Grading shenanigans at CGC? 9 9

[COI]

On 10/19/2024 at 1:54 PM, Stefan_W said:

I hear your point, which is reasonable, but I dont see it that way.

In my mind the reduction in 9.9s and 10s was limited to around the pandemic years. My guess at the time was that they hired a bunch of new graders as they were getting massive amounts of books in, and the graders may have been told that a clean copy is a 9.8. Regardless, the dip in 9.9s and 10s is the part that was arbitrary, and the current rise is more in keeping with what should have been happening all along. 

So in my view this is correcting an error, not some type of arbitrary standard. 

It seems much more likely to me that 9.8 was the glass ceiling for 20+ years, now they're conditioning collectors and submitters to accept 9.9s as the new 9.8s as a mechanism for stimulating growth.

I've always seen 9.9s and 10.0s as a marketing function more than a technical grade because there's no way to reliably identify 9.9s and 10.0s at scale. Emphasis on scale. It's not that 9.9s or 10.0s aren't "real", but they're expensive to identify given the time and expertise required. 

Even if I accepted that the increased prevalence of 9.9s was a correction, it would be about 20 years too late.

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 10/19/2024 at 6:59 PM, COI said:

It's not that 9.9s or 10.0s aren't "real", but they're expensive to identify given the time and expertise required. 

[Chip Cataldo]

On 10/19/2024 at 1:24 PM, COI said:

It therefore becomes very silly to all of a sudden cry foul about shenanigans on any particular submission when the entire game is predicated on shenanigans. 

This should be posted every time there's a CGC "scandal" of some sort.

A perfect statement.

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 10/19/2024 at 6:59 PM, COI said:

It's not that 9.9s or 10.0s aren't "real", but they're expensive to identify given the time and expertise required. 

[Domo Arigato]

On 10/19/2024 at 8:59 PM, COI said:

It seems much more likely to me that 9.8 was the glass ceiling for 20+ years, now they're conditioning collectors and submitters to accept 9.9s as the new 9.8s as a mechanism for stimulating growth.

Even if I accepted that the increased prevalence of 9.9s was a correction, it would be about 20 years too late.

This.  They're now screwing over everyone that submitted 10 and 9.9 worthy books over the last 20 years and didn't get those grades.

It's obviously being done now to stimulate more submissions and to encourage people to resubmit books they've already had graded.

People can sugarcoat that turd and call it a Tootsie Roll all they want.

 

[LordRahl]

On 10/19/2024 at 7:16 PM, Domo Arigato said:

This.  They're now screwing over everyone that submitted 10 and 9.9 worthy books over the last 20 years and didn't get those grades.

It's obviously being done now to stimulate more submissions and to encourage people to resubmit books they've already had graded.

People can sugarcoat that turd and call it a Tootsie Roll all they want.

 

So what you're saying is that past mistakes should NOT be corrected but instead they should continue to perpetuate the same mistake going forward? That's better in your view than correcting the mistake?

[LordRahl]

On 10/19/2024 at 7:15 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

This of course is the reason they had a "ceiling" on it at 9.8. Just because it was a good business decision, doesn't make it right.

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 10/19/2024 at 9:16 PM, Domo Arigato said:

This.  They're now screwing over everyone that submitted 10 and 9.9 worthy books over the last 20 years and didn't get those grades.

It's obviously being done now to stimulate more submissions and to encourage people to resubmit books they've already had graded.

People can sugarcoat that turd and call it a Tootsie Roll all they want.

 

That's basically what I said in a wall of text or convoluted way. I don't doubt the only leveling of our statements is the amount of people actually willing to do just that and send in. Less rare 9.9? How less, determines who sends. Topic thread of inside job to determine that lesser hold back? As stated only the handful of those who have posted their 9.9 victories then and now are confident, that I remember some getting back saying they should have been 9.9 when receiving their 9,8!

Those that have had skin in the game will try, but it will take possibly years before anyone with quantity succeeds, unless they're like loliplops and that has this thread baffled. We just watch a post of owners 9,9s successes because they know their stuff, will someone else feel confident AND be successful? Time will tell.

And that's the only reason I'm curious about this sub, was it inside job or someone who knew their stuff? And deservedly so...

 

[BlowUpTheMoon]

On 10/19/2024 at 10:16 PM, Domo Arigato said:

encourage people to resubmit books they've already had graded.

CGC probably wants to reclaim all those old school inner wells that don't cause banana bends. 

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 10/19/2024 at 9:30 PM, LordRahl said:

On 10/19/2024 at 9:16 PM, Domo Arigato said:

This.  They're now screwing over everyone that submitted 10 and 9.9 worthy books over the last 20 years and didn't get those grades.

It's obviously being done now to stimulate more submissions and to encourage people to resubmit books they've already had graded.

People can sugarcoat that turd and call it a Tootsie Roll all they want.

 

So what you're saying is that past mistakes should NOT be corrected but instead they should continue to perpetuate the same mistake going forward? That's better in your view than correcting the mistake?

I would change that 1st sentence that they've screwed a handful who know what's up for 20 years, but now it seems like childsplay and everyone else "could be jealous or afraid of inside job, or other conspiracy" but mainly I don't expect cgc to say anything yay or nay, but we'll see!

[Domo Arigato]

On 10/19/2024 at 9:30 PM, LordRahl said:

So what you're saying is that past mistakes should NOT be corrected but instead they should continue to perpetuate the same mistake going forward? That's better in your view than correcting the mistake?

So, what you're saying is that CGC screwed submitters over for 20 years, and it's ok to "correct" this now (which they did not have to do) while all of those previous customers are free to kindly suck it up and get bent?

Mmmmmmmm.........chocolaty tootsie goodness.

 

[LordRahl]

On 10/19/2024 at 7:40 PM, Domo Arigato said:

So, what you're saying is that CGC screwed submitters over for 20 years, and it's ok to "correct" this now (which they did not have to do) while all of those previous customers are free to kindly suck it up and get bent?

Mmmmmmmm.........chocolaty tootsie goodness.

 

Given I'm one of those previous customers that got screwed, yeah I'm saying they should correct the mistake. Not correcting it just continues to screw people. I'm not sure how that's better in whatever world you live in.

[aszumilo]

Better chance at a 9.9?  Why bother sending books to competitors?

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 10/19/2024 at 9:40 PM, Domo Arigato said:

So, what you're saying is that CGC screwed submitters over for 20 years, and it's ok to "correct" this now (which they did not have to do) while all of those previous customers are free to kindly suck it up and get bent?

Mmmmmmmm.........chocolaty tootsie goodness.

 

"Don't look a gift horse or throw the bath water out" I agree, but those in the experience area should be ticked like you said, but are grateful to now take advantage, which good for them and about time. Others left twisted in the wind are trying to gather their scuples and I can only imagine the YouTube vids now though I'm not looking for them. Still ya this seems backwards to even those who didn't know better, me included, 20 years of spitting into the wind? I guess relief for the minority is hope for the majority, but also, absolutely nothing "I" could do about it 

But wait and see still Tootsie rolls are good so I have that going for me. 

 

Edited Sunday at 02:52 AM by ADAMANTIUM

[COI]

On 10/19/2024 at 10:48 PM, LordRahl said:

Given I'm one of those previous customers that got screwed, yeah I'm saying they should correct the mistake. Not correcting it just continues to screw people. I'm not sure how that's better in whatever world you live in.

If it's a change in strategy, then it wasn't a mistake, and they're not correcting anything now. In every circumstance, some set of customers are getting screwed, and they're just resetting the table they're using to bend everyone over.

[LordRahl]

The amount of butthurt in this thread over 9.9s is astounding and really kind of funny. Especially funny when you consider that I'm pretty sure most of you don't play in the modern/copper 9.9 space so honestly WTF do you care? 

[skybolt]

On 10/19/2024 at 8:13 PM, HotKey said:

Ultimate Fallout 4 still has zero 9.9s and 10s, and people have been desperately trying for one for years.

How long until we see our first 9.9 UF4? 

You would've seen one if the guy who got the 12 9.9s included a copy with his submission. 

[LordRahl]

On 10/19/2024 at 7:57 PM, COI said:

If it's a change in strategy, then it wasn't a mistake, and they're not correcting anything now. In every circumstance, some set of customers are getting screwed, and they're just resetting the table they're using to bend everyone over.

How's that? They initially made a decision 25 years ago that 9.8 was the ceiling because it's too time consuming and expensive to identify every 9.9 and 10 walking in the door. They've now decided they have the bandwidth to do exactly that. Corporations make these types of decisions all the time. If they continue to perpetuate the mistake of the last 25 years, they screw everyone that has and will submit in the future. If they correct the mistake, they are screwing the people that have submitted 9.9s and 10s in the past that didn't get the appropriate grade but they are now doing right by future submissions. The people, like me, that submitted in the past and didn't get the grade are screwed in either scenario but by fixing the issue going forward at least they aren't screwing me on future submissions. I consider that a win.

Edited Sunday at 03:05 AM by LordRahl
typo

[Domo Arigato]

On 10/19/2024 at 9:48 PM, LordRahl said:

Given I'm one of those previous customers that got screwed, yeah I'm saying they should correct the mistake. Not correcting it just continues to screw people. I'm not sure how that's better in whatever world you live in.

I haven't commented on what they should do.  I'm saying this wasn't a mistake.  

Something you do knowingly for 20 years isn't a "mistake".

If they want to correct what you call their "mistake".....then I imagine they'll be accepting all of the CGC 9.8 books back for a free evaluation and upgrade to those books that deserve it.  Just let me know when that happens.

This isn't something they're doing for altruistic reasons to correct a wrong.  They're doing it to make more money.  Period.

 

[Domo Arigato]

On 10/19/2024 at 10:04 PM, LordRahl said:

How's that? They initially made a decision 25 years ago that 9.8 was the ceiling because it's too time consuming and expensive to identify every 9.9 and 10 walking in the door. 

I think I remember seeing something about that in their early advertisements.