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

[MAR1979]

On 1/23/2024 at 1:09 PM, BlancoBros said:

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.

Is the consignee the "alleged" scammer/thief/crook/swindler/fraudster or one of their proxies? 

@COMICLINK

Edited January 23 by MAR1979

[NewWorldOrder]

On 1/23/2024 at 10:12 AM, comicwiz said:

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 a situation of this type deserves. 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 excluded from participating in alternative remedies, because as in the instance of the floods incorrectly being blamed on climate change as a way out for insurers to not only snake their way out of paying out claims (not to mention cross-selling "water" coverages as needing to be seperate 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), those impacted are going by the information being provided to them by the grader whose interest is to handle this matter privately. 

 

Assuming you are talking about the harder to replace comics right?  Because most of the common books are easily to be replaced in grade and given to the customer to be made whole again, or the money give is enough to replace them through current market values.

I am assuming you are talking about the Mark Jeweler's Newsstands that can not be easily found right?

Edited January 23 by NewWorldOrder

[comicwiz]

On 1/23/2024 at 1:29 PM, NewWorldOrder said:

Assuming you are talking about the harder to replace comics right?

When we are talking about FMV, we are talking about a value of something. As I've explained FMV is deficient in reconciling the past vs today or current value. Replacement value is the only method to arrive at a resolution because it incorporates factors of depreciation and market fluctuations. 

When you talk about "replacement" you're assuming someone is going to be content just getting that book accurately graded. You haven't thought far along enough to consider that what they might want is the money they paid for that book,knowing it was a tamper-proof holder,and that the book inside was what was being sold to them. 

You are assuming no one is going to want their money, their original purchase price. Not FMV. 

That's where you're assessment of this mess is deficient.

[NewWorldOrder]

On 1/23/2024 at 10:35 AM, comicwiz said:

When we are talking about FMV, we are talking about a value of something. As I've explained FMV is deficient in reconciling the past vs today or current value. Replacement value is the only method to arrive at a resolution because it incorporates factors of depreciation and market fluctuations. 

When you talk about "replacement" you're assuming someone is going to be content just getting that book accurately graded. You haven't thought far along enough to consider that what they might want is the money they paid for that book,knowing it was a tamper-proof holder,and that the book inside was what was being sold to them. 

You are assuming no one is going to want their money, their original purchase price. Not FMV. 

That's where you're assessment of this mess is deficient.

Yes I understand the difference and I was merely asking if in general you were just talking about the common books vs rare books.  (ASM 300's vs the MJ insert newsstands)

I understand now you are saying for everything that CGC determined was tampered with.  Got it.

However, I think trying to get replacement cost of what they actually paid is going to be be a tough hill to climb.  If the submitter wants a cash payout is what I think will happen for the more common books will just be market current values.  I do think when it comes to the rare books thats where I can see this getting very tricky.

 

Edited January 23 by NewWorldOrder

[BrashL]

On 1/23/2024 at 11:47 AM, NewWorldOrder said:

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.

 

What I'm saying is that we disagree on what I consider to be the fundamental issue so talking around it won't help. As far as negativity, I think we should let CGC know we when we aren't happy, that's how things get changed. 

[NewWorldOrder]

On 1/23/2024 at 10:58 AM, BrashL said:

What I'm saying is that we disagree on what I consider to be the fundamental issue so talking around it won't help. As far as negativity, I think we should let CGC know we when we aren't happy, that's how things get changed. 

Which is totally fine, my point was merely that just because you do not like my opinion I am not some CGC shill  

Trust me when I say many dealers in this hobby have helped guide CGC to positive changes over the years that many here on the boards do not know about. I have seen it first hand many times, but of course one of the ways for you to voice that opinion is here so I totally get that.  For me I just don't feel the need to constantly come on here and post all my thoughts for public viewing, that's all.  I just talk to them in person or directly in some form.

I remember years ago getting a tampered ASM #129 (first generation old label) CGC 9.4 that was switched out.  It was a CGC 9.0 inner-well in a CGC 9.4 holder.  Some people really figured out a way to switch those out, and the way they did was way easier than what anyone thinks about this current scam is.  So that's why I said earlier this 3rd generation case is the best they have so far, and of course new improvements would be a great idea in light of this current situation.  I just see when people want a new case in 24 hours or a week they are being unrealistic.

People from CGC are 110% reading all these posts so they are listening. 

Hope we have found some common ground.

Edited January 23 by NewWorldOrder

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/23/2024 at 2:56 PM, NewWorldOrder said:

I remember years ago getting a tampered ASM #129 (first generation old label) CGC 9.4 that was switched out.  It was a CGC 9.0 inner-well in a CGC 9.4 holder. 

How did you know it was previously a 9.0?

[wiparker824]

Does look like these books are getting new certs as they said but you can still look up both the old and the new in the verify tool which is not what they said, not sure if that’s going to be temporary or permanent. Here’s the ASM 1 8.0 SS new and old cert:

https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/1341998001/

https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4372423001/

The book is also up for sale in upcoming CL auction. 

[grendel013]

On 1/23/2024 at 12:16 PM, bc said:

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

Agreed! Thank you for posting this. I like thinktanks but not sure why anyone wants to clutter the label with a scan of the raw graded book. Or what purpose it would serve. Like you pointed out... it would be the size of a postage stamp. Then what?

[bc]

On 1/23/2024 at 3:44 PM, grendel013 said:

Agreed! Thank you for posting this. I like thinktanks but not sure why anyone wants to clutter the label with a scan of the raw graded book. Or what purpose it would serve. Like you pointed out... it would be the size of a postage stamp. Then what?

I didn't even mention the potential QC issues that could happen if someone submits multiple copies of the same book in near the same grades.

-bc

[Sigur Ros]

On 1/23/2024 at 12:16 PM, bc said:

 

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

 

Under the foil, where most custom labels go.

[comicjel]

On 1/23/2024 at 12:31 PM, NewWorldOrder said:

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.

That is a good point!

[THE_BEYONDER]

Has anyone here returned a slab from the list and been compensated for a tampered book?

Edited January 23 by THE_BEYONDER

[360flip]

On 1/23/2024 at 1:59 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

Has anyone here returned a slab from the list and been compensated for a tampered book?

precodemonster on insta has a tampered asm 238 that he sent in. Looks like still waiting for compensation.

https://www.instagram.com/p/C2SsF9hP8EA/?ref=badge” class%3D“ig-b- ig-b-v-24&hl=en

Edited January 24 by 360flip

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/23/2024 at 10:24 PM, 360flip said:

precodemonster on insta has a tampered asm 238 that he sent in. Looks like still waiting for compensation.

https://www.instagram.com/p/C2SsF9hP8EA/?ref=badge” class%3D“ig-b- ig-b-v-24&hl=en

Thanks for the link.  Will be interesting to see what the refund will be 

[wiparker824]

On 1/23/2024 at 8:24 PM, 360flip said:

precodemonster on insta has a tampered asm 238 that he sent in. Looks like still waiting for compensation.

https://www.instagram.com/p/C2SsF9hP8EA/?ref=badge” class%3D“ig-b- ig-b-v-24&hl=en

isn’t that this book?

hard to make out the cert number in the IG photo but it does look like that book, which has been crossed off the list. Also in the comments they said they got it off CL in Sept which does indeed line up with the CL sale for that cert:

https://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?id=1715892

If it’s crossed off and they’re being compensated does this mean CGC’s just crossing off all books returned to them? Regardless of if they’re verified as legit or not?

Edited January 24 by wiparker824

[Terry JSA]

On 1/3/2024 at 11:27 PM, Buzzetta said:

I'm taking out this time
To give you a piece of my mind
'Cause you can't knock the hustle
Who do you think you are?
Baby, one day you'll be a star

My exact thought process. I’m not knocking his hustle at all. This was absolutely genius.

[comicjel]

On 1/23/2024 at 3:44 PM, grendel013 said:

Agreed! Thank you for posting this. I like thinktanks but not sure why anyone wants to clutter the label with a scan of the raw graded book. Or what purpose it would serve. Like you pointed out... it would be the size of a postage stamp. Then what?

All I am saying is that scams that involve separating the books from the original labels would be harder to accomplish if the original label had the original comic scanned IMO.

Yes the scan would be small, and you certainly could not see minor details, but most comics have lines in the art that go to the edges of the book that are easy to see if they match or not (even with a small scan). 

Also, it is just one tool - if something did not match up well, you could then go to the "verify" scan and see more detail.

Just looking for deterrents to the scam we know, that maybe can be implemented ahead of a 2 year case redesign.  

 

[comicwiz]

On 1/23/2024 at 10:50 PM, wiparker824 said:

If it’s crossed off and they’re being compensated does this mean CGC’s just crossing off all books returned to them? Regardless of if they’re verified as legit or not?

The method being used is completely counter-intuitive to be able to track progress or developments on this impacted list. 

There should be no reason (I can't see this being indeliberate either, because someone planning out the books on the  "impacted" list would surely recognize the issues this would cause) for strikethroughs to comingle books that have been reviewed as legitimate with those deemed compromised.

They're calling it in with the reportfraud@ email in red notation:

They're striking it off the list (we know from precodemonster he's been told it's compromised):

Add this to the ever growing pile of things that make no sense in the the methods being used, not to mention the confusion this creates for those monitoring this list and/or using it to assess what's been impacted and what's been struck off the list (appearing prior to this, books that were determined to be ok).

Edited January 24 by comicwiz

[BrashL]

On 1/24/2024 at 9:43 AM, comicwiz said:

The method being used is completely counter-intuitive to be able to track progress or developments on this impacted list. 

There should be no reason (I can't see this being indeliberate either, because someone planning out the books on the  "impacted" list would surely recognize the issues this would cause) for strikethroughs to comingle books that have been reviewed as legitimate with those deemed compromised.

They're calling it in:

They're striking it off the list (we know from precodemonster he's been told it's compromised:

Add this to the ever growing pile of things that make no sense in the the methods being used, not to mention the confusion this creates for those monitoring this list and/or using it to assess what's been impacted and what's been struck off the list (appearing prior to this, books that were determined to be ok).

Multiple notes on a 9.8? What crazy multiverse did I fall into?