• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

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

Started by spidermanbeyond,

9,029 posts in this topic

Buzzetta

Buzzetta

Posted
Posted
On 12/21/2023 at 5:22 PM, paqart said:

Stealing apples is the same as stealing oranges.

If you are talking about theft then yes.  But we are not talking about theft.  We are talking about pursuing action to reassign potential liability and in the process opening oneself up to possible liability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mikey C

Mikey C

Posted
Posted
On 12/21/2023 at 4:34 PM, GDN said:

What we do know is probably half of this guy's CGC submissions are legit submission because for every book he swaps he ends up with a RAW copy that he can send in to have graded fresh.  Hoping it comes back with the same grade as the case he took it out of.  

This happened with the ASM 9.8 #252 newsstand (purchased in August) that he cracked out and replaced with the lower grade MJ copy. He sent the original ASM 252 newsstand back to CGC in September after it was replaced, it graded 9.8 again and he then sold it via eBay on 10/3 for $1,800. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzetta

Buzzetta

Posted
Posted
On 12/21/2023 at 5:27 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

I think it’s just that his EBay store name and eBay ID are different 

Does ebay still have the feature to see the history of name changes for a user?  I had a direct link saved on my old computer at one point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted
On 12/21/2023 at 5:15 PM, Christophe9999 said:

hulk.jpg

 

On 12/21/2023 at 5:21 PM, paqart said:

I'm not convinced these are the same comic. The dents in the back cover don't look the same to me. A pressing might have caused that, but there are also a couple of spots on one image that are missing from the other. On e is center left of the big blue arrow at bottom left of BC, the other is upper right of group of horizontal turquoise lines that appear in bottom right of coupon.

100% the same book. Look at the spine ticks and wear on the very top right edge and bottom lower edges. Exact same book. Kudos to @Christophe9999 as I saw this in the WP post, but couldn't get as high a res pic as @mephistopheles was able to post 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prince Namor

Prince Namor

Posted
Posted
On 12/22/2023 at 4:06 AM, paqart said:

Again, not saying eBay is liable. As soon as eBay has to issue a refund, they are a victim. At that point, their most natural form of redress is to go after CGC or the seller. CGC is in some ways probably the easier path. At that point, CGC is the victim (after paying eBay) and has only the seller to go after. That is how it should be btw.

The customer issues the refund, not eBay. If the customer disappears... I guess it's a different story.

If that seller is still doing business on eBay and selling items, he has money that's held for a few days before CGC releases it. On big dollar sales, eBay sometimes will hold it for just a bit longer. At any point they think something fishy is going on, they can freeze that money. That is the #1 place they'll look to reimburse customers who ask for a refund. 

Even then, I don't believe they'd ever go after CGC, because it could put THEIR OWN situation under the microscope - eBay doesn't want a court case of that kind of liability, considering right now the way the law reads it benefits them in the U.S.

CGC is just a service, the same as eBay, and can't be held liable for what someone does with their service (in theory, and based somewhat on eBay's ruling in the Tiffany's case). eBay would be foolish to challenge that considering what they've already been through.

It's obviously more complicated than that... but... what in the comic book world can we compare it to previously? Did Jason Ewart and Daniel Dupcak make waves in the world outside of comics? Were major news stories written and controversies exposed in the world of high dollar comic collecting? Hell, even the COMIC NEWS community overlooked it mostly.

Did Ewart and Dupcak's shenanigans topple corporate giants like eBay and CGC by using them for financial gain? Did everyone get reimbursed? Did ebay or CGC get sued?

Will this one be any different? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
paqart

paqart

Posted
Posted
On 12/21/2023 at 5:29 PM, comicwiz said:

 

100% the same book. Look at the spine ticks and wear on the very top right edge and bottom lower edges. Exact same book. Kudos to @Christophe9999 as I saw this in the WP post, but couldn't get as high a res pic as @mephistopheles was able to post 

Yep. The front cover convinced me. My doubts were from the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzetta

Buzzetta

Posted
Posted
On 12/21/2023 at 5:31 PM, Prince Namor said:

The customer issues the refund, not eBay. If the customer disappears... I guess it's a different story.

If that seller is still doing business on eBay and selling items, he has money that's held for a few days before CGC releases it. On big dollar sales, eBay sometimes will hold it for just a bit longer. At any point they think something fishy is going on, they can freeze that money. That is the #1 place they'll look to reimburse customers who ask for a refund. 

Even then, I don't believe they'd ever go after CGC, because it could put THEIR OWN situation under the microscope - eBay doesn't want a court case of that kind of liability, considering right now the way the law reads it benefits them in the U.S.

CGC is just a service, the same as eBay, and can't be held liable for what someone does with their service (in theory, and based somewhat on eBay's ruling in the Tiffany's case). eBay would be foolish to challenge that considering what they've already been through.

It's obviously more complicated than that... but... what in the comic book world can we compare it to previously? Did Jason Ewart and Daniel Dupcak make waves in the world outside of comics? Were major news stories written and controversies exposed in the world of high dollar comic collecting? Hell, even the COMIC NEWS community overlooked it mostly.

Did Ewart and Dupcak's shenanigans topple corporate giants like eBay and CGC by using them for financial gain? Did everyone get reimbursed? Did ebay or CGC get sued?

Will this one be any different? 

Exactly.

And then not only that if eBay contends that the flaw is inherent toward third party graders it exposes itself in some of the newer areas it is making ground into such as that "Vault" they are trying to get the card collectors to use. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
paqart

paqart

Posted
Posted
On 12/21/2023 at 5:31 PM, Prince Namor said:

The customer issues the refund, not eBay. If the customer disappears... I guess it's a different story.

If that seller is still doing business on eBay and selling items, he has money that's held for a few days before CGC releases it. On big dollar sales, eBay sometimes will hold it for just a bit longer. At any point they think something fishy is going on, they can freeze that money. That is the #1 place they'll look to reimburse customers who ask for a refund. 

Even then, I don't believe they'd ever go after CGC, because it could put THEIR OWN situation under the microscope - eBay doesn't want a court case of that kind of liability, considering right now the way the law reads it benefits them in the U.S.

CGC is just a service, the same as eBay, and can't be held liable for what someone does with their service (in theory, and based somewhat on eBay's ruling in the Tiffany's case). eBay would be foolish to challenge that considering what they've already been through.

It's obviously more complicated than that... but... what in the comic book world can we compare it to previously? Did Jason Ewart and Daniel Dupcak make waves in the world outside of comics? Were major news stories written and controversies exposed in the world of high dollar comic collecting? Hell, even the COMIC NEWS community overlooked it mostly.

Did Ewart and Dupcak's shenanigans topple corporate giants like eBay and CGC by using them for financial gain? Did everyone get reimbursed? Did ebay or CGC get sued?

Will this one be any different? 

I'm pretty sure CGC can be held liable for this because their service is to certify and guarantee that what is inside the slab conforms to the label they deposit inside the slab. That guarantee means they are liable. This is no different from the situation if an assayer stamps a gold brick 99.9% pure gold, but it's actually only half gold. If someone buys based on that representation, and who wouldn't, it's the assayer's fault for putting a false stamp on the bar, and the fault of the person presenting the bar for assay, if that person knew it wasn't 99.9% pure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted
On 12/21/2023 at 5:32 PM, paqart said:

Yep. The front cover convinced me. My doubts were from the back.

That tick just underneath the marquee is what made me look closer. The thumbnails on WP are not as smooth as eBay, you have to click the listing, then once you're in there, you have to do a little tinkering to get the full-size image because it wants to resize everything. But I figured it was easier to notice the staple, that's a very distinctive trait. Once the higher res shot was posted, it was possible to compare the fronts better, also for some reason the images come out blurry on WP sometimes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Mikey C

Mikey C

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
On 12/21/2023 at 5:29 PM, Timed said:

The cert number is different, but it's definitely the same book. However the green label says page 10 is missing... Did the fraudster somehow insert page 10 or did he get help passing it as a blue label?

He removed the green label 8.5 completely, put it into a blue label 8.5's existing case and sent that in for a reholder. He's not replacing anything. That blue label 8.5 is now missing page 10. Then he still has the original, complete 8.5 raw to send in to get graded fresh.

Edited by Mikey C
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OJ Pimpson

OJ Pimpson

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 12/21/2023 at 2:27 PM, Bo1983 said:

All slabs are in question now across all third party graders this why I only buy raw and keep them raw!

Not sure about this. The other guys slab, which I have purchased to crack and send in to CGC is significantly harder to break out and in my experience causes much more damage to the entire slab in doing so. Of course I don’t know how the fraudsters opened their slabs so anything is possible I suppose. 
 

BUT, even if they could pull this off at the other graders, why would they when doing it at CGC guarantees you a 25%-50% higher return. So I’m pretty comfortable concluding that this hasn’t happened to them. Yet

fortunately for CGC their competition is utterly clueless and incompetent and will do nothing to capitalize on this opportunity

Edited by OJ Pimpson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
50 50
Go to topic listing