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

[comicjel]

On 2/8/2024 at 3:41 PM, brute_nm said:

I can't wait for someone to find a super old social media picture with Zanello, Riva, and the Terrazases on some beach or ski trip 

LOL... or maybe "recent" one!

[Panda2]

Well, just got the notification that my book had indeed been tampered with - now I guess we wait and see what happens.  The email states it may be a few weeks before I hear anything further.

[paqart]

On 2/8/2024 at 4:25 PM, Panda2 said:

Well, just got the notification that my book had indeed been tampered with - now I guess we wait and see what happens.  The email states it may be a few weeks before I hear anything further.

Curious how this works with the victims. 
1) Does this mean the comic is now surrendered to CGC and you don't get it back under any circumstances?
2) Was the purchase price higher or lower than FMV?
3) How is FMV determined?
4) Are they offering FMV, replacement value or a replacement slabbed comic?
5) Did you lose money because of this, after expected compensation?
6) Are you happy to walk away after compensation, or do you want to see perpetrators criminally prosecuted?
7) Have you independently contacted law enforcement?

Edited February 8 by paqart

[brute_nm]

On 2/8/2024 at 2:25 PM, Panda2 said:

Well, just got the notification that my book had indeed been tampered with - now I guess we wait and see what happens.  The email states it may be a few weeks before I hear anything further.

Thanks for keeping us in the loop! I imagine CGC may make you sign an NDA at some point, but I think it's important to hear how the process works. So thanks for telling us what you can.

[silent06]

On 2/8/2024 at 3:35 PM, paqart said:

Curious how this works with the victims. 
1) Does this mean the comic is now surrendered to CGC and you don't get it back under any circumstances?
2) Was the purchase price higher or lower than FMV?
3) How is FMV determined?
4) Are they offering FMV, replacement value or a replacement slabbed comic?
5) Did you lose money because of this, after expected compensation?
6) Are you happy to walk away after compensation, or do you want to see perpetrators criminally prosecuted?
7) Have you independently contacted law enforcement?

As one of those impacted, I can answer questions 1) and 2), based on the response I received from CGC.

To question 1.) To my knowledge, the answer is Yes, the book has been surrendered and will be retained by CGC.

With regards to question 2.) CGC has sighted that this incident is an ongoing investigation and that they do not have a confirmed date for the resolution of the claim. In alignment with the lack of any projected date for claim resolution, CGC has not provided any information regarding valuation or compensation for losses incurred for the books I purchased that were impacted by this incident.

Edited February 8 by silent06

[tmac100]

On 2/8/2024 at 1:47 PM, comicjel said:

I could have actually rationalized that they might "not" have had an inside person if the scam was limited to reholder books, and if many of their original summitted 9.8s looked to be strong 9.8s and were almost always reholdered before sold - that would have made sense and seemed plausible to me.

The problem was, and the reason I think there must have been someone on the inside, was that many of the originally submitted books that received 9.8 were not strong 9.8s (IMO) and were just sold instead of being reholdered (which really made no sense if the scam was to reholder inferior swapped books).  To me the inside guy was more (or equally) for the originally submitted (generous) grades than for the reholdering aspect - and maybe this evolved more recently.

But then, there also seemed to be a reholder person that was changing labels from non-MJI to MJI; and non-newstand to newstand, apparently without checking the original scans (or notes) and, as I emphasized in an earlier post, the part of this label changing swap that I found more difficult to accept, was not that the reholder department might be somewhat lax with such label changes (I could accept that pretty easily), but more so that the outside scammer would have felt comfortable that they would not be discovered by attempting this type of swap / label change... how could the outside scammers feel so bold with such a risky label change, that you would almost expect to be scrutinized more, unless they had someone on the inside?

Now enter Mr. Terrazas, based on the recent filing... he is a grader (check) and he had access to reholdering books (check) and he was able to print labels for reholdered books that did not match the book being reholdered (check) and he had a spouse who had internal access as well (check) - if you were to search for the perfect inside guy for what we see happening, this would be your "one stop" inside guy! (or certainly someone with similar access).

Now consider the case brought against the Terrazas'... what was it, 23 stolen books? - huge deal I agree!; graded (by someone else), and then reholdered with incorrect (higher grade) labels - horrible I agree!.  But how many of you attorneys out there feel that CGC would have brought this type of "public" filing for these 23 books (after they were already fired)? - to me this case had a reason that went beyond getting this already fired couple to return the remaining (if any) books that they had not already sold (or to try to get a recovery from them).  I just don't see this lawsuit (including the timing) being pursued if they were independent of the outside scammers.

There are other things...

- SS books that seem involved somehow (by both inside and outside scammers)

- Unbelievable quick turn around times on things

- Grader notes on 9.8s that seem unusual 

So yes, I feel there must have been an inside guy, and I feel it was possibly Mr. Terrazas or someone with similar access (just my opinion based on 401 pages of reading!) 

    

   

  

 

The confusing part though is that I believe that they were fired from CGC in September, but the scammer was still sending in books in December.

[comicjel]

On 2/8/2024 at 6:54 PM, tmac100 said:

The confusing part though is that I believe that they were fired from CGC in September, but the scammer was still sending in books in December.

True, and they were sending in books before they were hired too.

I can picture a scenario where the scam is easier with insiders but not impossible without them.

 

[comicjel]

On 2/8/2024 at 6:54 PM, tmac100 said:

The confusing part though is that I believe that they were fired from CGC in September, but the scammer was still sending in books in December.

... and remember that the lawsuit for the outside scammers made reference to the scammers scrambling to get their most recent submission back - which had to be a "reholder" submission, because a regular submission could just be left as is with little concern.

So the fact that they only had a reholder submission at that stage, may be telling.

[Nick Furious]

On 2/8/2024 at 5:54 PM, tmac100 said:

The confusing part though is that I believe that they were fired from CGC in September, but the scammer was still sending in books in December.

That definitely puts some hesitation on the theory that the two parties were working together.    

[Yorick]

On 2/8/2024 at 2:03 PM, silent06 said:

With regards to question 2.) CGC has sighted that this incident is an ongoing investigation and that they do not have a confirmed date for the resolution of the claim. In alignment with the lack of any projected date for claim resolution, CGC has not provided any information regarding valuation or compensation for losses incurred for the books I purchased that were impacted by this incident.

So you have no book and no compensation?  No date of when either might be available?

[jas1vans]

I believe these are two separate incidents. One group got caught because they were greedy. Another got caught because they were sloppy and took short cuts. I would guess they saw another scam and thought they could do it better, faster, smarter.

*I do not know exactly how either group accomplished their frauds. I do know that one group was at it a lot longer than the other.

[paqart]

On 2/8/2024 at 7:34 PM, Nick Furious said:

That definitely puts some hesitation on the theory that the two parties were working together.    

They could have been working some other insider(s). I just don't see how they could do what they did without help.

[ADAMANTIUM]

Tbh an ASM 300 9.8 hasn't sold on eBay since December before this news broke. I was curious and looked but didn't see a first print sale.

ASM 252 is trucking along in 9.6, I didn't check currents in 9.8.

Hulk sells because of the dip probably but idk. 

I think there were X-Men #266 mentioned in there somewhere, 9.8 only, but I forget. Bought it from another boardie, but recent sales drops $200, from $800 down to $600.

It's hard to believe that we're really only one month In.     

I stopped spinning my wheels though, and while not a cheerleader myself, some of those comments I'm glad we're made!

The understanding that reholders weren't treated like the case had to be perfect, needed to be said. Hence the, "I just sent in for reholder and never worried" as @NewWorldOrder I think mentioned. That it was the books themselves that were checked.

Glad there isn't as much in fighting as all information can be gathered for a common goal. Grain of salt

Edited February 9 by ADAMANTIUM

[Panda2]

On 2/8/2024 at 4:35 PM, paqart said:

Curious how this works with the victims. 
1) Does this mean the comic is now surrendered to CGC and you don't get it back under any circumstances?
2) Was the purchase price higher or lower than FMV?
3) How is FMV determined?
4) Are they offering FMV, replacement value or a replacement slabbed comic?
5) Did you lose money because of this, after expected compensation?
6) Are you happy to walk away after compensation, or do you want to see perpetrators criminally prosecuted?
7) Have you independently contacted law enforcement?

Will keep you posted!

[comicjel]

On 2/8/2024 at 7:34 PM, Nick Furious said:

That definitely puts some hesitation on the theory that the two parties were working together.    

No doubt, this is just a theory! - I have no proof of anything! - 100% a theory!... did I mention that this is theoretical?

That said...

I do not actually know the date they were fired (I never had access to the whole filing), but based on the pages that were posted, it sounds like CGC "initiated questioning" him in September, and he was not forthcoming until "several days in October", and based on the "list", the last submission for grading (as opposed to reholdering) by the "outside" scammers was graded on 11/28/23 - therefore, depending on if it was a pre-screen or not, it was likely mailed out by the outside scammers in September or October - so when you factor in the lag time between being mailed, and being graded, the timing may actually fit for the last grading submission to have been sent before the Terrazas firing, and none after. 

As additional support of this, based on the "list", the dates that the last 6 grading submissions, by the outside scammers, were graded, were as follows:

8/18/23, 9/13/23, 9/22/23, 10/19/23, 10/20/23 and 11/28/23

When you see the frequency that they were submitting for grading, and you assume that they were being mailed 20 - 40 days in advance of being graded (again depending on pre-screen or not), it is curious why there was no "grading" submission graded or in the queue for them in December?? - based on their submission frequency and that "their" scam was not discovered until 12/18, you would expect that they would have had a grading submission either graded in December or in the queue in December, but for some reason they broke their pattern before "their" scam was discovered... but "after" the Terrazas were fired.

BTW, I know there was a submission in the queue referenced in the filing, but I am making the educated assumption that it was a reholder submission and not a grading submission - I base this on the fact that the scammers were frantically trying to get it sent back to them around 12/20, which if you think about it, they would not need to be as freaked out about it if it was a regular grading submission, since there is nothing about a grading submission that could implicate them of fraud (but a reholder submission clearly could)... and why would it be highlighted in the filing if it was just a submission of raw books being graded? (again, nothing could be fraudulent about raw books being graded) - so I conclude that it must have been a reholder submission in the queue to illicit freak out by the outside scammers and highlighting in the filing - (I have gone back to the filing, and have confirmed that it was a reholder submission that was referenced).

 

 

 

Edited February 9 by comicjel

[comeaux]

On 2/8/2024 at 11:29 AM, paqart said:

At this point, the information released so far indicates to me that there was an inside man at CGC assisting in the enterprise.

There was definitely an inside man and also an outside man who had special privileges at CGC above others. When he submits books for reholder, he doesn’t even send in the book in a broken/cracked case, he just sends in a book and a label and CGC does the deed for him. I can’t mention his name or I get another week vacation, it upsets the natives.   

[silent06]

On 2/8/2024 at 6:38 PM, Yorick said:

So you have no book and no compensation?  No date of when either might be available?

The answer is yes that is correct to your questions on all accords. As well as the additional issue of the response I received from CGC of how they are addressing books that have been potentially tampered with, which were purchased directly from Mr. Zanello, but not included on the list as part in their announcement of the incident.

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 2/8/2024 at 8:37 PM, comeaux said:

There was definitely an inside man and also an outside man who had special privileges at CGC above others. When he submits books for reholder, he doesn’t even send in the book in a broken/cracked case, he just sends in a book and a label and CGC does the deed for him. I can’t mention his name or I get another week vacation, it upsets the natives.   

Ya that was alarmingly stated and I'm glad it was, very relevant too, but I didnt think it was very recent. I had heard something like it a long time ago, but from older forum boardies, that I had assumed was early 2000's cgc business and not recent

Silly sentence structure corrected, but I'm not sure people would be as open to state these things if it wasn't common place to them.

 

Edited February 9 by ADAMANTIUM

[comicwiz]

On 2/8/2024 at 9:53 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

When he submits books for reholder, he doesn’t even send in the book in a broken/cracked case, he just sends in a book and a label and CGC does the deed for him. I can’t mention his name or I get another week vacation, it upsets the natives.   

Thank-you for sharing this, because I knew about this as well. 

Edited February 9 by comicwiz

[comicwiz]

On 2/8/2024 at 9:53 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Ya that was alarmingly stated and I'm glad it was, very relevant too, but I didnt think it was very recent. I had heard something like it a long time ago, but from older forum boardies, that I had assumed was early 2000's cgc business and not recent

Not that long ago

Edited February 9 by comicwiz