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

[ThothAmon]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:14 PM, sledgehammer said:

Exactly.

So is it realistic to think this seller can reseal slabs that he slid in to holders?

No. 

[sledgehammer]

On 12/19/2023 at 2:15 PM, ThothAmon said:

On 12/19/2023 at 2:14 PM, sledgehammer said:

Exactly.

So is it realistic to think this seller can reseal slabs that he slid in to holders?

No. 

Edited it to say inner wells in to holders.

[Silver Surfer]

This could be a massive problem. 

[ThothAmon]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:18 PM, sledgehammer said:

Edited it to say inner wells in to holders.

Still no. Couldn’t risk it even if tempted. CGC might very well notice a tampered with inner well. A glitch was found in the CGC matrix and it was exploited obviously. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/18/2023 at 6:26 PM, ThothAmon said:

On 12/18/2023 at 6:02 PM, paqart said:

I don't understand this. Can you explain for someone who doesn't know why the comic has to be in the inner well to begin with?

My opinion is a scammer couldn’t risk trying to seal a raw MJ ASM 252 himself/herself  before sliding into an inner well before replacing the original comic in the empty 9.8 holder. Using one that CGC HAD actually sealed into the inner well would look to even a discriminating eye to be untampered with when received back at CGC for reholdering and the custom label. 

You're saying that swapping out an inferior book, but still sealed in the inner well into a tampered outer well may reduce CGC's ability to catch the swapped out book because they would  assume that since the inner well is not tampered with the book is sound, but I disagree. CGC has enough experience with outer wells being tampered with that they SHOULD double check the grade whether inner OR outer wells were tampered with. That's just an automatic flag in my books, and I've been involved in a few investigations of this nature where we found swapped books in wells. 

What is more likely is that either the seller has managed to fake the outer well or reseal the outer well significantly enough to avoid raising flags...but the REALLY confusing part is CGC regrading this book as a 9.8 with all that wear. That is inexplicable to me and I have a hard time chalking it up to CGC bad quality control. That's one fugly 9.8 in that new holder. 

[Jim Doerfler]

One idea that was thrown out is that CGC add the certification number to the inner well.  If this is indeed some type of reholder scam, that would help prevent it.  Still no response from CGC?  I hope they are at least reading this.  

[ThothAmon]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:26 PM, VintageComics said:

You're saying that swapping out an inferior book, but still sealed in the inner well into a tampered outer well may reduce CGC's ability to catch the swapped out book because they would  assume that since the inner well is not tampered with the book is sound, but I disagree. CGC has enough experience with outer wells being tampered with that they SHOULD double check the grade whether inner OR outer wells were tampered with. That's just an automatic flag in my books, and I've been involved in a few investigations of this nature where we found swapped books in wells. 

What is more likely is that either the seller has managed to fake the outer well or reseal the outer well significantly enough to avoid raising flags...but the REALLY confusing part is CGC regrading this book as a 9.8 with all that wear. That is inexplicable to me and I have a hard time chalking it up to CGC bad quality control. That's one fugly 9.8 in that new holder. 

Apparently, at least twice, CGC has taken a previously graded 9.8 and has reholdered, once with a custom label, adding to the label the Mark Jewelers distinction both times. Since the grade date for the serial number didn’t change it was obviously not regraded.  There is no third party resealing going on here. 

[sledgehammer]

So here is the book, with the certification number that GPA shows sold earlier (July 11th), that was graded in 2011.

Can anyone pull up the image from gocollect that shows the copy that was in the slab when it sold then?

This is how it looks now, in the listing that ended 12/12 and the grading notes..

 

Edited December 19, 2023 by sledgehammer

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 12:26 PM, Timed said:

Instead of having to regrade all reholders, I think a better solution would be to write/engrave the CGC certification number on the inner well of each slab.

I think the cost / time to add a feature like this would be prohibitive. 

Would you be ready to pay an extra $50-100 (or whatever it would cost) for each slab to add this process? I think a lot of people would complain. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:31 PM, ThothAmon said:

Apparently, at least twice, CGC has taken a previously graded 9.8 and has reholdered, once with a custom label, adding to the label the Mark Jewelers distinction both times. Since the grade date for the serial number didn’t change it was obviously not regraded.  There is no third party resealing going on here. 

There either HAS to be a 3rd party resealing going on or CGC is not quality controlling their books before they go out (or both), which from what I understand they have always done. 

If the book was subbed for reholder with a damaged slab, that would pretty much GUARANTEE the book would be scrutinized for damage to make sure the grade still matched, because either

a) the damaged holder would throw a red flag that the grade was tampered with or

b) the damaged holder would throw a red flag that the book may have been damaged when the slab was damaged

Either way, an inspection of the book should ensue based on what I know about the process. 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:38 PM, VintageComics said:

There either HAS to be a 3rd party resealing going on or CGC is not quality controlling their books before they go out (or both), which from what I understand they have always done. 

If the book was subbed for reholder with a damaged slab, that would pretty much GUARANTEE the book would be scrutinized for damage to make sure the grade still matched, because either

a) the damaged holder would throw a red flag that the grade was tampered with or

b) the damaged holder would throw a red flag that the book may have been damaged when the slab was damaged

Either way, an inspection of the book should ensue based on what I know about the process. 

The assumption is that the seller is able to reseal the slabs to avoid further CGC scrutiny.

[Mikey C]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:33 PM, VintageComics said:

I think the cost / time to add a feature like this would be prohibitive. 

Would you be ready to pay an extra $50-100 (or whatever it would cost) for each slab to add this process? I think a lot of people would complain. 

I mean, if it restores faith into the CGC product, sure. It’s become a joke how bad their QC is and how people are exploiting their reholdering process to commit fraud. HUGE fraud. I follow a ton of big seller accounts on instagram and graded books sit way longer than raws. Maybe people are realizing they don’t need a random stranger’s opinion for a PC book they’ll never be able to even look at?

Either way, CGC needs to respond to this issue but the problem is that this has probably happened countless times for books that carry a heavy 9.8 premium. “I dropped my slab and need a reholder”. They’re just too busy to spend more than 3 seconds changing out a book. And as someone said, it makes them look bad if they change a grade they previously gave a book they’re reholdering. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:14 PM, ThothAmon said:

Little late to the game. Would you read the whole thread first please …

 

On 12/19/2023 at 3:14 PM, sledgehammer said:

Are you caught up yet?

So I was correct but a little late to the game and you two needed to pipe up anyway?

I know my posts are like catnip to you but relax. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:44 PM, Mikey C said:

It’s become a joke how bad their QC is and how people are exploiting their reholdering process to commit fraud.

EVERY industry has fraud. You make it sound like it's rampant when in fact, the majority of books are likely sound and this is a new loophole that someone has exploited. 

Let's wait and see how CGC responds rather than just throw the entire kindergarten class out with the bathwater. 

[sledgehammer]

On 12/19/2023 at 2:44 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

The assumption is that the seller is able to reseal the slabs to avoid further CGC scrutiny.

I agree. I don't think that putting one crack in the corner of the slab is going to make them decide to open an inner well.

All the submitter has to say is "Gee, it sure does look like there is an MJ insert in there.", but he may be doing so many of these reholders on non MJ books, it didn't catch anyone's attention.

 

[sledgehammer]

Multiple special label options. Incredible number of reholder submission dates. Less scrutiny, big problem.

Want a special label? We're going to regrade your book.

I mean "duh"'

[Jaylam]

Could it just be the label was swapped and not the book? Take a 9.? MJ copy of the book, crack it out of outer slab, Take the original 9.8 copy crack it out of outer slab, take out the label of the lower grade MJ book put in the label of the 9.8 book, never taking the lower grade book out of the inner well, just the label, then resub the 9.8 copy as a new raw submission and put the lower grade MJ with the 9.8 label back in an outer slab and send it in for a re-slab with a ME submission asking for a new label too. 

My apologies if someone has already presented this scenario. 

Edited December 19, 2023 by Jaylam

[ThothAmon]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:26 PM, VintageComics said:

What is more likely is that either the seller has managed to fake the outer well or reseal the outer well significantly enough to avoid raising flags...but the REALLY confusing part is CGC regrading this book as a 9.8 with all that wear. That is inexplicable to me and I have a hard time chalking it up to CGC bad quality control. That's one fugly 9.8 in that new holder. 

If you had actually watched the videos,read the thread or viewed terrapeak and gpa/graders notes you would know this isn’t what happened. Although I’m not saying what efforts were made or not to reseal outer well as I have no idea but I’m sure a damaged slab reholder is nothing new for CGC. 

Edited December 19, 2023 by ThothAmon

[Prince Namor]

On 12/20/2023 at 3:33 AM, VintageComics said:

I think the cost / time to add a feature like this would be prohibitive. 

Would you be ready to pay an extra $50-100 (or whatever it would cost) for each slab to add this process? I think a lot of people would complain. 

It wouldn't have to be that expensive, and if you did it only for books over a certain dollar value it'd be almost like insurance. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/19/2023 at 4:08 PM, ThothAmon said:

If you had actually watched the videos,read the thread or viewed terrapeak and gpa/graders notes you would know this isn’t what happened.

Sorry, what specifically didn't happen that I'm missing?

I'm not following you.