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

[comicwiz]

On 2/7/2024 at 12:07 PM, CJ Design said:

Didn't think you forgot...verifying you were on it. I have the complete pin-up list if you happen to need it.

We are on the same wavelength here, yes, please send that along. 

[paqart]

On 2/7/2024 at 4:36 AM, MyNameIsLegion said:

Exactly. Which is why it is near certain it will never happen.  CGC is banking on this, literally and figuratively. They would much rather pay-off any known victims that send their books back in, and destroy the evidence in the process. NO single victim that could file a credible criminal complaint is out more than a few thousand, maybe 5 figures in a few instances, and they don't know that for certain without cracking it themselves or sending it in to CGC. The perp will never see the inside of a criminal court. This is a romantic notion borne from watching too many courtroom dramas on TV.  The individual victims are spread far and wide, across states, so local and state authorities won't bother. the feds won't bother either, because no one that comes to them can name any of the other victims to join the complaint, and I seriously doubt they can convince a Fed to read 396 pages of this thread to get an inkling of the crime. Only CGC is in a position to make that happen, and they are possibly the LAST entity on earth that would feel compelled to do so. There's literally nothing in it for them, and probably only more embarrassment. 

Just for fun, I'm going to do a mental exercise by imagining what I would do if I was a victim. Speaking of which, I still haven't found my CGC ASM 252 I wanted to check against the list. For this exercise, let's say I bought a Stan Lee signed JIM 83 SS label 6.0 for $25k. In reality, it is 3.5 and the signature wasn't witnessed, making it worth about $8k.

So, what am I out? The comic or the money? From my point of view, the comic is more important than the money, so that's what I want from CGC, a 6.0 SS Stan Lee signature JIM 83. Instead, they offer FMV.

Let's say FMV for the original label is currently $17,500. That wouldn't make me happy because it is a loss of $7,500 and I lose a signed comic. So, I'd ask for $25k. If CGC refused, I'd keep the comic and hand the whole thing over to the FBI. 

If CGC paid the $25k, I'd probably drop it right there.

What happens if the value went up after purchase? If CGC offered to refund my purchase price, but I couldn't afford to replace my comic for what they offered, I'd go straight to law enforcement.

What bothers me about the deal offered by CGC is that once I turn it in for evaluation, if it proves to be a swap, I lose the comic and have to accept their terms. If I don't like their terms, I have no negotiating power at all, and can't easily go to law enforcement. For that reason, I think I would go to law enforcement first. I'd tell them what happened, show them the comic and receipts, and ask whether I should go to CGC. They would probably have to go through CGC anyway to validate the story, but now they know what is going on and have their eyes on the case.

The bad thing about going straight to law enforcement is that I might not get any reimbursement and the comic would be taken as evidence. With that in mind, maybe I would send it to CGC, but would tell law enforcement about it and document every step, including all communications with CGC. I would swear out a complaint against the 2 perps, regardless whether CGC made me whole.

[HotKey]

I would hope any and all independent investigation firms looking into this take a long hard look at all the quality control posts and missing books posts from the last few years as well.

[paqart]

I was thinking about the SS comics last night. Is it plausible that the signatures are real but they weren't witnessed? Then someone managed to get SS labels and stuck them in SS cases? Were there prior sales to rule that out?

[paqart]

On 2/7/2024 at 7:42 AM, agamoto said:

What the defendents sold to consumers was not a counterfeit.

I believe they were textbook "counterfeit" regardless of your explanation. The reason is that, from the consumer's point of view, they were buying a (for instance) 9.0 IH181 that had an MVS missing, so it was not a legitimate 9.0. The case created the false impression that the IH181 was something it wasn't. The combination of the comic, case, and label is a "counterfeit 9.0 IH181" even if the comic isn't a counterfeit IH181, the case isn't counterfeit, nor is the label.

This is why they're suing under the Lanham Act, which covers false designation of origin (which is what I sued Harris Comics, Fox Television, and Chris Carter for), but also such things as falsely labeled knockoff blue jeans or Rolex watches. In the case of blue jeans, the trousers might be real blue jeans and may even be based on the same pattern and use the same materials, but if they weren't made by whoever the label says they were made by (false designation of origin) like Levi's, then they are counterfeit. That is true even if the label itself is genuine, but stripped from another pair of trousers. That is exactly what happened here. Real label, case, and comic, but they don't belong together. It is a false designation of origin because the grade and the comic don't go together. The seller is representing that the 9.0 was assigned to that comic by CGC, but that isn't true. Therefore, false designation of origin.

[paqart]

On 2/7/2024 at 7:42 AM, agamoto said:

 

@36:00 - Giving credit to the CGC lawyers for doing such a great job... I'll be brutally honest here. Whatever CGC paid Kroll or the outside counsel involved in gathering all the info needed to dump into this complaint, it was probably way too much.

Figuring out the scam here is not the same as constructing a tight lawsuit. That's like saying "the actors do all the work" and not crediting the writers, director, cinematographer, etc. That, or the reverse, "the actor didn't do anything, it was all the behind the camera guys who made the movie great."

[comicjel]

On 2/7/2024 at 12:15 PM, paqart said:

I was thinking about the SS comics last night. Is it plausible that the signatures are real but they weren't witnessed? Then someone managed to get SS labels and stuck them in SS cases? Were there prior sales to rule that out?

I can't put my finger on the scam, but my gut tells me that those SS books from the scammer are not what they appear to be.

[agamoto]

On 2/7/2024 at 9:15 AM, paqart said:

I was thinking about the SS comics last night. Is it plausible that the signatures are real but they weren't witnessed? Then someone managed to get SS labels and stuck them in SS cases? Were there prior sales to rule that out?

While it would involve removing and reinserting a book into an inner sleeve, which I don't think has been on anyones radar in all of this, all it would take to effectively duplicate a sloppy ol' sharpie signature on any book is a $550 axidraw and the appropriate color sharpie. I personally don't believe for a second anyone would have the balls to do such a thing on such big books and then send them into CGC. 

[agamoto]

On 2/7/2024 at 9:29 AM, paqart said:

Figuring out the scam here is not the same as constructing a tight lawsuit. That's like saying "the actors do all the work" and not crediting the writers, director, cinematographer, etc. That, or the reverse, "the actor didn't do anything, it was all the behind the camera guys who made the movie great."

It's not like saying either of those things. It's like saying CGC has likely paid, or will pay, a substantial sum to Kroll and to Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP for what amounts to a a copy/paste of the Provenance NGC LCC v. Albright suit, plugging in all the info and pictures dredged up by CGC forum detectives. 

The comment I made was in context of Lasko heaping praise on his colleagues for how they demonstrated the differences between the books before and after reholder. You may disagree, but @comicwiz did it better.

[WestcoastDAVEngers]

On 2/7/2024 at 9:30 AM, comicjel said:

I can't put my finger on the scam, but my gut tells me that those SS books from the scammer are not what they appear to be.

Why are all the Stan Lee signatures on the back cover? As someone who worked in the memorabilia industry for 15 years, working for places like Steiner Sports.. for example:  I have never seen anyone decide to get a Kings puck signed by Gretzky on the back where the kings logo ISN'T.

You can make a case for "he was trying to not ruin the front cover art" but signature placement is a HUGE deal when it comes to getting a premium. 

You don't get Slash to sign the back of a Les Paul, just like you don't get someone to sign on the back of an 8x10 photo.

Game worn jerseys are the only thing I see people getting signed on the inside, as to not detract from the game-worn aspect of it.

 

All that being said, why did CBS decide to be a "trend setter" and getting stacks and stacks of huge silver age keys signed by Stan on the back cover.

Nothing to me, is more fishy than that.

Edited February 7 by WestcoastDAVEngers

[sledgehammer]

On 2/7/2024 at 1:21 PM, WestcoastDAVEngers said:

All that being said, why did CBS decide to be a "trend setter" and getting stacks and stacks of huge silver age keys signed by Stan on the back cover.

Nothing to me, is more fishy than that.

I agree, and I've been wondering why. The issue is what do you do with the higher graded copy, of say 2 copies of JIM 85, where the lower graded book was put in the higher grade slab.

I guess you would still have the higher grade book, with a blue label and a note that says, "Stan lee written in ink on the back cover", but that just feels odd to me.

[WestcoastDAVEngers]

On 2/7/2024 at 11:26 AM, sledgehammer said:

I agree, and I've been wondering why. The issue is what do you do with the higher graded copy, of say 2 copies of JIM 85, where the lower graded book was put in the higher grade slab.

I guess you would still have the higher grade book, with a blue label and a note that says, "Stan lee written in ink on the back cover", but that just feels odd to me.

Yeah I have trouble figuring it out , but it just doesn't smell right.

[paqart]

On 2/7/2024 at 2:20 PM, agamoto said:

It's not like saying either of those things. It's like saying CGC has likely paid, or will pay, a substantial sum to Kroll and to Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP for what amounts to a a copy/paste of the Provenance NGC LCC v. Albright suit, plugging in all the info and pictures dredged up by CGC forum detectives. 

The comment I made was in context of Lasko heaping praise on his colleagues for how they demonstrated the differences between the books before and after reholder. You may disagree, but @comicwiz did it better.

Not sure I agree with you. I'm familiar with putting exhibits together and can say that what they did in the lawsuit was much easier to understand than anything I've seen on this forum. I happen to know what to look for when comparing comics, but it still takes careful examination to find the similarities. The way they're highlighted in the case is much easier to see, is clear, and doesn't require specialist knowledge of what to look for.
 

Edited February 8 by paqart
irrrelevant info

[comicwiz]

On 2/7/2024 at 12:14 PM, paqart said:

The bad thing about going straight to law enforcement is that I might not get any reimbursement and the comic would be taken as evidence.

You'd be surprised. I know of two large scale scandals where the FBI were involved. Nothing was surrendered to them by the owners. In fact, they weren't discouraged from selling the items, despite one incident involving a payout by an insurer. I think people immediately think, if I involve the authorities or Feds, I won't see my stuff again, I don't think that is the case in every instance, and of the items that were used as evidence, I didn't know anyone that had a problem getting it back.

[comicwiz]

On 2/7/2024 at 2:21 PM, WestcoastDAVEngers said:

Why are all the Stan Lee signatures on the back cover? As someone who worked in the memorabilia industry for 15 years, working for places like Steiner Sports.. for example:  I have never seen anyone decide to get a Kings puck signed by Gretzky on the back where the kings logo ISN'T.

You can make a case for "he was trying to not ruin the front cover art" but signature placement is a HUGE deal when it comes to getting a premium. 

You don't get Slash to sign the back of a Les Paul, just like you don't get someone to sign on the back of an 8x10 photo.

Game worn jerseys are the only thing I see people getting signed on the inside, as to not detract from the game-worn aspect of it.

 

All that being said, why did CBS decide to be a "trend setter" and getting stacks and stacks of huge silver age keys signed by Stan on the back cover.

Nothing to me, is more fishy than that.

We will need to circle back to this, but I 100% agree with your assessment of the location and placement.

[comicwiz]

On 2/7/2024 at 1:53 PM, agamoto said:

While it would involve removing and reinserting a book into an inner sleeve, which I don't think has been on anyones radar in all of this, all it would take to effectively duplicate a sloppy ol' sharpie signature on any book is a $550 axidraw and the appropriate color sharpie. I personally don't believe for a second anyone would have the balls to do such a thing on such big books and then send them into CGC. 

My eyes want to see the validity in this, but my gut tells me that it would be much easier to reproduce the entire wrap.

[paqart]

On 2/7/2024 at 2:39 PM, comicwiz said:

We will need to circle back to this, but I 100% agree with your assessment of the location and placement.

Now that you mention it, this seems strange to me also. I don't like signatures now, but when I was a kid, I sought them out. I remember asking Jim Starlin to sign on the first page instead of the cover, to not mar the cover, but wouldn't have had him sign a back cover that had no art.

[comicwiz]

On 2/7/2024 at 2:37 PM, paqart said:

Not sure I agree with you. I'm familiar with putting exhibits together and can say that what they did in the lawsuit was much easier to understand than anything I've seen on this forum.

It may be easier to understand for "joe public", but it is not accurate to the nuanced aspect of the deception. 

[sledgehammer]

On 2/7/2024 at 1:33 PM, WestcoastDAVEngers said:

On 2/7/2024 at 1:26 PM, sledgehammer said:

I agree, and I've been wondering why. The issue is what do you do with the higher graded copy, of say 2 copies of JIM 85, where the lower graded book was put in the higher grade slab.

I guess you would still have the higher grade book, with a blue label and a note that says, "Stan lee written in ink on the back cover", but that just feels odd to me.

Yeah I have trouble figuring it out , but it just doesn't smell right.

There is an Avengers 4 pressing example on the site, that went from a 9.0 Blue, to a 9.4 Yellow, stan back cover.

Almost certainly the same book.

What also doesn't smell right to me, and there may be a rational explanation, is the consistent effort to blur the view of all cert numbers.

It doesn't scream out transparency, but I've never played the CPR game, so I have no real insight.

[agamoto]

On 2/7/2024 at 9:26 AM, paqart said:

Real label, case, and comic, but they don't belong together. It is a false designation of origin because the grade and the comic don't go together. The seller is representing that the 9.0 was assigned to that comic by CGC, but that isn't true. Therefore, false designation of origin.

I'm not so sure about that. Let me play devil's advocate for a second...

We know this much: Zanello, allegedly, purchased two CGC graded books, one of higher grade, one of lower grade. We still have no clear picture if he had been swapping labels or swapping the CGC sealed inner sleeve containing the comic, but the end result was a frankenstein that ended back up on the desk of someone at CGC. CGC then opened the case AND the inner sleeve, performed some level of examination of the book, reinserted the book into a new inner sleeve and then encapsulated the comic with a new label certifiying the book as legit, anew.

Did Zanello violate CGC's terms by doing this? I believe not by their own definition, as their terms only stipulate material changes to the comics themselves as tampering when that didn't happen here. Did Zanello misrepresent what he was sending in to CGC? Clearly, but CGC's main business is in authentication of the collectible. They bear some responsibility here. Seems to me it's on CGC to make sure the book sent in is the book they say it is on the label, even if they don't guaranty the grade.  

The way the complaint is presented, Zanello was stuffing just any ol' lower grade comic stuck into a higher-grade CGC case/label. That's not what happened. Someone needs to explain to me like I'm five how Zanello is guilty of trademark infringement when he played no role whatsoever in the company's process for reauthentication and encapsulation of books submitted to them?

Is he supposed to be guilty simply because he alone is aware that the book inside the case CGC sent back to him isn't the original comic that CGC had graded? How is Zanello supposed to know that CGC did NOT review the condition of his submitted books outside of their case and inner sleeve, like CGC says they do?