• 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,

9,028 posts in this topic

VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
On 12/22/2023 at 9:57 PM, William-James88 said:

CGC was not a credible company before, they aren't one today.

If you don't consider CGC a credible company, how would you define a "credible company"?

Anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cat

Cat

Posted
Posted
On 12/24/2023 at 1:26 AM, VintageComics said:

If you don't consider CGC a credible company, how would you define a "credible company"?

Anyone?

I don't consider a credible company one that takes money for gimmicked grades, aka the Bad Idea transparent bought grades, that was wrong on a few levels. That's just the first thing that comes to mind. There's a tonne more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 12/23/2023 at 10:29 AM, Cat said:
On 12/23/2023 at 10:26 AM, VintageComics said:

If you don't consider CGC a credible company, how would you define a "credible company"?

Anyone?

I don't consider a credible company one that takes money for gimmicked grades, aka the Bad Idea transparent bought grades, that was wrong on a few levels. That's just the first thing that comes to mind. There's a tonne more. 

You didn't answer the question. No company or person is 100%. Everyone does something wrong, including you. 

You're discussing what you don't like about a company, which is actually a bit of a red herring. Nobody is "credible" using your logic. 

How much does a company or a person need to get RIGHT for it to be "credible"?

 

Edited by VintageComics
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
On 12/23/2023 at 2:53 AM, Timed said:

Lawyers, are these fraudulent slabs considered evidence - is it safe to return the books back to briva3? hm

I'm not a lawyer obviously, but if it was me I would be hanging onto the book for now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sledgehammer

sledgehammer

Posted
Posted
On 12/23/2023 at 9:24 AM, VintageComics said:

About 30 years ago I was having a religious debate with a guy about the 10 commandments. 

I soon realized he hadn't ever read the Bible, he'd only seen the movie. 

So then I asked him a specific question about his beliefs, to which he replied: "I don't know. I'm going to have to see the movie again." 

I literally died on the spot. lol

If we're going off topic, I seem to recall you being pretty ok, hell Damn OK, with the speculative need for a thorough examination of the potential thermite usage on 9/11.

Maybe off topic should be put on hold?

:baiting:

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timed

Timed

Posted
Posted
On 12/23/2023 at 9:36 AM, VintageComics said:

I'm not a lawyer obviously, but if it was me I would be hanging onto the book for now. 

I would agree; no telling what briva3 will do with the book once he gets it back. And CGC may want it to examine. At the same time, eBay requires items be sent back for refunds. Tough situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 12/23/2023 at 4:15 AM, agamoto said:

Only CGC could crack a sig series, only they could have pressed it, and only they could have given it the higher grade. Someone with a little more time may want to scour the internets for pics restored/qualified and signed Jim 83's. Might be legit. Sure would be a lot of risk for a .5 bump. I'm more impressed with the ability to sell it Dec 30th, submit to CGC, have it pressed and regraded and returned to him in time to have it sold 3 months later. Good work CGC!!!

As an interesting bit of info regarding CGC sig series, CGC used to allow "official sig series" people to crack and resubmit books, that means Joeypost was allowed to press and submit CGC books at some point. That changed at some point and now only CCS is allowed to do it. 

But back in 2013, someone else would have been allowed to have pressed the book and kept the Sig Series designation, so this specific instance is not an indicator of anything nefarious. 

Edited by VintageComics
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
On 12/23/2023 at 7:41 AM, sledgehammer said:

I want to hear from CGC, not Roy,

If you want me to stop posting in this thread, I'm more than happy to. 

I don't need to be here reading 90 pages and trying to help. I'd much rather be doing something else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Silver Surfer

Silver Surfer

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 12/23/2023 at 7:33 AM, VintageComics said:

You didn't answer the question. No company or person is 100%. Everyone does something wrong, including you. 

You're discussing what you don't like about a company, which is actually a bit of a red herring. Nobody is "credible" using your logic. 

How much does a company or a person need to get RIGHT for it to be "credible"?

 

Why do we have to splice these side bar arguments to the atom level. Personally I find them distracting and something like this will eventually derail this thread. Just my 2 cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sledgehammer

sledgehammer

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 12/23/2023 at 9:48 AM, VintageComics said:
On 12/23/2023 at 6:41 AM, sledgehammer said:

I want to hear from CGC, not Roy,

If you want me to stop posting in this thread, I'm more than happy to. 

I don't need to be here reading 90 pages and trying to help. I'd much rather be doing something else. 

Stop quoting me out of context.

I didn't only say that. I said I want official word, and you did beat me up about my opinion.

"Wow"  "I can't believe you went there"

Edited by sledgehammer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
On 12/23/2023 at 8:07 AM, skybolt said:

It would be really interesting to see when this guy started the whole re-holdering scam. I doubt this went back to 2011 or even 2016. Thus far the best evidence we've gotten was from 2022. My gut tells me it started back in 2021 when this guy started noticing how much money could be made between direct/newsstand copies, etc. I'm also confident that 9.9newsstand or other smart collectors would've caught onto something this egregious if it was going on for 10 years.

I feel the same way. 

I think earlier on they may have been allegedly shill bidding and doing other nefarious things, as can be evidenced by the same book showing up multiple times on Ebay, but this current problem being discussed feels very recent. 

We have a lot of eyes on the internet, especially over the pandemic, and I believe a grand scale deception like this would have been uncovered sooner. It's just a guess but it's what my gut says. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bo1983

Bo1983

Posted
Posted
On 12/23/2023 at 8:29 AM, sledgehammer said:

We should start a poll.

1. Briva3 is the only guy

2.  Ok, probably 1-4 guys are this sinister.

3. At an exponential growth pattern, and the dark web, there are probably at least 25 guys that are now doing this.

4. 50% of reholders since 2020 are now fraudulent lower graded copies

I mean, who the :censored: knows, and who has ventured a guess so far? Why would the guess be relevant?

There’s 9 billion people on earth it could be thousands out there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 12/23/2023 at 10:49 AM, Silver Surfer said:

Why do we have to splice these side bar arguments to the atom level. Personally I find them distracting and something like this will eventually derail this thread. Just my 2 cents.

If you don't like the post, ignore it. End of story.

If I want to splice atoms, I'm going to do it. Stop telling people how to post. Your living room is not my laptop. 

On 12/23/2023 at 10:50 AM, sledgehammer said:

Stop quoting me out of context.

I didn't say that. I said I want official word, and you did beat me up about my opinion.

"Wow"  "I can't believe you went there"

I didn't beat you up. I explained, based on my extensive experience (I subbed my 1st books in 2003), 1000's of submissions and 100's if not 1000's of personal, direct discussions with CGC.  

You were speculating out of your butt and I disagreed. 

When you started to make it personal about me, the beatings started, and they will continue for as long as they need to. :peace:

Edited by VintageComics
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