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

[Mikey C]

On 1/9/2024 at 9:06 AM, comicginger1789 said:

I am saying someone has a signed book by these three that is legitimate and that as part of the scam, they faked three signatures. They swapped the original book out for a similar shape copy that they added three fake signatures on and got the Stan Lee label. Correct me though because I do not think that label was available in 2013.The notes don't seem a perfect match (the staples seem to be noted and the wear seems similar there but I cannot see the other bends). Again, amateur detective here. 

Is it a lot to suggest that they took the time to procure another copy in similar shape of JIM 85 and risk faking three signatures? Sure that sounds like a lot but we have already established this scam as pretty elaborate so why not?

The issue with faking signatures, they’d have to take it out of the inner well and then reseal it within the inner well. We haven’t seen proof of this capability yet. My brain hurts. 

[Mikey C]

On 1/9/2024 at 7:44 AM, sledgehammer said:

ONCE AGAIN.

Every book that this guy has touched should have the cert # EXPOSED.

On 12/18, Mikey C noted that a 9.8 ASM 252 copy that zaneglor sold, looked exactly like the real 9.8 that was part of the swap that started all this.

That cert # https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4324007003/

That comic book is not on the list. Neither is  001, 002, 004, or 007.

The only two on the list, are THE ONES with a custom label, 005 and 006 AND THE GRADE DATE IS NOT DIFFERENT.

All of the other books are 9.8, and not custom labels, of the EXACT keys that he scams.

That means, he may have these slabs, and can try to insert sleeves in to them again, through some private listing consigner, without the additional benefit that the custom holder swapping was giving him.

A list of every one of his submissions, needs to be posted somewhere.

This 9.8 was sold on 10/3 via eBay for around $1800. Seems it was the “true” 9.8 that he originally bought in early August for $2200. Wonder why he let it go rather than using it again for another swap. Weird. 

[GDN]

On 1/9/2024 at 5:10 AM, sledgehammer said:

I just found proof that he had an AF 15, 4.5 yellow, in the same submission as the 6.5 yellow. 2020.

Here is the submission number 1589872001. this is the 4.5.

No custom label, even though it was the same time as the custom label copy.

All books that he touched.

Could it be that submission 158987-XXX wasn't his submission.  This could be the original signature submission by someone else (maybe that dealer with them all on the wall).  He then obtained and submitted the 6.5 copy for the custom label and that didn't get regraded so wouldn't show a new submission/cert number and the grade date would remain the old 2018 date.  Only the photo was updated on the original submission number.  We don't know when that label was changed.  CGC only added the 6.5 to the list because it went through his account for a new label.

Edited January 9 by GDN
corrected date from 2020 to 2018

[trademarkcomics]

On 1/9/2024 at 6:29 AM, Mikey C said:

The issue with faking signatures, they’d have to take it out of the inner well and then reseal it within the inner well. We haven’t seen proof of this capability yet. My brain hurts. 

Not necessarily. They could get a qualified book with a fake sig, then pop out the inner well and put it in the SS case.

Edited January 9 by trademarkcomics

[Mikey C]

On 1/9/2024 at 9:39 AM, trademarkcomics said:

Not necessarily. They could get a qualified book with a fake sig, then pop out the inner well and put it in the SS case.

I haven’t even considered this take. Def possible.

[wiparker824]

On 1/9/2024 at 7:37 AM, GDN said:

Could it be that submission 158987-XXX wasn't his submission.  This could be the original signature submission by someone else (maybe that dealer with them all on the wall).  He then obtained and submitted the 6.5 copy for the custom label and that didn't get regraded so wouldn't show a new submission/cert number and the grade date would remain the old 2020 date.  Only the photo was updated on the original submission number.  We don't know when that label was changed.  

For the record none of them are 2020. The one is now 1/5/24, they were all originally 2018. If they were 2020 we’d have bigger problems as it would imply Stan was resurrected to sign these for them to first be graded in 2020. But your point remains, the 6.5 was resubmitted for a custom label sometime after 2018 the 2.5 and 4.5 from that submission were not it would appear.

[trademarkcomics]

On 1/9/2024 at 6:41 AM, Mikey C said:

I haven’t even considered this take. Def possible.

[mrd160]

On 1/9/2024 at 9:41 AM, Mikey C said:

I haven’t even considered this take. Def possible.

When someone has proven that they’ll do anything for money, anything is possible. I think this guy was likely switching books, trimming books, faking SIGs, who knows but nothing is out of the realm of possibility. What has to happen is every book he has ever submitted needs to be scrutinized and any dealer he dealt with needs to be scrutinized. it’s very possible the dealer/dealers didn’t know what was going on but it is highly highly highly likely that he submitted books through dealer account or other peoples accounts maybe with them knowing, maybe with them not knowing but this is what needs to be investigated. There shouldn’t be a rush to judgment but there needs to be a thorough investigation. 

[MatterEaterLad]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:10 PM, Pcaedus said:

What store was it? There's only a handful in Brooklyn then again I really only go to Galaxy Comics and St. Marks Comics and I know both wouldn't have any expensive books in general. 

Whoever knows what store this is, please name it. They could be moving books thru unsuspecting IG sellers, FB sellers, small auction houses, etc.

[skybolt]

On 1/9/2024 at 8:37 AM, Mikey C said:

This 9.8 was sold on 10/3 via eBay for around $1800. Seems it was the “true” 9.8 that he originally bought in early August for $2200. Wonder why he let it go rather than using it again for another swap. Weird. 

Perhaps the scammer had a finite number of times he wanted to resubmit a certain book as to not draw any suspicion. Losing only a couple of hundred dollars on a resale is not a big deal to him.

[awakeintheashes]

On 1/9/2024 at 9:39 AM, trademarkcomics said:

Not necessarily. They could get a qualified book with a fake sig, then pop out the inner well and put it in the SS case.

Placing this here for posterity’s sake.

[Panda2]

It sure would be nice to hear from CGC by way of an update - or anything...their silence is deafening

[trademarkcomics]

On 1/9/2024 at 6:39 AM, trademarkcomics said:

Not necessarily. They could get a qualified book with a fake sig, then pop out the inner well and put it in the SS case.

Actually, now that I think about it. He wouldn't be able to resub the cracked out SS copy, but he could send it to that other company and get it put into a verified slab. So he could end up with say a verified 9.8 and turn a qualified 8.5 or something into a CGC SS 9.8. So he would have to have been selling verified slabs as well to show he was doing this...

Edited January 9 by trademarkcomics

[comicwiz]

On 1/9/2024 at 7:44 AM, sledgehammer said:

ONCE AGAIN.

Every book that this guy has touched should have the cert # EXPOSED.

On 12/18, Mikey C noted that a 9.8 ASM 252 copy that zaneglor sold, looked exactly like the real 9.8 that was part of the swap that started all this.

That cert # https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4324007003/

That comic book is not on the list. Neither is  001, 002, 004, or 007.

The only two on the list, are THE ONES with a custom label, 005 and 006 AND THE GRADE DATE IS NOT DIFFERENT.

All of the other books are 9.8, and not custom labels, of the EXACT keys that he scams.

That means, he may have these slabs, and can try to insert sleeves in to them again, through some private listing consigner, without the additional benefit that the custom holder swapping was giving him.

A list of every one of his submissions, needs to be posted somewhere.

I 100% agree that the missing link here is some intermingled dataset overlapping sales history with their submission history. 

These are hypotheticals to an alleged "holder tampering" incident, draw from this the inferences you feel are most compelling to the situation.

CGC is getting the sales history by going to one or more sources that track this information. What you asked for - submission history - is very reasonable, but CGC will never reveal that, at least not publicly. Privacy will likely be cited, and should a legal case develop, legal restrictions may apply in the future.

The other variable here, which is even more complex, is the donor sources outside of eBay for swaps. The submission history might illuminate some of these data gaps for us.

Not saying this to toot my horn, but as a matter of fact - I strongly believe that CGC will not have anywhere near the picture I've developed intermingling the sales history with the impacted list, using the methods I have. They may have a slight advantage by revewing the seller-linked submissions, but they need an impartial party - with the consumers best interest in mind - to look at it all overlapped to really draw out a more accurate impact. Even if they have "private investigators/forensic examiners" on the task, CGC is not compelled to share any findings it deems a risk to their reputation or actionable interests.

Regardless, there is no way any of these hypotheticals happen without the 350 swelling to nearing 1500 books. This is a conservative number, and I believe it could possibly be higher if we consider that every swap needs two books, one with a donor in an incorrectly assigned slab, with the added downside of the other either being in another incorrectly assigned slab, or in the waiting for an opportunistic swap.

Edited January 9 by comicwiz

[wiparker824]

On 1/9/2024 at 7:49 AM, MatterEaterLad said:

Whoever knows what store this is, please name it. They could be moving books thru unsuspecting IG sellers, FB sellers, small auction houses, etc.

Tempting… I still feel like this should be CGC’s responsibility to put whoever they feel is potentially connected out though. 

[comicwiz]

On 1/9/2024 at 9:59 AM, wiparker824 said:

Tempting… I still feel like this should be CGC’s responsibility to put whoever they feel is potentially connected out though. 

100% needs to be CGC

[awakeintheashes]

On 1/9/2024 at 9:53 AM, trademarkcomics said:

Actually, now that I think about it. He wouldn't be able to resub the cracked out SS copy, but he could sent it to that other company and get it put into a verified slab. So he could end up with say a verified 9.8 and turn a qualified 8.5 or something into a CGC SS 9.8. So he would have to have been selling verified slabs as well to show he was doing this...

Seems like a logical next step once the scammer got confident in their methods and practices. 

[GDN]

On 1/9/2024 at 6:42 AM, wiparker824 said:

For the record none of them are 2020. The one is now 1/5/24, they were all originally 2018. If they were 2020 we’d have bigger problems as it would imply Stan was resurrected to sign these for them to first be graded in 2020. But your point remains, the 6.5 was resubmitted for a custom label sometime after 2018 the 2.5 and 4.5 from that submission were not it would appear.

Thanks.  I corrected my post.

[trademarkcomics]

Have to wonder if this guy is a danger to society. Not all con men are sociopathic killers, but all sociopathic killers are con men.

"This guy crossed the line and didn't even blink."

[BrashL]

On 1/9/2024 at 8:58 AM, comicwiz said:

I 100% agree that the missing link here is some intermingled dataset overlapping sales history with their submission history. 

These are hypotheticals to an alleged "holder tampering" incident, draw from this the inferences you feel are most compelling to the situation.

CGC is getting the sales history by going to one or more sources that track this information. What you asked for - submission history - is very reasonable, but CGC will never reveal that, at least not publicly. Privacy will likely be cited, and should a legal case develop, legal restrictions may apply in the future.

The other variable here, which is even more complex, is the donor sources outside of eBay for swaps. The submission history might illuminate some of these data gaps for us.

Not saying this to toot my horn, but as a matter of fact - I strongly believe that CGC will not have anywhere near the picture I've developed intermingling the sales history with the impacted list, using the methods I have. They may have a slight advantage by revewing the seller-linked submissions, but they need an impartial party - with the consumers best interest in mind - to look at it all overlapped to really draw out a more accurate impact. Even if they have "private investigators/forensic examiners" on the task, CGC is not compelled to share any findings it deems a risk to their reputation or actionable interests.

Regardless, there is no way any of these hypotheticals happen without the 350 swelling to nearing 1500 books. This is a conservative number, and I believe it could possibly be higher if we consider that every swap needs two books, one with a donor in an incorrectly assigned slab, with the added downside of the other either in an incorrectly assigned slab, or in the waiting for an opportunistic swap.

This all brings it back to what a lot of people were saying originally, you can't trust any book in the current cases unless it's your book. Even then we need an explanation from CGC how so many books passed through the business without being flagged. Once there is a good explanation for how this fraud was perpetrated under their nose for so long, we need specific actions (what process has been changed, how many people have been replaced, etc.) that have been implemented. THEN we need a new case so collectors know what books they can trust and which ones they need to research to be sure they are what's on the label. Until then you'd have to be nuts to buy a CGC book for your own collection based on the information on the slab alone.