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

[wiparker824]

On 1/23/2024 at 6:36 AM, lostboys said:

 

 

 

Does anyone else find it odd that no one is mentioning UF4 or TWD1...these books were pretty damn hot during the pandemic.

 

 

 

There is a copy of TWD1 on the list. Just not the volume compared to the Spidey books. Seemed like the scammer preferred copper or older particularly if the book had some sort of extra rare version like newsstand, MJI, MVS intact, Tattooz intact, etc.

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/23/2024 at 8:49 AM, wiparker824 said:

There is a copy of TWD1 on the list. Just not the volume compared to the Spidey books. Seemed like the scammer preferred copper or older particularly if the book had some sort of extra rare version like newsstand, MJI, MVS intact, Tattooz intact, etc.

How have sales been on ASM 238?

[wiparker824]

On 1/23/2024 at 6:54 AM, THE_BEYONDER said:

How have sales been on ASM 238?

Only 1 sold so far in 2024 (tracked by GPA) and it was above the 90 day average. I think with that book, others like 252 I’m looking to see where the more rare versions land… like the Canadian Price Variant for 238 and the MJI for 252. The last sales of these versions of these books were dominated by books from the scammer. So will be interesting to see where those go with his books out of the picture. Could even go up higher if those books are out of the market and there’s all of the sudden a bunch of people with checks from CGC looking to replace them. 

Edited January 23 by wiparker824

[comicwiz]

Information wittheld.

Edited February 15 by comicwiz

[BrashL]

On 1/23/2024 at 5:48 AM, NewWorldOrder said:

Best in the Industry?  Yes, I personally feel CGC's case is the best in the industry. 

LOL, OK I think we're done here then. Just remember, it's OK to criticize a company you like. Companies don't have feelings. 

Edited January 23 by BrashL

[paqart]

On 1/22/2024 at 12:34 PM, agamoto said:

As the frequency of comments in this thread begins to wane and the community and CGC continue to process this incidence, I wanted to provide more concrete information below in order to clarify options available to the community in these circumstances.

If you have incurred financial loss due to purchasing comics online that were subsequently swapped out with different books, this constitutes criminal fraudulent misrepresentation, and any online transaction involving these books or shipment of them across state lines is considered felony wire fraud. CGC has requested you report such incidents to them via email at ReportFraud@CollectiblesGroup.com. However, this should not be your only course of action. It is essential, whether you purchased the item in person with cash or over the internet, to report the details to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) at https://reportfraud.ftc.gov. The FTC is tasked with protecting consumers and addressing issues of fraud and deception in the marketplace. 

Moreover, any fraudulent transaction that occurred online should also be reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) at https://www.ic3.gov/. The IC3 is instrumental in gathering reports on internet-related criminal activities and forwarding them to the appropriate law enforcement agencies for further investigation. While CGC has expressed their intention to fairly compensate those who have suffered losses, the specifics of this compensation are still not clear. It is crucial for victims to understand that there are no individual legal remedies for recovering losses without first filing a report with the proper law enforcement authorities. CGC cannot and will not file this report for you, as they are not the direct victims of this fraud.

Technically speaking, one could argue CGC was inadvertently involved in facilitating the fraud against consumers, but it's critical to remember they are also victims of fraudulent misrepresentation here. That, however, is a civil matter between the responsible parties and CGC. Had the fraud not been discovered by CGC's customers, CGC theoretically would have profited considerably from the scheme, given the amount of fees involved in grading and re-grading such a significant number of high-grade books in addition to their reholder fees. CGC can indeed take legal action against those they determine responsible for damaging their reputation, covering costs associated with reimbursing victims, private investigations, legal fees, and process mitigation. However, what they cannot do is 'press charges' or 'prosecute' anyone who may have defrauded individual customers with a swapped book. The consumers, not CGC, are the victims of this fraud. While CGC has pledged to hold those responsible accountable 'to the fullest extent of the law,' they might wish to provide clearer communication to customers and victims about which specific 'law' they are referring to. CGC should clarify whether their legal team intends to represent all victims, including CGC, in any potential future lawsuit they may file. Additionally, CGC should make it clear to customers and victims that third parties like PayPal, eBay, Instagram, etc., cannot file a fraud report on an individual’s behalf either.

Furthermore, CGC should also inform concerned customers and victims that sending any suspect book to CGC before consulting with local/state/federal law enforcement, personal legal representation, or before filing any criminal complaints could potentially jeopardize any direct legal recourse for recovering losses from those indicted and convicted for this fraud in a criminal court.

Others in this thread have expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of such reporting. However, it is important to understand that failing to report these incidents assuredly guarantees that no action will be taken. The collective reporting of these crimes greatly assists federal agencies in identifying and tackling such fraudulent schemes. These steps not only aid in your pursuit of justice but also contribute to the broader effort to combat online fraud and protect others from similar deceptive practices. As individuals who have suffered from these fraudulent activities, it is your right and responsibility to yourself, to other victims, and to potential victims, to report these incidents.

That's my 2 cents. 

A good point related to this is that just compensation is different if you go to the seller (via police) or CGC. CGC compensates for (current) FMV. If you go to the seller, you could theoretically a full refund + damages. If you paid more than it is currently worth, then the best options are to go after the seller for a full refund, or to CGC for a replacement book that is legitimately the grade and comic represented on the holder.

Edited January 23 by paqart

[paqart]

On 1/23/2024 at 8:39 AM, THE_BEYONDER said:

The scammer didn’t seem to target these books 

It would have been nearly impossible to find newsstand editions in any grade. When I tried finding one on eBay last year, I had to plow through 1,500 listings before finding one, and it wasn't 9.8.

[comicwiz]

On 1/23/2024 at 9:58 AM, paqart said:

A good point related to this is that just compensation is different if you go to the seller (via police) or CGC. 1) CGC compensates for (current) FMV. 2) If you go to the seller, you could theoretically a full refund + damages. If you paid more than it is currently worth, then the 2) best options are to go after the seller for a full refund, 1) or to CGC for a replacement book that is legitimately the grade and comic represented on the holder.

I don't see the scenario I marked 2) in your comment being possible without some LE or Federal oversight. The problem with the scenario I marked as 1) is that there is nothing in The CGC Guarantee that accomodates or reconciles that scenario. It needs to be more than a verbal assurance - it needs to be in writing.

To me, using the FMV angle is no different than actual cash value (ACV) which is something that does not reconcile disparities in depreciation, or in this instance, the impacts of market fluctations between the timeline of these books originally being purchased and the discovery of this "holder tampering."

There's so much I can expand on in this regard, but what I will say is that replacement value (RV) would have been suited to accomodate the massive fluctuations we've seen since the peak markets of 2020/21.

Seeing FMV thrown out in an incident of this magnitude, is like paying for a 5 star all-inclusive resort,and when you're checking-in, they give you discount coupons for McDonalds instead of what was marketed to you.

It's baffling to me especialy when I see people talking about the "market advantages" of using CGC - they are clearly deluded, and have become the bizarro world alternate of the spoon-feeding that allowed CGC to achieve the foothold they have.

When you combine the above inadequacies of The CGC Guarantee, and an exploited "tamper-proof" holder, all you're really hanging on to is a misinformed opinion and view that is going to leave you exposed for ignoring the signs and evidence proving otherwise.

Edited January 23 by comicwiz

[wiparker824]

The other question I have I don’t believe has been brought up around FMV is are they going to estimate the FMV as of mid-December 2023 when the scam was discovered or when they receive your book? Because there will be some people who don’t follow every news story from CGC and don’t realize their book is on this list until let’s say 3 years from now when they send it to an auction house and are notified. Then what? Let’s say the FMV at that time is 50% less than today? What if it’s 50% more? Is CGC going to pay out the FMV at the time they receive the books indefinitely? Because if they are, even if you know your book is on the list you could in theory just hold it until the FMV hits whatever value you’re waiting on to sell if you want to roll the dice.

We are now hearing from some people who are getting their books sent back to them as clean books, which is great. I’ll be interested to hear from those that went thru the FMV process though. 

[shadroch]

On 1/23/2024 at 7:26 AM, BrashL said:

LOL, OK I think we're done here then. Just remember, it's OK to criticize a company you like. Companies don't have feelings. 

The CGC slab is the kindest, warmest, bravest slab humanity has ever known.

[paqart]

On 1/23/2024 at 10:38 AM, comicwiz said:

I don't see the scenario I marked 2) in your comment being possible without some LE or Federal oversight. The problem with the scenario I marked as 1) is that there is nothing in The CGC Guarantee that accomodates or reconciles that scenario. It needs to be more than a verbal assurance - it needs to be in writing.

To me, using the FMV angle is no different than actual cash value (ACV) which is something that does not reconcile disparities in depreciation, or in this instance, the impacts of market fluctations between the timeline of these books originally being purchased and the discovery of this "holder tampering."

There's so much I can expand on in this regard, but what I will say is that replacement value (RV) would have been suited to accomodate the massive fluctuations we've seen since the peak markets of 2020/21.

Seeing FMV thrown out in an incident of this magnitude, is like paying for a 5 star all-inclusive resort,and when you're checking-in, they give you discount coupons for McDonalds instead of what was marketed to you.

It's baffling to me especialy when I see people talking about the "market advantages" of using CGC - they are clearly deluded, and have become the bizarro world alternate of the spoon-feeding that allowed CGC to achieve the foothold they have.

When you combine the above inadequacies of The CGC Guarantee, and an exploited "tamper-proof" holder, all you're really hanging on to is a misinformed opinion and view that is going to leave you exposed for ignoring the signs and evidence proving otherwise.

The option you labeled 1 is what CGC is offering right now, as I understand it. The other option circumvents CGC completely, as an inadequate solution. The way it's presented atm, as I understand it, is this:

1) You paid $20k at the top of the market, comic is now worth $10k. CGC gives you $10k and keeps the comic.

2) You paid $20k at the top of the market, comic is now worth $10k. You keep the comic, and the taint attached to the cert number, so it is now unsellable.

I'm suggesting the following two options for this scenario:

3) You paid $20k at the top of the market, comic is now worth $10k. You go through the police/FBI/seller/seller's agent (eBay/CL/etc) to get full reimbursement for purchase price.

4) You spent $20k for a 9.8 MJI ASM 238. CGC finds another copy, legit, and replaces your comic with the one they find that is a legit 9.8 ASM 238 with MJI, no matter what it costs them to obtain it. Personally, I think this is the best option, not selling the comic to CGC. It puts the onus on them to give the collector what they bought.

Edited January 23 by paqart

[comicjel]

On 1/22/2024 at 7:56 PM, NewWorldOrder said:

Interesting

So do you mean like on label it self?  or do you mean available to see online once you put in the cert#?

If I were advising CGC, I would improve the label itself to include a high resolution scan of the ungraded book (right after being graded, but before slabbing) - maybe front of book on front of label, and back of book on back of label.

I know they include scans now in the cert verify, and those are good!, but I think having the scan on the label (right above the actual book) would be easy to compare when buying online (or in person).

Not a be all end all cure for all scams, just an added feature that would make this type of scam harder to pull off.

[wiparker824]

On 1/23/2024 at 8:59 AM, paqart said:

The option you labeled 1 is what CGC is offering right now, as I understand it. The other option circumvents CGC completely, as an inadequate solution. The way it's presented atm, as I understand it, is this:

1) You paid $20k at the top of the market, comic is now worth $10k. CGC gives you $10k and keeps the comic.

2) You paid $20k at the top of the market, comic is now worth $10k. You keep the comic, and the taint attached to the cert number, so it is now unsellable.

I'm suggesting the following two options for this scenario:

3) You paid $20k at the top of the market, comic is now worth $10k. You go through the police/FBI/seller/seller's agent (eBay/CL/etc) to get full reimbursement for purchase price.

4) You spent $20k for a 9.8 MJI ASM 238. CGC finds another copy, legit, and replaces your comic with the one they find that is a legit 9.8 ASM 238 with MJI, no matter what it costs them to obtain it. Personally, I think this is the best option, not selling the comic to CGC. It puts the onus on them to give the collector what they bought.

Option 4 presents a conflict of interest for them. If they start sourcing books that are rare like ASM 238 9.8 MJI like you said they are now inserting themselves into a very small market. It’s not an easy book to find, unless you find a raw 9.6 and it’s close enough and you own the grading company so you can just throw it into a 9.8 holder to get you out of the problem… which is one reason I’d not want that if I owned one of these books. Not to mention not all books particularly in the non-9.8 grade range are the same to a collector. If you’re someone who is buying a IH181 in a 9.0 you may have flaws you prefer in that grade, and flaws you don’t want to see. If you let CGC pick the book they will get whatever one they can find for the lowest amount. Similarly the SS books on this list were often signed on the back, already hard to find books, not going to be easy or even possible to source the same book signed on the back by creators who are no longer living.

This same reasoning is why I think just getting a check for FMV is problematic, because in many cases even if you get the check to buy a replacement you may not be able to find one on the market. Sure if it’s just a direct edition ASM 300 you will be able to but some of these books on here just aren’t out there for sale constantly to just get a replacement right away. 

What I said many pages ago would be the best option is for CGC to pay the current FMV OR the sale price the current owner paid (if you can provide receipt) - whichever is higher. This would give the current owner the maximum amount regardless of if the book has went up or down since they bought it. But I don’t think that’s realistically going to happen. 

[bc]

On 1/23/2024 at 11:39 AM, comicjel said:

If I were advising CGC, I would improve the label itself to include a high resolution scan of the ungraded book (right after being graded, but before slabbing) - maybe front of book on front of label, and back of book on back of label.

I know they include scans now in the cert verify, and those are good!, but I think having the scan on the label (right above the actual book) would be easy to compare when buying online (or in person).

Not a be all end all cure for all scams, just an added feature that would make this type of scam harder to pull off.

IMHO - Don't think that putting a scanned image of the book on the label is going to do anything to stop fraud.

The image is going to be as big as postage stamp, if that. There's no way to see any level of detail to verify that the actual slabbed book is the same.

Here's a sample label:

Where are you going to put the image at without a total redesign?

Guess they could put it on the back of the label - but again, it's going to be too small to discern any unique characteristics of that specific book.

-bc

[NewWorldOrder]

On 1/23/2024 at 5:21 AM, wiparker824 said:

I’m not comparing to Covid prices, that’s why I presented the 90 day averages and the last sale price. If I was comparing to Covid prices these would be insanely low since these books were hitting $5,800 in the Covid peak. But again I wasn’t, and there’s no point in doing that so I’m not sure why you’re bringing that up. 

And also $2100 is 20-30% lower than the 90 day average and the last sale. Not sure why it needs to be an additional 20-30% lower than that but okay. I’m guessing if the next one hits that you’ll move the goalposts again. 

By you not there do you mean you were not in the Hobby?

Why?  Because the book is common and fairly easy to find in high grade.

I am saying if I waken up from a 2019 coma I would been very happy to get 2k for such a common book.

The books downward trend has more to do with other factors than the case tampering which is what you were deciding if that was the case (no pun intended)

Edited January 23 by NewWorldOrder

[NewWorldOrder]

On 1/23/2024 at 8:39 AM, comicjel said:

If I were advising CGC, I would improve the label itself to include a high resolution scan of the ungraded book (right after being graded, but before slabbing) - maybe front of book on front of label, and back of book on back of label.

I know they include scans now in the cert verify, and those are good!, but I think having the scan on the label (right above the actual book) would be easy to compare when buying online (or in person).

Not a be all end all cure for all scams, just an added feature that would make this type of scam harder to pull off.

My only rebuttal to that is I as a submitter really dont want another person handling my books before grading.  More chances of damage before the grader even touches the book.

[paqart]

On 1/23/2024 at 12:01 PM, wiparker824 said:

 

What I said many pages ago would be the best option is for CGC to pay the current FMV OR the sale price the current owner paid (if you can provide receipt) - whichever is higher. This would give the current owner the maximum amount regardless of if the book has went up or down since they bought it. But I don’t think that’s realistically going to happen. 

That makes sense to me.

Your comment reminds me of my own CGC-related issue with a rare comic. It isn't valuable btw, just rare. I sent in a Fantastic Four #24 (1999) $2.29 price variant for grading. It came back a 9.0, but it was damaged during the holdering process, causing a detached cover. They offered to, I think, refund the grading fee and pay FMV for the comic, but it isn't worth much anyway. What was worth something to me is the 2 years it took to find it and the fact I still haven't seen another for sale. So, I kept the comic because it is still the only example I've been able to find. I expect that someday it will be worth more, but in this case, I paid money to have my comic damaged and got bupkus in return. Not only that, but if I ever do sell it, I have to take it out of the holder so that the buyer can't pretend it really is a 9.0. After the damage it suffered, it isn't.

The experience was unsatisfying, but I don't know what CGC could have done. They would have had a hard time finding one also, with no guarantee it's in the right condition if they got lucky and found one. They can't pay what I think it might be worth in 10-20 years, but my cash into it is meaningless (maybe $5 for the comic plus $30 for the grading+shipping). So, it's a dead loss to me. Selling it to them for the grading fee and FMV would require sacrificing the only copy of that variant I've been able to find, so I kept it. The only satisfactory outcome would be if CGC replaced it with another $2.29 variant in the same or better condition, but there's almost zero chance they could do that even if they were willing.

[NewWorldOrder]

On 1/23/2024 at 6:26 AM, BrashL said:

LOL, OK I think we're done here then. Just remember, it's OK to criticize a company you like. Companies don't have feelings. 

Because you dont agree with something I said "we are done." 

I am assuming then you skim read as per most here.  I said many times in this thread weeks ago this was simple problem that CGC could have stopped if they followed basic protocols in terms of the reholdering process.  I mean what else is there to say past that?

I am just not going to post over and over the same non-sense as many here have and be super negative on every post.  Any reasonable person would take my last post in response to you as a reasonable response and an opinion. The fact you can't respond in kind with a thought out rebuttal is on you.

 

[BlancoBros]

On 1/22/2024 at 2:44 PM, wiparker824 said:

Also, one other tidbit, the newsstand copy isn’t on the list but a book from that same submission 4287881003 is on the list and has yet to be crossed off. Is it because the 003 book was submitted for a custom label and the 001 book was not? We don’t know because we aren’t being told how this list was compiled or how books are being determined to be clean and then crossed off. 

Similarly, on comiclink upcoming auctions and there is ASM 194 cert# 4290512-003. Its not on the 350 list but was submitted at the same time as (which are on the list):

4290512-004 New Mutants #98 1991 9.8 (Universal)

4290512-005 Amazing Spider-Man #300 1988 9.8 (Universal)

Looks like they are cashing out anonymously. One right after another.

[comicwiz]

On 1/23/2024 at 10:55 AM, wiparker824 said:

The other question I have I don’t believe has been brought up around FMV is are they going to estimate the FMV as of mid-December 2023 when the scam was discovered or when they receive your book? Because there will be some people who don’t follow every news story from CGC and don’t realize their book is on this list until let’s say 3 years from now when they send it to an auction house and are notified. Then what? Let’s say the FMV at that time is 50% less than today? What if it’s 50% more? Is CGC going to pay out the FMV at the time they receive the books indefinitely? Because if they are, even if you know your book is on the list you could in theory just hold it until the FMV hits whatever value you’re waiting on to sell if you want to roll the dice.

We are now hearing from some people who are getting their books sent back to them as clean books, which is great. I’ll be interested to hear from those that went thru the FMV process though. 

This is why I mention FMV is not equipped to handle situations such as this incident. By its very definition, it requires both buyer/seller to know all relevent facts, have a reasonable knowledge of what they are purchasing, and are entering into the transaction or trade free from pressure. The fact each buyer purchased a "tampered" comic known to have had it's holder tampered with at a later time, means it is deficient in retroactively assisting with an assessment of adequate compensation at the time the discovery of tampering occurred. 

As most already know (and I've certainly said this enough in past posts) replacement value is the most capable of handling some of the more complex issues this situation presents. Part of it is the messy situation of compensating victims who bought in a peak market, and are now facing the prospect of being offered current values for that book,which have in many instances, dropped significantly from 2020 and 2021 prices.

In a real world scenario outside of this scandal, the complexities associated to exploting the holder, and rendering the property to be of even less value than the tampered holder/label would indicate, would be akin to an extreme weather event like the flooding which occurred some years back due to lake level mismanagement. In that situation, coastal home owners who had never experienced a flood situation in their lives were being denied coverage by their insurers, who had found a way to wiggle themselves out of compensation,citing that homeowners now needed to carry a seperate water damage rider. What happened here is homeowners were misinformed that this unexplained flooding event was caused by "climate change" when in fact, it had nothing to do with climate change, and everything to do with the IJC's decisions to raise water levels for shipping. hydroelectric generation, and recreational boating.

This prompted the State of New York to go after the IJC for $1 Billion relating to the misnamanagement of lake-levels causing flooding damage that reached coastal communities in NY. Had this been more well known,what should have occurred as soon as this event took place is for all homeowners who had been denied coverage to demand from their insurance company to cover their damages, and for the insurance industry to devise a subrogation plan to recover damages from the IJC. 

It may seem a crude example to bring up, but I see a lot of parallels from the steps currently being taken. Using the "fair" in FMV is a euphamism for taking a financial hit in the chin, not because it's an accurate way to arrive at a compensation that is deserving to people impacted in this situation. For the above reasons, as well as all the other info I've shared thus far, I think the only chance for appropriate redress is to get the Feds involved. It would be a shame if customers who participate in the options offered by The CGC Guarantee find themselves being disqualified or excluded from participating in alternative remedies. In the instance of the floods incorrectly being blamed on climate change as way a for insurers to wiggle out of paying out claims, not to mention how they used the flooding impacting hundreds of homeowners as an opportunity to cross-sell "water" coverages as a separate rider (and yes, I'm aware that as I write this, it is too eerily reminiscent of the 9.9 prescreen pitch during the interview) - with this incident, those impacted are also going by the information being provided to them by the grader whose interest is to handle this matter privately.

 

Edited January 23 by comicwiz