few years ago

"but we didn't have to" or something like that

 

[Chip Cataldo]

On 12/20/2023 at 5:44 PM, DC# said:

Cautious as I do not want to derail this thread.....but.....I am separating the issues/challenges around assigning grades which are still subject to human interpretation (and thus also susceptible to shenanigans) from the idea that CGC has a vested interest in preventing what amounts to counterfeiting.   Even a corrupt organization like the mob will take action against someone stepping on their turf.    

I get where you're coming from and I don't want to derail the thread either, but other than redesigning the holder there's not much else they can do to combat what's been done.

They might not even invest in that since it was one guy doing this...there's no evidence that this is a widespread enough issue for them to make the tooling investment to change the case design.

[Chip Cataldo]

On 12/20/2023 at 5:48 PM, jsilverjanet said:

very true and having worked in customer service for over 30 years, sometimes like you said internal decisions are being made on how to handle and the extent of the problem

HOWEVER

this company has shown in the past none of that, in fact for very little regard to their customers

I could list instance after instance of many mistakes, opportunities for the company to do right, and for them to fall flat on their face

they have no real customer service team, they have no PR person when issues like this arise

this company has a poor track record and that is why maybe some of us aren't waving their pom poms for the CGC like others are

I have no interest whether CGC is at fault or not. Can the same be said of those who are giving CGC the benefit of the doubt?

Well said.

[jsilverjanet]

you don't have to fill out a form for them to add something they made a mistake on

you can just call them, tell the problem and they will notate it on the account

 

[sledgehammer]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:15 PM, VintageComics said:

On 12/20/2023 at 3:45 PM, sledgehammer said:

no, you didn't understand me correctly.

OK, but it's not personal. It just wasn't clear to me what you were saying. 

 

On 12/20/2023 at 4:29 PM, VintageComics said:

In conclusion, I haven't changed a single one of my germane points. You just misunderstood them, so I think YOU need to get YOUR facts straight before you muddy the discussion next time. 

Can you just control your urge to share any more of your mood swings with me?

I'm pretty sure that I've added more to this thread than you have.