Giant Size X-Men #1 Just Graded 9.9. It Begins..... 7 7

[newshane]

I disagree with the notion that CGC is holding back mints and gems. 

They really are that difficult to find. 

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 6/5/2024 at 9:15 PM, newshane said:

I disagree with the notion that CGC is holding back mints and gems. 

They really are that difficult to find. 

I sympathize with the thought that even graders at CGC didn't have a list criteria of every book in 9.9&10 and just marked it 9.8.

I also am of the belief that the lottery ticket of 9.9&10 grade is also a myth just to label why it has been so seldom.

Here is my opinion. Not too much wrong with this book qualifies for 9.8, and is not printed like last ronin on hard stock and doesn't warrant being scrutinized for 9.9&10.

Then through whatever venue, "really guys? Cgc graded all these books and not any 9.9&10? Wth ....  then they scrutinized for a little bit because it felt warranted and found no secure candidates and resumed their old ways UNTIL ALL THE SCENARIOS START REPEATING and they DO find a candidate.

Not doing their job, being lazy or for whatever the reason as it comes across?

I don't think they had a "plot to only let a few out!" Just that when they looked enough, stopped looking due to no winners, and eventually ran it through scenarios until once in that process they found a winner.

That's in my opinion or what I got from this post

On 6/5/2024 at 8:51 PM, Tony S said:

 

Back when Matt Nelson ran his own comic pressing and restoration business - Classics Incorporated - he had an article on the website that demonstrated mathematically how there should have been more 9.9's and 10's in the CGC census. The article was quite convincing. The moment CGC purchased the business and renamed it CCS, that article went poof - even though the Classics Inc website stayed active for a time. 

I think Matt was right then.  Maybe Matt still feels the same way - and as President can now do something about it.  This basically started with the infamous interview about "how is there is not a single 9.9 or 10 on a book like Ultimate Fallout ". Matt's answer was along the lines of maybe they were to focused on 9.8 and were not looking.  So lets go over those numbers. Between the 1st and 2nd printings and the variant covers of each, CGC has certified over 8,500 copies of UF 4 at 9.8 (published 2011)  and not one single book at a MINT grade of 9.9 or 10. That seems pretty darn unlikely. 

So yeah - I too have said here on this forum before that there ought to be more 9.9 and 10's. Especially of real "modern" books - say published the last 25 years. Better printing, better paper. 

100% agree on consistency being the most important quality of grading. But if something has been done consistently wrong, it needs to be fixed. Books should get the grades they deserve. Or as Steve Borock has always said, give the book the highest grade that is not wrong.  CGC has arguably not been doing that. Despite the existence of the grades of  9.9 and 10, those two  grades were more like winning lottery tickets. 

The change may be disruptive and it may generate more submissions to CGC  But that doesn't mean it should not happen. Or I suppose we could do away with 9.9 and 10 and say the ones that exist were mistakes never to be made again.  

 

Edited June 6 by ADAMANTIUM

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 6/5/2024 at 7:15 PM, newshane said:

I disagree with the notion that CGC is holding back mints and gems. 

They really are that difficult to find. 

On 6/5/2024 at 6:51 PM, Tony S said:

CGC has certified over 8,500 copies of UF 4 at 9.8 (published 2011)  and not one single book at a MINT grade of 9.9 or 10. That seems pretty darn unlikely. 

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 6/5/2024 at 9:25 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

I sympathize with the thought that even graders at CGC didn't have a list criteria of every book in 9.9&10 and just marked it 9.8.

I also am of the belief that the lottery ticket of 9.9&10 grade is also a myth just to label why it has been so seldom.

Here is my opinion. Not too much wrong with this book qualifies for 9.8, and is not printed like last ronin on hard stock and doesn't warrant being scrutinized for 9.9&10.

Then through whatever venue, "really guys? Cgc graded all these books and not any 9.9&10? Wth ....  then they scrutinized for a little bit because it felt warranted and found no secure candidates and resumed their old ways UNTIL ALL THE SCENARIOS START REPEATING and they DO find a candidate.

Not doing their job, being lazy or for whatever the reason as it comes across?

I don't think they had a "plot to only let a few out!" Just that when they looked enough, stopped looking due to no winners, and eventually ran it through scenarios until once in that process they found a winner.

That's in my opinion or what I got from this post

 

I also say all this full well knowing that every ten and nine points nine almost makes the news and is scrutinized.

In a way the rare makes that POSSIBLE.

If no longer "rare" that goes out the window, and that subtly will cause decline if anything else imo

[LordRahl]

On 6/5/2024 at 6:51 PM, Tony S said:

 

Back when Matt Nelson ran his own comic pressing and restoration business - Classics Incorporated - he had an article on the website that demonstrated mathematically how there should have been more 9.9's and 10's in the CGC census. The article was quite convincing. The moment CGC purchased the business and renamed it CCS, that article went poof - even though the Classics Inc website stayed active for a time. 

I think Matt was right then.  Maybe Matt still feels the same way - and as President can now do something about it.  This basically started with the infamous interview about "how is there is not a single 9.9 or 10 on a book like Ultimate Fallout ". Matt's answer was along the lines of maybe they were to focused on 9.8 and were not looking.  So lets go over those numbers. Between the 1st and 2nd printings and the variant covers of each, CGC has certified over 8,500 copies of UF 4 at 9.8 (published 2011)  and not one single book at a MINT grade of 9.9 or 10. That seems pretty darn unlikely. 

So yeah - I too have said here on this forum before that there ought to be more 9.9 and 10's. Especially of real "modern" books - say published the last 25 years. Better printing, better paper. 

100% agree on consistency being the most important quality of grading. But if something has been done consistently wrong, it needs to be fixed. Books should get the grades they deserve. Or as Steve Borock has always said, give the book the highest grade that is not wrong.  CGC has arguably not been doing that. Despite the existence of the grades of  9.9 and 10, those two  grades were more like winning lottery tickets. 

The change may be disruptive and it may generate more submissions to CGC  But that doesn't mean it should not happen. Or I suppose we could do away with 9.9 and 10 and say the ones that exist were mistakes never to be made again.  

This is so spot on, I'm going to repost it every time someone says this change shouldn't happen, with your permission.

[Tony S]

On 6/5/2024 at 9:46 PM, LordRahl said:

This is so spot on, I'm going to repost it every time someone says this change shouldn't happen, with your permission.

Sure. Post away 

[wombat]

All I know is if I was contemplating a 9.9 prescreen service I would be giving people a reason to use it. 

[Tony S]

On 6/5/2024 at 10:43 PM, wombat said:

All I know is if I was contemplating a 9.9 prescreen service I would be giving people a reason to use it. 

That is a profound observation. 

Edited June 6 by Tony S

[DC#]

Interesting conclusion drawn from watching weekly census results of Star Wars #1.   It was inferred that someone dropped a big load of 9.8/9.6 SW #1s hoping to get one elusive 9.9 back - the first in the census. 

If that is what went down - the fact that none achieved the higher grade starts to support what Matt said in the Swagglehaus interview that noT all books have the same likelihood  of hidden 9.9s within the ranks of the lowly 9.8s.   
 

 

[vheflin]

I wonder how deep the 9.9 market is, that is, will they still get monstrous 25x multiples over 9.8s if they aren't so exclusive?

[joeypost]

On 6/5/2024 at 11:43 PM, wombat said:

All I know is if I was contemplating a 9.9 prescreen service I would be giving people a reason to use it. 

Like the fast track option?

[october]

I love that some people think that the hundreds of thousands of nearly identical modern books submitted every year are closely scrutinized and carefully parsed between 9.8/9.9/10 as per the grading standards for each. Come on. These guys spend 2 seconds looking at these books, self-evident from the amount of stuff missed.

I do agree that these grades shouldn't have existed in the first place.

[vheflin]

On 6/6/2024 at 8:50 AM, october said:

I love that some people think that the hundreds of thousands of nearly identical modern books submitted every year are closely scrutinized and carefully parsed between 9.8/9.9/10 as per the grading standards for each. Come on. These guys spend 2 seconds looking at these books, self-evident from the amount of stuff missed.

I do agree that these grades shouldn't have existed in the first place.

and hence why no grader notes in said grades. . .

[Microchip]

A solid start of $36k with just over three weeks to go.

The census population today is that this book is alone in the top spot.   The obvious question is what the population will look like this time next year, and the year after.    

The stoppage on 9.9's in now removed, and the top grading band is now going to be expended from 9.4 - 9.8 to 9.4 - 9.9.    

We've spent the last two decades pointing out the that grading on 9.4's, 9.6's, and 9.8's is inconsistent, and now another tier of grading is added into the mix.   Well it ensures an endless stream of threads on grading for the next two decades as well

 

 

[mattn792]

Hey, it’s perfect according to the Quietly Exploiting Suckers criteria, how can you go wrong?

[Microchip]

On 6/7/2024 at 9:58 AM, mattn792 said:

Hey, it’s perfect according to the Quietly Exploiting Suckers criteria, how can you go wrong?

The adage "buy the book, not the grade" applies to 9.9 shopping as well.    There's chin scratchers at every grade.

Edited June 7 by Microchip

[NewWorldOrder]

On 6/6/2024 at 5:16 PM, Microchip said:

The adage "buy the book, not the grade" applies to 9.9 shopping as well.    There's chin scratchers at every grade.

I agree every collector should look at the book and if they believe the grade matches then they should buy it, etc.

However there are many people in the hobby with basically unlimited money.  Where 100k is like 1K to us.   So they are buying the "bragging rights" and not the book.  Feel me?

Edited June 7 by NewWorldOrder

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 6/6/2024 at 5:34 PM, NewWorldOrder said:

Feel me?

[NewWorldOrder]

On 6/6/2024 at 5:59 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

It all depends on who is trying.

 

Edited June 7 by NewWorldOrder

[Microchip]

On 6/7/2024 at 10:34 AM, NewWorldOrder said:

I agree every collector should look at the book and if they believe the grade matches then they should buy it, etc.

However there are many people in the hobby with basically unlimited money.  Where 100k is like 1K to us.   So they are buying the "bragging rights" and not the book.  Feel me?

Agreed.  And there's no shortage of guys buying the label first, bragging rights, registry points, what ever it is.  There's no getting away from that, but with the big ticket books bought on the open market, the investment aspect is a big piece of the equation, and the label grade does take on more importance, as CGC has turned the book into a commodity, that can easily be traded.   A $100 note is $100, and 9.9 is a 9.9 book at the end of the day.    The CGC grade becomes the dominant feature of a book once it's slabbed.