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

[Panda2]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:03 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

So....

MCS  & Comiclink have publicly acknowledged books in the scam have gone through them and offered to help with the investigation in some copacity

CommicConnet/Metroplis: at least one conformed book, but no statement from them

Heritage Auctions: Anything from there yet? There had to be some books flipped through them, they're the top of the food chain, and they have extensive online sales history and images. Id' think they'd have something to say on all this. But then, they launder doctored Original Comic art all the time....

Where did you see the comiclink statement?  I was specifically looking for one yesterday and came up dry.

Many thanks, Panda2

[sledgehammer]

On 1/7/2024 at 11:09 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

On 1/7/2024 at 10:44 PM, migmtl76 said:

Have any books on the list been sold on Comic Link ?

@sledgehammer

I can't really complain about him possibly selling books in the past.

What i don't like is that he said that he looked at scans of a comic (Avengers 57 8.5) before possibly "scamboy" bought it from comiclink.

Then he looked at scans after it was custom label reholdered, and listed on CL and determined it was AOK, because previous damage is clearly visible.

At this point, the full extent of the possible things that a potential "scamboy" may have done, has not been revealed.

Without getting in to specifics, in theory it is feasible "things" were done to that 8.5, before it had the custom label put on by CGC, in the HOPES that it would be returned at a now HIGHER grade than 8.5, but failed. Maybe that doesn't fit his MO, but who is deciding that?

Now that comic book is off of the list, just because Josh is sure?

I thought I asked him nicely to show us the logic in how he reached that conclusion, but so far, he has ignored it.

Edited January 8 by sledgehammer

[comicwiz]

I've taken the analysis portion as far as I'd like from my end for the time being. I want to clarify some things to understand why I did what I did.

As an accredited appraiser, the moment I saw the potential for prices to have been manipulated, I needed to do my own independent research on the matter. I take very seriously the codes of ethics I'm bound to as part of a society of appraisers, and this excercise is crucial to me beyond the purpose of facilitating the ways prices were influenced by alleged tampering. It illuminates some of the very real activities that I've only up until this point believed were happening, and have theorized might be possible. Through the examples I've shown, I've left it to the community to form their own opiinions on what that looks like, even if all we have at the moment are allegations of "holder tampering."

Currently, what we have from CGC is a list of "approximately 350" comics. In addition to this, we have an "Updated: CCG and CGC Comics Statement on Holder Tampering Incident" posted on Jan 3, 2024 revealing an "impacted list." I am proceeding from the alleged "tampering" CGC has put forth, based on the list of "impacted" comics.

From the analysis, I have: 

117 records with no sales history - on my master list, I have these highlighted in yellow

That leaves an approximated differential of 233 records from the approximate 350 on the "impacted list"

8 strikethroughs at the present date, of which 5 are from the 117 records with no sales history.

3 of the strikethroughs represent a deduction of  $33,145 from the totals below

Green: $945,758.08 - this is the total for each single incident sale for certifications appearing on the "impacted list"

Red: $177,417 - this is the total for multiple or repeat sales of the same certificaiton, but focusing primarily on the accounts which have been alleged to be connected to this "holder tampering."

Total: $1,123,175.08 - this combines green and red totals.

If we deduct the 3 strikethroughs, the total is $1,090,030.08 from approximately 225 records after taking all deductions and strikethroughs into account.

These may look like numbers, but this is a real financial impact. The red to me is a disturbing reminder that without the communities vigilance, we may not have had any reason or purpose to scrutinize this matter. That we have an incident like this to reveal the ways markets are manipulated, real or unproven as allegations at the moment, is a reason for all to take pause to let this sink in.

It is encumbent on all of us to demand answers. If there is an explanation for some of the "holder tampering" that has been uncovered, or how/why books appear to have changed inside slabs with an unchanged certification, it's important it's shared with the community with the utmost transparency and truth.

There may be a perfectly good explanation for all this, we need to hear it from CGC. And this extends to explanations on a number of questions on how grade dates conjoining books on the "impacted list" occured in otherwise impossible circumstances when factoring in regular submission to be processed, and the confluence of standard delays seen with turnaround times, logistics and return delivery timeframes.

Thanks to @spidermanbeyond for starting this thread, and as well to too many names to list for their assistance thus far. I'm fading to the background and returning to the daily grind. One last thing, we need to all be grateful that we have sites like GPA - bad actors crowd every hobby I'm involved in, it's crtical that we understand the importance data repositories and the need to mine for past sales is to give us any chance of staying on top of this cat and mouse game.

I am hoping the next major announcement we hear from CGC is an intent to aggresively pursue this matter, and for those allegedly tied to it to be prosecuted.

Edited January 9 by comicwiz

[EastEnd1]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:10 AM, Panda2 said:

Where did you see the comiclink statement?  I was specifically looking for one yesterday and came up dry.

Many thanks, Panda2

Josh posted here a few times maybe five or six days ago.

[EastEnd1]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:18 AM, comicwiz said:

I've taken the analysis portion to as far as I'd like from my end. I want to clarify some things to understand why I did what I did.

As an accredited appraiser, the moment I saw the potential for prices to have been manipulated, I needed to do my own independent research on the matter. I take very seriously the codes of ethics I'm bound to as part of a society of appraisers, and this excercise is crucial to me beyond the purpose of facilitating the ways prices were influenced by alleged tampering. It illuminates some of the very real activities that I've only up until this point believed were happening, and have theorized. Through the examples I've shown, I've left it to the community to form their own opiinions on what that looks like, even if all we have at the moment are allegations of "holder tampering."

Currently, what we have from CGC is a list of "approximately 350." In addition to this, we have an "Updated: CCG and CGC Comics Statement on Holder Tampering Incident" posted on Jan 3, 2024. I am proceeding from the alleged "tampering" CGC has put forth, based on the list of "impacted" comics.

From the analysis, I have: 

117 records with no sales history - on my master list, I have these highlighted in yellow

That leaves an approximated differential of 233 records from the approximate 350 on the "impacted list"

8 strikethroughs at the present date, of which 5 are from the 117 records with no sales history.

3 of the strikethroughs represent a deduction of  $33,145 from the totals below

Green: $945,758.08 - this is the total for each single incident sale for certifications appearing on the "impacted list"

Red: $177,417 - this is the total for multiple or repeat sales of the same certificaiton, but focusing primarily on the accounts which have been alleged to be connected to this "holder tampering."

Total: $1,123,175.08 - this combines green and red totals.

If we deduct the 3 strikethroughs, the total is $1,090,030.08 from approximately 225 records after taking all deductions and strikethroughs into account.

These may look like numbers, but this is a real financial impact. The red to me is a disturbing reminder that without the communities vigilance, we may not have had any reason or purpose to scrutinize this matter. That we have an incident like this to reveal the ways markets are manipulated, real or unproven as allegations at the moment, is a reason for all to take pause.

It is encumbent on all of us to demand answers. If there is an explanation for some of the "holder tampering" that has been uncovered, or how/why books appear to have changed inside slabs with an unchanged certification, it's important it's shared with the community with the utmost transparency and truth.

There may be a perfectly good explanation for all this, we need to hear it from CGC. And this extends to explanations on a number of quesitons on how grade dates conjoining books on the "impacted list" occured in otherwise impossible circumstances when factoring in turnarounds for any regular submission to be procesed, combined with standard delays seen with turnaround times, logistics and return delivery timeframes.

Thanks to @spidermanbeyond for starting this thread, and as well to too many names to list for their assistance thus far. I'm fading to the background and returning to the daily grind. One last thing, we need to all be grateful that we have sites like GPA - bad actors crowd every hobby I'm involved in, it's crtical that we understand the importance data repositories and the need to mine for past sales is to give us any chance of staying on top of this cat and mouse game.

I am hoping the next major announcement we hear from CGC is an intent to aggresively pursue this matter, and for those allegedly tied to it to be prosecuted.

Thanks again for all your hard work!

[sd2416]

On 1/8/2024 at 9:18 AM, comicwiz said:

I've taken the analysis portion to as far as I'd like from my end. I want to clarify some things to understand why I did what I did.

As an accredited appraiser, the moment I saw the potential for prices to have been manipulated, I needed to do my own independent research on the matter. I take very seriously the codes of ethics I'm bound to as part of a society of appraisers, and this excercise is crucial to me beyond the purpose of facilitating the ways prices were influenced by alleged tampering. It illuminates some of the very real activities that I've only up until this point believed were happening, and have theorized might be possible. Through the examples I've shown, I've left it to the community to form their own opiinions on what that looks like, even if all we have at the moment are allegations of "holder tampering."

Currently, what we have from CGC is a list of "approximately 350" comics. In addition to this, we have an "Updated: CCG and CGC Comics Statement on Holder Tampering Incident" posted on Jan 3, 2024 revealing an "impacted list." I am proceeding from the alleged "tampering" CGC has put forth, based on the list of "impacted" comics.

From the analysis, I have: 

117 records with no sales history - on my master list, I have these highlighted in yellow

That leaves an approximated differential of 233 records from the approximate 350 on the "impacted list"

8 strikethroughs at the present date, of which 5 are from the 117 records with no sales history.

3 of the strikethroughs represent a deduction of  $33,145 from the totals below

Green: $945,758.08 - this is the total for each single incident sale for certifications appearing on the "impacted list"

Red: $177,417 - this is the total for multiple or repeat sales of the same certificaiton, but focusing primarily on the accounts which have been alleged to be connected to this "holder tampering."

Total: $1,123,175.08 - this combines green and red totals.

If we deduct the 3 strikethroughs, the total is $1,090,030.08 from approximately 225 records after taking all deductions and strikethroughs into account.

These may look like numbers, but this is a real financial impact. The red to me is a disturbing reminder that without the communities vigilance, we may not have had any reason or purpose to scrutinize this matter. That we have an incident like this to reveal the ways markets are manipulated, real or unproven as allegations at the moment, is a reason for all to take pause to let this sink in.

It is encumbent on all of us to demand answers. If there is an explanation for some of the "holder tampering" that has been uncovered, or how/why books appear to have changed inside slabs with an unchanged certification, it's important it's shared with the community with the utmost transparency and truth.

There may be a perfectly good explanation for all this, we need to hear it from CGC. And this extends to explanations on a number of questions on how grade dates conjoining books on the "impacted list" occured in otherwise impossible circumstances when factoring in regular submission to be processed, and the confluence of standard delays seen with turnaround times, logistics and return delivery timeframes.

Thanks to @spidermanbeyond for starting this thread, and as well to too many names to list for their assistance thus far. I'm fading to the background and returning to the daily grind. One last thing, we need to all be grateful that we have sites like GPA - bad actors crowd every hobby I'm involved in, it's crtical that we understand the importance data repositories and the need to mine for past sales is to give us any chance of staying on top of this cat and mouse game.

I am hoping the next major announcement we hear from CGC is an intent to aggresively pursue this matter, and for those allegedly tied to it to be prosecuted.

Your name is appropriate.  Your leg work is amazing.  Im sure I speak for all of us (except scamboy and DD) when I say thank you!

[wiparker824]

On 1/8/2024 at 8:10 AM, Panda2 said:

Where did you see the comiclink statement?  I was specifically looking for one yesterday and came up dry.

Many thanks, Panda2

 

[sledgehammer]

On 12/28/2023 at 7:36 AM, sledgehammer said:

Comiclink just listed a 9.8 ASM 194 newstand, grade date in December.  https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4351598006/

The submission includes this ASM 238. Look at LFC. https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4351598005/

The submission also includes a 9.6 XMEN 266 https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4351598003/

an ASM 9.8 252  https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4351598004/

An Omega men 9.8  https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4351598007/

 

You know, just your AVERAGE CGC submission.

 

 

 

Just a reminder.  Grade date of this submission was 12/7/23... I removed the tag to JOSH.

This newsstand book is still listed on CL.

@CGC Mike

Mike.

Do you think we will reach a point where CGC might monitor any exceedingly suspicious "looking" submissions that we note here, or somewhere, and explain why they shouldn't be viewed as suspicious? What if this submission is an indication of some completely different individual doing the same thing?

 

[Blackmask]

On 1/8/2024 at 7:55 AM, sledgehammer said:

Just a reminder.  Grade date of this submission was 12/7/23... I removed the tag to JOSH.

This newsstand book is still listed on CL.

@CGC Mike

Mike.

Do you think we will reach a point where CGC might monitor any exceedingly suspicious "looking" submissions that we note here, or somewhere, and explain why they shouldn't be viewed as suspicious? What if this submission is an indication of some completely different individual doing the same thing?

 

Why exactly should this submission be viewed as suspicious?  Is it just because it has an ASM 194, 238, and 252 that got 9.8’s?  Or am I missing something?

[sledgehammer]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:10 AM, Blackmask said:

Why exactly should this submission be viewed as suspicious?  Is it just because it has an ASM 194, 238, and 252 that got 9.8’s?  Or am I missing something?

My opinion might be different than yours.

Did you look at any of the scans of the 9.8s that I gave you links to?

Do you think that the 238, has a bottom spine front corner that would fit for a 9.8?

I'm open to your thoughts.

Shining light on everything, is good in my opinion.

[Blackmask]

On 1/8/2024 at 8:25 AM, sledgehammer said:

My opinion might be different than yours.

Did you look at any of the scans of the 9.8s that I gave you links to?

Do you think that the 238, has a bottom spine front corner that would fit for a 9.8?

I'm open to your thoughts.

Shining light on everything, is good in my opinion.

I did look at the linked scans, and they all appeared normal to me, which is why I asked if I was missing something.  The small bindery tear/scuff in the bottom left corner of the 238, on an otherwise pretty spotless book, seems in tolerance for a 9.8.  In my opinion.  

Edited January 8 by Blackmask

[sledgehammer]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:37 AM, Blackmask said:

On 1/8/2024 at 10:25 AM, sledgehammer said:

My opinion might be different than yours.

Did you look at any of the scans of the 9.8s that I gave you links to?

Do you think that the 238, has a bottom spine front corner that would fit for a 9.8?

I'm open to your thoughts.

Shining light on everything, is good in my opinion.

I did look at the linked scans, and they all appeared normal to me, which is why I asked if I was missing something.  The small bindery tear/scuff in the bottom left corner of the 238, on an otherwise pretty spotless book, seems in tolerance for a 9.8.  In my opinion.

If the submission is by the same person as the books on the list, I would like to know why none of the books is on the list.

Why would he make a submission, and I have no idea how likely it would be that all 3 of the extremely relevant to this scam, books would receive 9.8s in one submission like this, with zero books he is messing with?

The fact is that alerting CGC to this submission, might be helpful to this. Like I said, what if somebody else is doing the same thing???

In my opinion.

 

Edited January 8 by sledgehammer

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/8/2024 at 11:25 AM, sledgehammer said:

My opinion might be different than yours.

Did you look at any of the scans of the 9.8s that I gave you links to?

Do you think that the 238, has a bottom spine front corner that would fit for a 9.8?

I'm open to your thoughts.

Shining light on everything, is good in my opinion.

The 238 looks pretty good from the scans, but the 252 has some issues….

 

[CGC Mike]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:55 AM, sledgehammer said:

Just a reminder.  Grade date of this submission was 12/7/23... I removed the tag to JOSH.

This newsstand book is still listed on CL.

@CGC Mike

Mike.

Do you think we will reach a point where CGC might monitor any exceedingly suspicious "looking" submissions that we note here, or somewhere, and explain why they shouldn't be viewed as suspicious? What if this submission is an indication of some completely different individual doing the same thing?

 

I will notify the team that this book is still listed on Comiclink.  Regarding any future submissions that forum members note as possibly being suspicious, please bring it to our attention.  We will look into it.  It has been our policy prior to this thread to check into anything that appears suspicious.  

[LordRahl]

On 1/8/2024 at 8:25 AM, sledgehammer said:

My opinion might be different than yours.

Did you look at any of the scans of the 9.8s that I gave you links to?

Do you think that the 238, has a bottom spine front corner that would fit for a 9.8?

I'm open to your thoughts.

Shining light on everything, is good in my opinion.

Yes, I do. 

9.8's have defects, they are not perfect books. And I'm talking about legit 9.8's, not gift grade 9.8's which we all know are out there. If you are basing any analysis on data like this particular 238, and forming conclusions that books are suspect because you apparently don't know what a 9.8 could look like... well that's a problem. 

[Blackmask]

On 1/8/2024 at 9:13 AM, THE_BEYONDER said:

The 238 looks pretty good from the scans, but the 252 has some issues….

 

I think my original question is being overlooked….other than the fact that ASM 194, 238, and 252 are on this submission and got 9.8’s (and that we may not agree with the grading on all of them), is there some evidence of impropriety that I’m missing.  Is there evidence that it came from the same suspect?  Or that it was a reholder submission?  I have no connection to ComicLink or the submission, but it seems like there should be some non-circumstantial evidence of impropriety before we call out an auction house for not removing the listing??  I agree that shining light on this issue is in the community’s best interest, but we have to remember that while channeling Hercule Poirot is good….channeling Cotton Mather not so much.

[lostboys]

Yeah, MOST 9.8s will have defects going forward as CGC eventually unleashes the 9.9s on the comic collecting world.

 

Just imagine all the money there is to be made cracking, pressing and regrading all the 9.8s out there.

 

[wiparker824]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:13 AM, THE_BEYONDER said:

The 238 looks pretty good from the scans, but the 252 has some issues….

 

If this is a 9.8 I have a lot of 9.0’s that deserve 9.8’s. 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/8/2024 at 8:11 AM, Pcaedus said:

Might be off topic I noticed cgc doesn't have any dc custom labels up to date I believe. Is it a rights thing? Shame 

The good thing about the lack of DC custom labels is that it keeps DCs off the scammers radar.

[Silver Surfer]

On 1/8/2024 at 9:13 AM, THE_BEYONDER said:

The 238 looks pretty good from the scans, but the 252 has some issues….

 

So instead of putting in a crisp 9.4 it looks like this guy was getting gready because that copy looks like a 6.0.