The "Review Committee" discussion

[Davenport]

I think it's always a concern when a key book doubles in value. This is where educating the public comes into factor, and a majority of collectors are made aware that the difference between an 8.5 and 9.2, or a 9.4 and 9.8 CGC graded copy could be a minor press job or erased dirt away. Maybe if enough people understand the actual process that CGC uses to grade these books, then we won't get these huge price jumps for an insignificant amount of change.

Personally I do find it somewhat confusing.

 

If grading is about communicating condition to another person, and the current Flat-tastic Age of comic collecting keeps evolving, maybe future labels will add a P (potential) afterthought.

 

Like 8.5P2 for one that could potentially jump 2 levels if reconditioned, or 8.5P0 for a deadnuts VF+ with zero potential/or already reconditioned.

Maybe 4.0P9 for one with tuckable paper near a poped staple.

[awe4one]

The short answer is that CGC grades the book in front of them. They do not research to see if a given book has entered their doors before.

 

I'd be curious to know the grading nores from both submissions to see what has changed.

 

In other words, see what, whatever the technique used, improved the comic upon resumission...

 

Jim

 

If you were really that curious, you could find that out with a phone call.

 

International long distance...it's cheaper this way...

 

Jim

[FFB]

The short answer is that CGC grades the book in front of them. They do not research to see if a given book has entered their doors before.

 

I'd be curious to know the grading nores from both submissions to see what has changed.

 

In other words, see what, whatever the technique used, improved the comic upon resumission...

 

Jim

 

If you were really that curious, you could find that out with a phone call.

 

International long distance...it's cheaper this way...

 

Jim

 

I thought you were back in the US already? Or was that Scheradon.

[awe4one]

I thought you were back in the US already? Or was that Scheradon.

 

Could be Scheradon...I was back in the US briefly for a couple weeks and returned here last Fri. Will come back permanently in late Sept...

 

Jim

[divad]

bummer . . .

[esquirecomics]

I think that a lot of us are too pre-occupied with trying to change CGC and dealer mentality (including myself), instead of trying to change the consumer's perception on what they're really paying for and what they're getting in return.

 

Good point. The short answer is that it is easier to focus on CGC and dealers because they are readily identifiable. But you are correct. The consumer's perception is key. Change that, and CGC and dealers will follow suit.

[esquirecomics]

BTW, is the book still owned by Robert Dennis?

[Scheradon]

The short answer is that CGC grades the book in front of them. They do not research to see if a given book has entered their doors before.

 

I'd be curious to know the grading nores from both submissions to see what has changed.

 

In other words, see what, whatever the technique used, improved the comic upon resumission...

 

Jim

 

If you were really that curious, you could find that out with a phone call.

 

International long distance...it's cheaper this way...

 

Jim

 

I thought you were back in the US already? Or was that Scheradon.

 

[tth2]

BTW, is the book still owned by Robert Dennis?

Was it ever? I thought it was only consigned to him by Halperin.

[esquirecomics]

BTW, is the book still owned by Robert Dennis?

Was it ever? I thought it was only consigned to him by Halperin.

 

I saw some reference by Steve B I think that said he was waiting to receive the book from Rob. Was that just a reference that it was in his possession or pertained to someone or something else?

[nearmint]

BTW, is the book still owned by Robert Dennis?

Was it ever? I thought it was only consigned to him by Halperin.

 

I saw some reference by Steve B I think that said he was waiting to receive the book from Rob. Was that just a reference that it was in his possession or pertained to someone or something else?

 

Steve posted two days ago that Robert had informed him that the book was on the way. Today Steve posted that the book had arrived and the pedigree had been restored. They also did a resto check, but didn't find anything.

[Aman619]

I think it's always a concern when a key book doubles in value. This is where educating the public comes into factor, and a majority of collectors are made aware that the difference between an 8.5 and 9.2, or a 9.4 and 9.8 CGC graded copy could be a minor press job or erased dirt away. Maybe if enough people understand the actual process that CGC uses to grade these books, then we won't get these huge price jumps for an insignificant amount of change.

Personally I do find it somewhat confusing.

 

If grading is about communicating condition to another person, and the current Flat-tastic Age of comic collecting keeps evolving, maybe future labels will add a P (potential) afterthought.

 

Like 8.5P2 for one that could potentially jump 2 levels if reconditioned, or 8.5P0 for a deadnuts VF+ with zero potential/or already reconditioned.

Maybe 4.0P9 for one with tuckable paper near a poped staple.

 

I know you are being sarcastic, but this is the best idea Ive read on the Boards in a while. I mean, if we are truly approaching a time in our hobby when improving books through having work done on them is commonplace, encouraged and accepted by collectors and dealers, the next step in professional appraisal/grading is to notate how much potential each book contains.

 

isnt it?

[Davenport]

 

I know you are being sarcastic, but this is the best idea Ive read on the Boards in a while. I mean, if we are truly approaching a time in our hobby when improving books through having work done on them is commonplace, encouraged and accepted by collectors and dealers, the next step in professional appraisal/grading is to notate how much potential each book contains.

 

isnt it?

A "P" label addition would be great, wouldn't it? With a glance registering the difference between 9.0P0 and 9.0P4. Or having it click mentally that an 8.5P4 and a 9.6P0 are potentially the same.

 

Great, if (big IF) everyone were up to speed on just what the hell potential means.

 

If grading is a shared "condition language", then a big chunk of the New Dictonary is missing. It hasn't been published.

Maybe that new OGG coming out will hint at some of the recent flat's-where-it's-at grading criteria. Even a hint would be nice.

[deathlok]

Okay, then these are all the names of folks that have been nominated:

 

Arexcrooke

AussieRuss

DiceX

Nearmint

Oldguy

Pedigreeman

Redhook

 

Pedigreeman has opted out at this time.

 

Since Alan is out, that leaves 6 people. I am fine with that and think that it is a good #. Do you (the boards) think this too much, too little, or just right? If so, let's make it formal and then you pedigree hunters can get to work

 

Half your list doesn't have much experience with pedigrees, and would porbably be unable to tell one pedigree from another, or from a non-pedigree book.

[FFB]

I think it's always a concern when a key book doubles in value. This is where educating the public comes into factor, and a majority of collectors are made aware that the difference between an 8.5 and 9.2, or a 9.4 and 9.8 CGC graded copy could be a minor press job or erased dirt away. Maybe if enough people understand the actual process that CGC uses to grade these books, then we won't get these huge price jumps for an insignificant amount of change.

Personally I do find it somewhat confusing.

 

If grading is about communicating condition to another person, and the current Flat-tastic Age of comic collecting keeps evolving, maybe future labels will add a P (potential) afterthought.

 

Like 8.5P2 for one that could potentially jump 2 levels if reconditioned, or 8.5P0 for a deadnuts VF+ with zero potential/or already reconditioned.

Maybe 4.0P9 for one with tuckable paper near a poped staple.

 

I know you are being sarcastic, but this is the best idea Ive read on the Boards in a while. I mean, if we are truly approaching a time in our hobby when improving books through having work done on them is commonplace, encouraged and accepted by collectors and dealers, the next step in professional appraisal/grading is to notate how much potential each book contains.

 

isnt it?

 

You never know exactly how much a dry clean and press will improve a book until you actually try it, and since different restorers use different methods (with different levels of effectiveness), it would be impossible to tell how many grade levels a book would potentially improve from a press job simply by looking at it before treatment. That's not to say that someone couldn't eyeball it and make an educated guess, but there's no way to do it with enough certainty to put a separate number on a slab for it.

[tth2]

Half your list doesn't have much experience with pedigrees, and would porbably be unable to tell one pedigree from another, or from a non-pedigree book.

I don't think any experience with pedigrees is required at all. All you have to be able to do is look at a scan of a book with a pedigree on the label, and then look at a scan of the book without the pedigree on the label, and confirm that it's the same book.

[Aman619]

I agree. Especially since CGCs grading isnt an exact science when grading books in from of them, let alone guessing how much it could be improved. As I wrote my post, I saw where I was heading, but deleted it. But what the heck. It occurred to me that I was actually describing something that was seen by CGC as a similar venture. Namely - - PCS. They woudl receive a book, have Friessen look it over and alert the owner as to its potential. Then as a business venture, OFFER their services to RELEASE the "book within.

 

With PCS now a cautionary tale (and a rare "victory" of sanity prevailing here) and probably a sensitive subject for CGC, I hesitated to get into this aspect.. But what the heck, huh?

[Davenport]

 

You never know exactly how much a dry clean and press will improve a book until you actually try it, and since different restorers use different methods (with different levels of effectiveness), it would be impossible to tell how many grade levels a book would potentially improve from a press job simply by looking at it before treatment. That's not to say that someone couldn't eyeball it and make an educated guess, but there's no way to do it with enough certainty to put a separate number on a slab for it.

I thought "eyeball it and make an educated guess" was what you paid for with pro-grading. A subjective point-in-time professional opinion that's printed on a label.

 

Why couldn't some future label reflect two "eyeball it" opinions. One N-grade (now) opinion and another P-grade (potential) opinion? Like combining CGC's grading service with Classics Incorporated's "Proscreen" (evaluation for upgrade potential) service.

 

Both services are available independently for a fee, so it would just be "one stop shopping", wouldn't it? An "eye ball it" combo deal, printed on the same label.

[Red Hook]

Half your list doesn't have much experience with pedigrees, and would porbably be unable to tell one pedigree from another, or from a non-pedigree book.

I don't think any experience with pedigrees is required at all. All you have to be able to do is look at a scan of a book with a pedigree on the label, and then look at a scan of the book without the pedigree on the label, and confirm that it's the same book.

 

That's pretty much it. And it's not like the group will be in charge of the "nuclear football" and the fate of the world will be at stake.

[whomerjay]

I think it's always a concern when a key book doubles in value. This is where educating the public comes into factor, and a majority of collectors are made aware that the difference between an 8.5 and 9.2, or a 9.4 and 9.8 CGC graded copy could be a minor press job or erased dirt away. Maybe if enough people understand the actual process that CGC uses to grade these books, then we won't get these huge price jumps for an insignificant amount of change.

Personally I do find it somewhat confusing.

 

If grading is about communicating condition to another person, and the current Flat-tastic Age of comic collecting keeps evolving, maybe future labels will add a P (potential) afterthought.

 

Like 8.5P2 for one that could potentially jump 2 levels if reconditioned, or 8.5P0 for a deadnuts VF+ with zero potential/or already reconditioned.

Maybe 4.0P9 for one with tuckable paper near a poped staple.

 

I know you are being sarcastic, but this is the best idea Ive read on the Boards in a while. I mean, if we are truly approaching a time in our hobby when improving books through having work done on them is commonplace, encouraged and accepted by collectors and dealers, the next step in professional appraisal/grading is to notate how much potential each book contains.

 

isnt it?

 

You never know exactly how much a dry clean and press will improve a book until you actually try it, and since different restorers use different methods (with different levels of effectiveness), it would be impossible to tell how many grade levels a book would potentially improve from a press job simply by looking at it before treatment. That's not to say that someone couldn't eyeball it and make an educated guess, but there's no way to do it with enough certainty to put a separate number on a slab for it.

 

I like this idea despite the probable inaccuracy. An obvious alternative is to provide (on the label fine with me) detail as to why the grade is such, and the educated consumer will know what are "improvable" features, using either non-plodding or plodding resto.