When can we expect a totally redesigned holder from CGC? 6 6

[Closet Avenger]

CGC's current holder is completely compromised and need a total overhaul. Until then, why would anyone submit books? Also, should we resubmit old slabs to get the new one and a fraudulent book is found in the holder, will CGC reimburse those clients?

[Bronty]

Unfortunately I don’t think a complete overhaul of a holder is a fast process.   You need to develop thr design , test the prototypes,  get molds made, order large batches - I don’t think it will be quick because there are a number of steps 

[wiparker824]

Has CGC said they agree with the assessment that the holder is completely compromised? Until then I don’t know why anyone would think a new holder was even being considered. The reholder process was compromised, and they’ve said they’ve already “made significant improvements to their processes” whatever those are. But that doesn’t mean they believe the holder was the problem, the problem I’m sure they believe is that the reholders weren’t checked well enough for tampering. Even if they ever do release a new holder I’d not expect them to ever say the old ones were compromised and are no longer valid. I’m not saying I wouldn’t mind a new holder, I’m just realistically not expecting one. 

[namisgr]

On 1/9/2024 at 8:45 PM, Closet Avenger said:

CGC's current holder is completely compromised and need a total overhaul. Until then, why would anyone submit books?

To get them graded, checked for restoration, and either sold or added to one's collection.  I don't see how having other books in other people's inventory or collections being possibly tampered with changes that at all.

[THE_BEYONDER]

I’m not expecting to see a new label design.    I’m expecting to see new reholder protocols.

[Dr. Balls]

On 1/10/2024 at 5:47 AM, wiparker824 said:

Has CGC said they agree with the assessment that the holder is completely compromised? Until then I don’t know why anyone would think a new holder was even being considered. The reholder process was compromised, and they’ve said they’ve already “made significant improvements to their processes” whatever those are. But that doesn’t mean they believe the holder was the problem, the problem I’m sure they believe is that the reholders weren’t checked well enough for tampering. Even if they ever do release a new holder I’d not expect them to ever say the old ones were compromised and are no longer valid. I’m not saying I wouldn’t mind a new holder, I’m just realistically not expecting one. 

The genie is out of the bottle now - there is no stopping someone from buying a 9.8 and a 9.4, cracking the 9.8, putting the 9.4 in it's place with the 9.8 label - resealing it and then resubbing the cracked-out 9.8 as a raw for a new slabbed 9.8.

Someone might not have the nutsack to do that to a $150k IH181, but they might on a $3000 book that they can swap out with $800 book and get away with it. The problem may have originated with big ticket blue chip books, but it would be short-sighted to think that it's not going to happen clear down to three-and-four figure books.

The additional part of the problem isn't what has happened or how long it's been happening - it's that it will continue to happen now that it's a complete mess. They'll need a new case design for sure. This isn't isolated and it's going to continue - the integrity of their grading process is really screwed because even though 90% of CGC collectors might not have heard of this issue, in the next year, they may unknowingly end up with books in their collection as a result of it.

I mean, the census is going to be messed up, the grades are going to be messed up and the worst part: there will eventually be no way of being able to track this because the secondary problem is what I outlined above: circumventing the "custom label" scam by simply swiping lesser-graded books into premium grade slabs and then resubmitting previously-graded 9.8 raws.

It all sounds very "the sky is falling!", I know. But gaming out this scenario isn't really that hard, especially when it comes to a hobby where there is ample chances to squeeze more money out of unsuspecting collectors. You have limitless avenues of selling books, with a little patience you can fly under the radar indefinitely when it comes to non-mega key books. Trying to police that would be nigh-impossible.

Edited January 10 by Dr. Balls

[wiparker824]

On 1/10/2024 at 9:38 AM, Dr. Balls said:

The genie is out of the bottle now - there is no stopping someone from buying a 9.8 and a 9.4, cracking the 9.8, putting the 9.4 in it's place with the 9.8 label - resealing it and then resubbing the cracked-out 9.8 as a raw for a new slabbed 9.8.

Someone might not have the nutsack to do that to a $150k IH181, but they might on a $3000 book that they can swap out with $800 book and get away with it. The problem may have originated with big ticket blue chip books, but it would be short-sighted to think that it's not going to happen clear down to three-and-four figure books.

The additional part of the problem isn't what has happened or how long it's been happening - it's that it will continue to happen now that it's a complete mess. They'll need a new case design for sure. This isn't isolated and it's going to continue - the integrity of their grading process is really screwed because even though 90% of CGC collectors might not have heard of this issue, in the next year, they may unknowingly end up with books in their collection as a result of it.

I mean, the census is going to be messed up, the grades are going to be messed up and the worst part: there will eventually be no way of being able to track this because the secondary problem is what I outlined above: circumventing the "custom label" scam by simply swiping lesser-graded books into premium grade slabs and then resubmitting previously-graded 9.8 raws.

It all sounds very "the sky is falling!", I know. But gaming out this scenario isn't really that hard, especially when it comes to a hobby where there is ample chances to squeeze more money out of unsuspecting collectors. You have limitless avenues of selling books, with a little patience you can fly under the radar indefinitely when it comes to non-mega key books. Trying to police that would be nigh-impossible.

That’s not what’s been confirmed to be happening though. Nobody has confirmed they’ve been able to swap out a book without having any evidence of tampering on the case. What was confirmed was that there was evidence of tampering and CGC’s reholder process didn’t catch it and reslabbed the book into a case that of course no longer looked tampered with. If someone can produce a CGC slab without the help of CGC’s faulty reholder process and without any evidence of tampering then yes CGC would have to admit their case has been compromised. I’m aware of the videos showing the case being opened with a heat gun but in all of them I’ve seen there was still subtle indications the book had been opened. Would I prefer a better case that made it not as subtle? Sure. But again to my point about CGC’s assessment, if they don’t feel the case is the problem and the problem is the reholder process that’s what will change. And anyone expecting anything different is going to be disappointed.

[Bronty]

I would say its unlikely any of us really knows the full truth.    Maybe the cases are not compromised and maybe they are and don't want to admit it yet.   Either way we'll be told things are fine.

[Dr. Balls]

On 1/10/2024 at 10:20 AM, wiparker824 said:

That’s not what’s been confirmed to be happening though. Nobody has confirmed they’ve been able to swap out a book without having any evidence of tampering on the case. What was confirmed was that there was evidence of tampering and CGC’s reholder process didn’t catch it and reslabbed the book into a case that of course no longer looked tampered with. If someone can produce a CGC slab without the help of CGC’s faulty reholder process and without any evidence of tampering then yes CGC would have to admit their case has been compromised. I’m aware of the videos showing the case being opened with a heat gun but in all of them I’ve seen there was still subtle indications the book had been opened. Would I prefer a better case that made it not as subtle? Sure. But again to my point about CGC’s assessment, if they don’t feel the case is the problem and the problem is the reholder process that’s what will change. And anyone expecting anything different is going to be disappointed.

Seeing how easily this is done, I’m not of the opinion that it hasn’t been going on for some time. Maybe not a massive epidemic of cases being switched - but there is no way this vulnerability has not been exploited before.

There will likely never be an admittance of how deep this goes, and that’s just the nature of how the world works.

[Gonzimodo]

I know it's been said a couple times already, but I really hope the scammer had at least one new submission at CGC when this scandal broke so they can review the cases and try to figure out exactly what the process is.

We'll probably never get to see any of that evidence with our own eyes, but at least CGC can train its employees on what to look for.

A new case would be nice, but I doubt there will be one anytime soon.   I do find it kind of crazy that the labels and inner wells (that hold the actual comics) are completely separate from each other, though.  I never really thought about that much until this scam was discovered, and now it seems ludicrous to me that there's really nothing directly linking the sealed, certified comic with the label/certification number other than a cheap plastic case.  (But I may just be dense.)

[Dr. Balls]

On 1/10/2024 at 11:48 AM, Gonzimodo said:

A new case would be nice, but I doubt there will be one anytime soon.

I know I gloss over the case problem with a flippant response like "CGC needs a new case!" - I do know that developing something like that is a huge financial, time and resource commitment. I've worked with companies creating products, and the manufacturing time is incredibly long - and these were products that have sold a fraction of what CGC sells, and with a much more basic implementation.

It's a very ugly situation for the hobby, and there's going to be lots of doubt floating around, lots of damage control and lots of black eyes being given out before CGC unveils a new case. The real hope here is that they have been R&D'ing a new case behind the scenes and they've got a head start on the lengthy process.

[Buzzetta]

I do not believe that all of the cards have been played.  CGC will most likely not disclose what they believe the scamming piece of filth did for a multitude of reasons. 

[Math Teacher]

On 1/10/2024 at 6:54 AM, namisgr said:

To get them graded, checked for restoration, and either sold or added to one's collection.  I don't see how having other books in other people's inventory or collections being possibly tampered with changes that at all.

I agree with @namisgr. If I have books in my collection that I have owned for years, I have no qualms about sending in my books to be graded. Personally, I have never sent in a book to be reholdered.

 

[comicjel]

On 1/10/2024 at 11:38 AM, Dr. Balls said:

The genie is out of the bottle now - there is no stopping someone from buying a 9.8 and a 9.4, cracking the 9.8, putting the 9.4 in it's place with the 9.8 label - resealing it and then resubbing the cracked-out 9.8 as a raw for a new slabbed 9.8.

Someone might not have the nutsack to do that to a $150k IH181, but they might on a $3000 book that they can swap out with $800 book and get away with it. The problem may have originated with big ticket blue chip books, but it would be short-sighted to think that it's not going to happen clear down to three-and-four figure books.

The additional part of the problem isn't what has happened or how long it's been happening - it's that it will continue to happen now that it's a complete mess. They'll need a new case design for sure. This isn't isolated and it's going to continue - the integrity of their grading process is really screwed because even though 90% of CGC collectors might not have heard of this issue, in the next year, they may unknowingly end up with books in their collection as a result of it.

I mean, the census is going to be messed up, the grades are going to be messed up and the worst part: there will eventually be no way of being able to track this because the secondary problem is what I outlined above: circumventing the "custom label" scam by simply swiping lesser-graded books into premium grade slabs and then resubmitting previously-graded 9.8 raws.

It all sounds very "the sky is falling!", I know. But gaming out this scenario isn't really that hard, especially when it comes to a hobby where there is ample chances to squeeze more money out of unsuspecting collectors. You have limitless avenues of selling books, with a little patience you can fly under the radar indefinitely when it comes to non-mega key books. Trying to police that would be nigh-impossible.

Since I believe that CGC keeps scans of every book they grade, I expect that going forward they will compare any reholdered book to the scan of the originally graded book before reholdering - that should be a quick procedure that seems like would prevent / minimize this type of scam.

I do feel they will eventually need to come up with a case that is more tamper "evident", where you are not relying on trying to recognize subtle anomalies from photos of corners of the holders that do not scan well to begin with!    

 

[Dr. Balls]

On 1/10/2024 at 1:36 PM, comicjel said:

Since I believe that CGC keeps scans of every book they grade, I expect that going forward they will compare any reholdered book to the scan of the originally graded book before reholdering - that should be a quick procedure that seems like would prevent / minimize this type of scam.

I do feel they will eventually need to come up with a case that is more tamper "evident", where you are not relying on trying to recognize subtle anomalies from photos of corners of the holders that do not scan well to begin with!    

 

I imagine this is where AI will play a significant role - comparing books to prevent fraud on such a scale that it's not possible to hire people to do it.

[LudaToke]

On 1/10/2024 at 3:40 PM, Dr. Balls said:

I imagine this is where AI will play a significant role - comparing books to prevent fraud on such a scale that it's not possible to hire people to do it.

You don't need AI to accomplish this task.  I said this in the other thread that got locked up but using AI for this purpose is like killing a fly with a bazooka. AI is very complex and would be cost prohibitive for both CGC and ultimately the customer.  AI is the hot buzzword of the day and proposed as a solution for just about everything even though it isn't practical for most issues.  There are imagery analysis software packages that could be much more easily adopted and used by CGC but even that would be a tall task that I don't think CGC would ever do.  The capital investment alone that would be required would never be approved by their board.

Edited January 10 by LudaToke

[Axelrod]

On 1/10/2024 at 12:20 PM, wiparker824 said:

That’s not what’s been confirmed to be happening though. Nobody has confirmed they’ve been able to swap out a book without having any evidence of tampering on the case. What was confirmed was that there was evidence of tampering and CGC’s reholder process didn’t catch it and reslabbed the book into a case that of course no longer looked tampered with. If someone can produce a CGC slab without the help of CGC’s faulty reholder process and without any evidence of tampering then yes CGC would have to admit their case has been compromised. I’m aware of the videos showing the case being opened with a heat gun but in all of them I’ve seen there was still subtle indications the book had been opened. Would I prefer a better case that made it not as subtle? Sure. But again to my point about CGC’s assessment, if they don’t feel the case is the problem and the problem is the reholder process that’s what will change. And anyone expecting anything different is going to be disappointed.

I think it's the "subtle indications" that might be left by experienced scammers that is, and will continue to be, the problem going forward. 

Even if there are signs of tampering, just how obvious is it?  Definitely not something you are going to detect from your average ebay photo.  And then, when one receives the book in hand, how bad does it have to be for a buyer to say "hmmm, wait a minute, this book looks like it could have been tampered with...."  What do they do then?  Return it while the seller screams that they got exactly the book in the photo?  Send it to CGC for "verification?"  

CGC may stop most of the "reholder" scam going forwards, which results in lower grade books in perfect higher grade cases, but the scammers who can swap out high grade for mid-grade and reseal the case with only "subtle" traces, are still going to do that, and just sell on EBAY + the like.  As long as there are no changes to the current holder, this will remain an issue.

Some have suggested solutions that might help without requiring a total overhaul of the case, such as etching the serial number on the inner well to match the outside of the case and/or attaching the inner well to the label in some way that makes it not slip out the way it currently can.  No idea how hard it would be to implement changes like those.  

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

[troydivision1]

If they are going back to the drawing board...now's the best time to roll out treasury sized slabs as well.

[Dick Pontoon]

Tooling costs are too prohibitive for treasury size slabs.