Does this make sense to anyone..?

[murph0]

Got this from the eBay forums. Some of this guys opinions are just..well..out there.. occasionally he tries to make a point but IMO it's just nullified by some of his very anti-CGC theme through out the post. Anyways,

 

"I don't mean to be excessively argumentative, but the case to which I referred was about far more than CGC not noting - or noticing - some pressing (which, btw, does not IMHO qualify as "restoration" but *should* be noted on the label). It was about the lack of diligence at best and deliberate cover-up of a scam at worst. I don't see how the deletion of the original grading notes can be overlooked. If CGC can't tell that a book has had a pen/pencil mark removed on that type of book, sometime after it initially graded THAT SAME BOOK, I fail to see much value in CGC's services.

 

This leads to another point about CGC, or any grading service. Do they not have some sort of responsibility to at least attempt to ascertain whether or not they have seen a book before - particularly with high dollar items? If the time is taken to perform a restoration check, certainly the time can be taken to review past submissions. In the case of the Marvel Mystery books, only a handful of them have even been submitted and even a neophyte would have been able to compare the books with those previously submitted. IMO there should be a policy of inspection for previous submission and AUTOMATIC re-holdering at the previous grade, if it is in the same condition. If pressed, it could grade higher with the pressing noted; etc. CGC's disclaimer of its own inability to prevent census duplication sounds reasonable, but it is doing its customers a disservice by not being more diligent.

 

Of course, CGC would LOVE it if everyone submitted their books SEVERAL times, since it would make all those lovely fees. There is an inherent conflict of interests here that completely devalues the services CGC performs, in my eyes.

 

If anyone doesn't agree with me, let me leave you with an example. CGC's census shows a total of 6 copies graded of Captain America Comics #21, with the highest grade of F/VF 7.0 held by three copies, one of which is restored. The Overstreet value of one of the two unrestored copies is around $1100. Say a copy of this same issue gets submitted, gets checked for restoration, and the initial grader in his subjective opinion thinks it is a VF/NM 9.0. It goes to a second grader who maybe didn't get enough sleep the night before or who is on his 50th book that day. He agrees with the 9.0 grade. It goes to the third grader (hasn't Borock stated that each book is graded by at least 3 people to help prevent mis-grades?) and for some reason (we don't what that could be, since CGC doesn't publish its guidelines, of course!) likes 9.0 too. But - oh, no! - this book is a re-submission of one of the 7.0 books, and the submitter failed to note this on the form. Does anyone REALLY think that CGC shouldn't be performing a rigorous check to make sure they haven't seen this book before? If I were a buyer of the re-graded 9.0 copy - the ONLY EXAMPLE OF A CGC VF/NM 9.0 UNRESTORED C.A.C. #21 IN THE ENTIRE WORLD - I would want to know that it originally came in as a 7.0 - but, hey, I'm picky like that.

 

Nuff said by me on this subject. Sorry to make this another CGC sucks thread!"

 

Does anyone else out there think that CGC should actually go look up the old books? That would basically cancel out any thought of having a new opinion on a resub.

 

Brian

[aardvark88]

Cgc's job is to grade comic books that are submitted & then add the book to the census, not to work backwards & assume every later submitted Timely could be a resubmit. Then again, if Cgc raises their fees an extra 20%, perhaps we should expect them to spend 20% more time looking for resubmits of gold, silver, early bronze? Cgc would go bonkers if they attempted to see if the Hulk 181 coming in now might be a resubmit.

[Aman619]

CGC would be more thorough if they did check to see if they had seen the same book before. Of course thats easier said than done, especially for books that are commonly sent in (Hulk#181) But for less common GA or SA books, they could scan each one, and at least go through the scans quickly on screen looking to match up any distinct characteristics of a book they are grading to make sure it is or isnt an un-documented resubmit. Certain spine or corner damage would be fairly easy to catch. Even easier would be arrival dates and other marks, as in how the scandal of the Heritage Marvel Mystery was uncovered thru an easily noticed flaw on the cover.

 

Would they have to charge extra? Maybe.

But if their census is to have any lasting meaning, they should consider the damage to the reliability of their numbers re-submits are causing...and take appropriate steps to fix it.

[sfilosa]

Honestly, all I expect CGC to do, is grade the book handed to them and check for restoration. They have stated several times, they enjoy a "resubmit" because they get another grading fee.

This actually leads to a point I wanted to discuss.

 

Given the scenario of resubmits, it would only make sense that CGC grading standards "loosen" as time goes on, not get stricter.

 

Simply put, if the standards become looser, there will be 1) more books people will want graded that they thought might not be worth grading, and of course 2) more resubmits.

 

Therefore, everyone who hopes that CGC standards become stricter over time, mine as well keep dreaming.

 

 

[LordRahl]

Seriously, does anyone REALLY think this is feasible? Granted G.A. books are scarce enough that this could be accomplished. No way is this possible for Silver and Bronze age books. Maybe some early Silver in high grade but where do you make the cut off. So CGC only does it for G.A.? So screw everyone else who is buying more common Silver and Bronze books? The majority of turnover and money being spent is on Silver and Bronze age books NOT G.A. If CGC is going to do something like this it would have to be done across the board for all books, and I don't think it's humanly possible. There has to be MANY copies of highly submitted key books like Hulk 181 that would be virtually indestinguishable from scans. Nice thought but it's always easier to come up with great ideas than it is to implement them.

[Aman619]

It may be unfeasible...only CGC can decide where best to allocate their resources, right? But for CGC to continue to succeed as graders, they must RETAIN the trust of buyers and sellers by accurately and consistently grading. And since they are also in the census business, for their census to mean anything, they must take steps to ASSURE that it is as accurate as humany possible.

 

The census will be totally out-of-whack in the future withouts steps NOW to fix it. If CGC decides they cant, or dont wish to expend the time or resources to what was in reality only an OFFSHOOT of their original business plan (grading the comics) it may not be the end of the world for them. BUT---we will grow to just ignore the census at that point, for it will of little more use than our old methods of determining scarcity: our own experience and th eword of dealers we know and/or trust.

[murph0]

I replied to this person with the question. "So then based on this idea, you must just buy comics from dealers and collectors and then not grade it yourself but instead say 'Well he called it this, so it is this'". I'm still waiting for a reply on that one. I'm beginning to think some of these people who bash CGC just really don't understand it at all.

 

Brian

[fantastic_four]

But for CGC to continue to succeed as graders, they must RETAIN the trust of buyers and sellers by accurately and consistently grading.

 

Before they lose your trust, check to see whether any of the coin or card certification companies cross-check resubmissions like you're suggesting. I don't know if they do or not, but I bet they don't due to the extra cost.

 

This kind of resubmission checking may become feasible once automated computer image comparison gets a lot better and cheaper. In the meantime, it's probably too expensive and unreliable to do it manually.

[500Club]

I think checking for possible resub books would be prohibitively time consuming and damn near impossible. The graders see too many books to be able to accurately do this.

 

Resubs do corrode the accuracy of the census over time, though.

[garthgantu]

Seems like the best point of checking for resubmits would be to keep the census accurate...? Sure, it would also enable CGC to potentially ensure that a previously graded comic doesn't get a better grade later on, but for the collecting community, the most valuable aspect would seem to be an accurate census.

[aardvark88]

U cannot assume that Cgc graded the comic 100% accurately the 1st time around. It is possible for say a silver DC that garnered a Cgc 9.0 to be resubmitted to get a 9.4 later on. Just means they hammerd the grade on the silver DC the 1st time.

[murph0]

I've got a part 2. This is taken from a different person.

 

"1) I don't hate CGC, but I think there are fundamental flaws that will prove disastrous. Failing to publish its grading standards and the lack of ability to grade consistently are only the beginning. Cover-ups and grading scandals are very, very bad and have turned off a great many potential clients. It is a good service for what it is: the initial entry into the comic book grading business.

 

2) If I were spending hundreds of dollars to have my comic book CGC graded (and tagging the fee to the value is incredibly greedy, btw), I would want some sort of guarantee that CGC is grading my book accurately. Why? When I sell my CGC 8.0 (pick a title) for $1000 and the buyer (or the auction house who is in bed with CGC!) decides to "game" the CGC system and gets it re-graded 9.2 and sells it for $2500, CGC OWES ME MONEY! How much money is debatable, but CGC is the mechanism through which monetary gains were realized (regardless of pressing - which IS frequently detectable, sorry you can't do it - or undetected restoration). If Nic Cage didn't already have a ton of money and wasn't into the Zen Buddhist phase of his life, he would be PISSED OFF at both CGC and Heritage, and rightly so!"

 

Can't say I've heard "points" (opinions) like these before. Oh well, it's something new.

 

Brian

 

[blowout]

I would want some sort of guarantee that CGC is grading my book accurately. Why? When I sell my CGC 8.0 (pick a title) for $1000 and the buyer (or the auction house who is in bed with CGC!) decides to "game" the CGC system and gets it re-graded 9.2 and sells it for $2500, CGC OWES ME MONEY!

 

I love this part. No mention of the fact that a potential re-sub to CGC carries risks both ways. What happens if the book comes back graded lower, does that mean that HE OWES CGC MONEY?

Grading is to a certain extent subjective, and this guy doesn't seem to have grasped this. How can CGC possibly guarantee a grade to be 100% accurate, when no-one else possibly can?

[murph0]

Here's another one. I've only continued posting these because they're just too funny to ignore. I said something to him about if CGC regrades lower, that means he owes them money to which he replied...

 

"Brian, your point would be valid except for the fact that you are looking at the wrong injured party. In the case where the book is re-graded higher, the injured party is Owner #1. CGC owes #1 money. In the case where the book is re-graded lower and consequently resold for less, the injured party is Owner #2, and CGC owes #2 money. Either way, CGC is IMHO responsible for monetary damages, e.g., the lost revenue upon re-sale, holding all other conditions constant (which is of course the only way to analyze the deleterious effects of a specific action).

 

Although the same results can and do happen with raw books, CGC's sole utility to the hobby is to remove as much subjectivity as possible from the grading process. This is the service that people are paying for, not "this is the grade we gave it on this day by this grader; feel free to send it in for re-grading". This is why it has a responsibility to exercise due diligence on uncommon books to ensure against resubmission and degradation of the census, and the reduce the amount of gaming.

 

What about a UV marking system on the back cover? It's cheap and would allow near-100% accuracy in detecting re-grades. Would an invisible branding be objectionable? I'm sure it would to some, but let's hear why. CGC would never do this, of course, since they would not get those tasty re-grading fees. It's a shame that profit gets in the way of integrity, but that IS the American business model, isn't it?

 

Btw, I've read enough of Borock's lame explanations to know that I have no need to e-mail him directly. He's already done a great job of embarrassing himself and CGC"

 

Looks like you have a friend Steve, although I'm sure he's never confronted you or even read half the stuff you say.

 

Brian

[shadroch]

Allow me t ask a hypothetical question.Suppose there are two 10.0 copies of Mighty Man #1. I own one of them. They sell for 50x guide. I resubmit my copy and once more it rates a 10.0. I do this 25 more times each time getting a 10.0. Now the census shows 26 slabbed at 10.0 and a bunch at 9.6 or above. Wouldn't this cause the price to fall drasticly ? Now I buy the other slabbed copy of 10.0 rather cheaply as the owner thinks it is 1 of 26. I then send CGC all the broken slabs so they are removed from census and I now own the only two 10.0 Mighty Man in existance. What are they worth now? 100x guide?. I know this is an absurd example but do you see my point?

[murph0]

Probably, but if you're resubmitting it still in the holder, one comes off the census. And getting the books out of the holder yourself is difficult

 

Brian

[shadroch]

Getting them out of the holder is easy, its putting the replacement book back into the holder thats proving to be the downfall.

[thecomicsheet]

Getting them out of the holder is easy, its putting the replacement book back into the holder thats proving to be the downfall.

[Shield]

Allow me t ask a hypothetical question.Suppose there are two 10.0 copies of Mighty Man #1. I own one of them. They sell for 50x guide. I resubmit my copy and once more it rates a 10.0. I do this 25 more times each time getting a 10.0. Now the census shows 26 slabbed at 10.0 and a bunch at 9.6 or above. Wouldn't this cause the price to fall drasticly ? Now I buy the other slabbed copy of 10.0 rather cheaply as the owner thinks it is 1 of 26. I then send CGC all the broken slabs so they are removed from census and I now own the only two 10.0 Mighty Man in existance. What are they worth now? 100x guide?. I know this is an absurd example but do you see my point?

 

An excellent, excellent point. Something I'd never thought of before! I'm sure it could be done....

[murph0]

However, the chances of the book coming back exactly the same that many times is unlikely.

 

Brian