CGC Resub Success Rate? (Remember to particpate in the Poll too) 1 1

[clobberintime]

Do you get paid by the word or something? The bottom line to this whole issue is money. Say what you will in several paragraphs, the driving idea behind resending a book is get it up a notch and double your money - or triple it or whatever merely by paying another fee to cgc. Why don't you add a poll question about motivations for resubmitting?

[fantastic_four]

hehe, you don't have to validate yourself...you're pretty much like the rest of us. Most of us would resubmit a book we thought was undergraded if we were gonna sell it. It's just that one statement you're having to validate, that there are collectors resubmitting just to validate themselves or the book.

 

They're out there, yeah, but I can't imagine that they amount to any more than 10% of resubmissions, 20% at most. Heritage's resubmissions alone likely dwarf collectors who resubmit books they know they're going to keep. I can see resubmitting a few times to validate your grading, but once you knew you and CGC were on par, future resubmits would likely be to maximize value. Collectors who submit their own books they have no intention of selling are in the minority, and amongst those, people who resubmit books they're going to keep are lesser still.

[BronzeBruce13]

The resubmission rate itself as it stands is not a huge factor in maintaining CGC's "mission"; it is the value and condition of the books that are being resubmitted that bring questions of impropriety into play. Honestly, I'm not going to send in an Origin 1 CGC 9.9 just because I think it looks EXACTLY like my CGC 10.0 - no matter how resolutely I feel about my grading opinion being correct.

 

Damn, I need to cut the lawn!! ... I was talking about reputation in regards to their grading accuracy, not impropriety. Your example about possibly resubbing a 9.9 in hopes of a 10.0 would be quite different than resubbing a 9.2 that you felt was a 9.4... there's a little more room there. Talk to me when you get a sweet Defenders 10 in 9.2 that you think deserves a 9.4/9.6, you check the graders notes and nothing they say really adds up to the 9.2 grade... you just might resub.

 

 

 

Exactly what I was alluding to above. It may be an unrealistic expectation, but this is the case due to the different values placed on books, driving folks to seek the higher grade whether it is because it is just for higher dollar potential or just to be right. My main problem with this is that CGC has deemed this resubmission 9.6 a lower grade at one point, if you sell this to me without letting me know that it used to be a 9.4, I would probably have qualms that I paid you more that I would have knowing that it was a 9.4 prior to resubmission. There is too much that can happen with resubmissions, but the question of whether there was some alteration or "friendly deal" to earn that higher grade on the resubmission will always be in the back of my mind. If you don't tell me, ignorance is bliss, but this would totally discount the idea of full disclosure.

 

I understand what you mean, although I've bought more than a few books that were resubbed higher without any problem because I saw the scans and was happy with the book. I knew they were resubs though. When a book is upgraded, I don't think someone slid a $50 in the book, I just feel it got what it deserved, maybe more so because the owners of the book felt the grade was off and then CGC agreed the 2nd time. We see overgraded books all the time, but few make a big effort to say that. Some of us are also of the opinion that CGC went through a few phases of grading strictness. One of which (the last 1/2 or 2/3rds of the maroon label era) may have been too strict. So, that is a factor as well if the current standard evolved to what it is today and has maintained.

 

 

A misrepresented raw high grade will sell for more than an accurately graded mid or low grade any day...everyone loves that gamble - you see it on eBay every day - folks plopping down mega multiples of NM OS guide on an ASM 129 raw that some joker with 2 rating feedback with a blurry picture is calling NM/MT - all because folk think they'll get a bargain on the next CGC 9.8 ASM 129...HA!

 

You are absolutely right...it's a gamble and the evaluation of your business savvy is based on the outcome of the deal.

 

I was not talking about misrepresentation... not sure where that came from?

 

 

Bruce - in the end of your scenario above, did you resell the book? Eventually it all boils down to the $$$cha-ching$$$ It may have started out with you wanting validation that your grading was on par with or better than CGC's, but in the end, once you sell it off as part of your lower grade books when you upgrade, if you don't tell the person you sell it to, that the 9.4 181 used to be a 9.2, it may bother the collector who plans on holding onto it for a while, more than to a flipper who sells it when the next movie hype peak hits. I'm not saying there was anything wrong with what you intended: validation from a recognized authority builds confidence in your own capabilities. But to me, a $15 - $110 fee is way too much to pay for a "second opinion" When the book comes back at a higher grade, don't you feel cheated by CGC? Why didn't they grade it that higher grade in the first place? You had to pay 2x to get the same grade you thought it was from the start? Aren't CGC experts? Did they undercook it the first time, knowing I'm the type of person who would resubmit? Why do I have to bear the consequence (double payment) of their graders not getting it right the first time? If I was a big time submitter, would they have made extra sure that they graded it accurately first time around? All these questions would pop in my head before I "resubmitted" and at the end of the day, I'll always decide that it's just not worth it.... but that's just me.

 

See my explanation above to James... We'll have to agree to disagree on some of this.

I never considered the fact that my upgraded book would be a topic I needed to bring up during a sale, but I see your point. I guess I felt I was right and the book was what it was supposed to be now. Regardless, I did mention it just the same to the buyer who wants this 9.6, not because I felt I should report something, just because I knew it was a 9.6/9.8 and it was an interesting story about the book.

 

Simply put, I don't expect CGC to get it right IMO all the time... to me, that's unrealistic.

I was more demanding at the time I resubbed the 181... I was mad!, but now I roll with it, I think I understand that comic grading books that are on the line is always going to be a difficult task and I expect a certain level of variance.

[clobberintime]

Bruce - to answer a couple of you earlier questions: I do agree with CGCs grading most of the time. The things I don't agree with are high grade books -9.4 up - with miswraps and date marks/writing. I just can't see books that are severely off center or have big date stamps grading over a 9.0 - but I see it all the time. The spine centering thing bothers me in particular. I have never considered those miswrapped books nm but CGC grades them up to 9.8 from what I have seen. I have been buying back issues for nearly 30 years now and think I am a tough/tight grader but have learned that sending in books is sometimes a [!@#%^&^] shoot. Out of the 20 or so books I have had graded, most have been in the range I thought. I sold FF a spidey 9 that I thought was a vf/nm to nm- and it came back a 9.2 but with slight color touch. Out of a batch of 10 books I was involved in having graded which I thought were all 9.0/9.2, two came back 8.5, 2 were 9.0s, the rest were 9.2s and one came out a 9.6. Unless you are employed by cgc or are a profesional grader, I think it is very presumptuous to say "this book is a 9.4, 9.6 or 9.8 " until they slap a label on it. I think CGC has created the standrds for those kinds of books - as I have said in many other posts, never before cgc did I ever hear of people paying 6 to 20x guide for a book. Try pricing a non-cgc book like that even now! That's why these ebay sellers that list unrestored 9.6 or whatever books for sale are laughable. And people go after those books trying to make money with the thought"I"ll buy it on the cheap, cgc it and get rich!"

[BronzeBruce13]

I have to mow the lawn now... I tire of validating my existence in the comic world

 

BB - you are singlehandedly bringing down the hobby as we know it and highly accelerating the CGC market "adjustment" with your irresponsible use of "resubmissions". Now go think about that while you manicure your shrubbery...

 

Darn it Vince!!!... you [!@#%^&^] ... wait you're not Vince!

[BronzeBruce13]

Do you get paid by the word or something? The bottom line to this whole issue is money. Say what you will in several paragraphs, the driving idea behind resending a book is get it up a notch and double your money - or triple it or whatever merely by paying another fee to cgc. Why don't you add a poll question about motivations for resubmitting?

 

 

Funny, from someone who gets paid by the minute

Point is... no one knows what everyone's motivations are and trying to tell people what they were thinking or why they did something is borderline pompous in my mind and is something I avoid doing. Whether anyone accepts what I said really does not matter. I'm not sure why I even bother.. I guess I like to be understood. I tried to give explanation and insight, but at the end of the day... if you doubt it, so be it. No offense taken.

 

What I would point out lastly is if resubbing was exclusively some major money making strategy for me... you'd think with the hundreds upon hundreds of books I've owned or bought to resell that I may have resubbed a bit more than 3.

 

 

 

[BronzeBruce13]

hehe, you don't have to validate yourself...you're pretty much like the rest of us. Most of us would resubmit a book we thought was undergraded if we were gonna sell it. It's just that one statement you're having to validate, that there are collectors resubmitting just to validate themselves or the book.

 

They're out there, yeah, but I can't imagine that they amount to any more than 10% of resubmissions, 20% at most. Heritage's resubmissions alone likely dwarf collectors who resubmit books they know they're going to keep. I can see resubmitting a few times to validate your grading, but once you knew you and CGC were on par, future resubmits would likely be to maximize value. Collectors who submit their own books they have no intention of selling are in the minority, and amongst those, people who resubmit books they're going to keep are lesser still.

 

All's I said was some resubmit for the reasons I gave. I never offered a percentage or said it was the majority reason. In fact, I thought I said "most" was driven by money, but not all. You basically are agreeing with me unless I missed something here. People are probably just skimming my posts instead of reading all that I'm saying because I can't get my point across as quickly as others

[BronzeBruce13]

Bruce - to answer a couple of you earlier questions: I do agree with CGCs grading most of the time. The things I don't agree with are high grade books -9.4 up - with miswraps and date marks/writing. I just can't see books that are severely off center or have big date stamps grading over a 9.0 - but I see it all the time. The spine centering thing bothers me in particular. I have never considered those miswrapped books nm but CGC grades them up to 9.8 from what I have seen. I have been buying back issues for nearly 30 years now and think I am a tough/tight grader but have learned that sending in books is sometimes a [!@#%^&^] shoot. Out of the 20 or so books I have had graded, most have been in the range I thought. I sold FF a spidey 9 that I thought was a vf/nm to nm- and it came back a 9.2 but with slight color touch. Out of a batch of 10 books I was involved in having graded which I thought were all 9.0/9.2, two came back 8.5, 2 were 9.0s, the rest were 9.2s and one came out a 9.6. Unless you are employed by cgc or are a professional grader, I think it is very presumptuous to say "this book is a 9.4, 9.6 or 9.8 " until they slap a label on it. I think CGC has created the standards for those kinds of books - as I have said in many other posts, never before cgc did I ever hear of people paying 6 to 20x guide for a book. Try pricing a non-cgc book like that even now! That's why these ebay sellers that list unrestored 9.6 or whatever books for sale are laughable. And people go after those books trying to make money with the thought"I"ll buy it on the cheap, cgc it and get rich!"

 

Last post and then I'm getting to the freakin' lawn!!

 

All great points, BUT you're missing one important thing here I think that I realized sometime back and seemed obvious to me after awhile. I spoke with Steve Borock about this and he confirmed it for me if I understood him correctly (I'm sure he'll LMK if I get this wrong).

 

In HG books in particular, CGC grades "structure"... the physical shape of the book in terms of wear, damage, mishandling, storage. CGC is NOT for the most part, and only in very extreme cases, factoring in many of the "eye appeal" factors that you mention and have varying levels of acceptance to collectors. In lower grades, SB said that "Eye-Appeal" will play a factor. However, in HG (and no I did not ask exactly what grade that starts at) CGC is reporting to you an opinion of the condition of the book and leaving you to value the "Eye Appeal " factors yourself based on your own preferences. Since some are generally visible with a decent scan, and again opinions vary wildly concerning how they should impact the grade, this makes sense to me personally. A grading standard based on structure is difficult enough, as I pointed out long ago in another post, trying to incorporate "Eye-Appeal" factors into the grade, along with structure is a nightmare. We all don't come close to agreeing either. "Eye-Appeal" factors like miswraps, date stamps, arrival dates, production creases are left for us to decide. They view them as neutral. I feel some of these things are not easily visible all the time and should be on the label in a perfect world, but we have to compensate for now with questions and requests for info and larger scans. Maybe someday CGC, and/or another company will add a separate "Eye-Appeal" grade if a standard that most will agree to can be developed... but for now, decide for yourself what EA factors you can live with or not and realize that you are receiving an opinion of the structure of the book.

 

OK lawnmower here I come

 

[lighthouse]

I think one of the things that gets lost in this whole process is the purpose of having a book slabbed in the first place. It's to get the opinion of someone who is not involved in the sale. They are not the buyer. They are not the seller. That doesn't mean their grading is perfect, it means their grading isn't biased toward the buyer or the seller.

 

Haven't you ever been at a show when you and the other party disagreed on the grade of a book? Haven't you ever asked the guy next to you what he thought of it? Haven't you ever asked "Let's see what So-and-So thinks?" Aren't there a couple dealers you see at shows that you don't mind asking for a second opinion? Haven't you ever had someone ask you to take a look and 'see what you think'?

 

The service that you buy from CGC is just that, a second opinion. An opinion from some folks who have graded quite a few comics, who don't have any ties to the seller or the buyer. The holder exists solely to preserve the book as it was when CGC saw it (at least from handling, you can still destroy one by leaving it in your car).

 

That's what you're buying... nothing more, nothing less. You're buying a second opinion.

 

As to the question of resubs, I don't have any problem with them at all. If anything, the graders should get better the longer they do it, and a more recent opinion is more accurate. Project forward ten years... Don't you think you will be checking submission dates on your CGC books? Don't you think a 9.6 that was graded last month is worth more than a 9.6 that was graded 11 years ago? In all likelihood the 11-year-old 9.6 has suffered deterioration since then. Humidity, light exposure, even the decay of the holder itself. It may still be a 9.6, or the gradual decay from storage conditions may have dropped it to a 9.4. Don't you think you'll take that into account in your purchasing down the line? Look at Mile Highs that are still in Colorado and compare them to ones that got sent to Florida in 1979. There is absolutely a difference. We're not talking about coins that you can leave in a holder for 50 years with no change. We're talking about paper and ink.

 

Can you honestly say that you would feel comfortable paying 9.4 prices for a book that was slabbed at 9.4 11 years ago? Or have you folks not thought that far ahead? Resubmissions may seem like an oddity now... or a charlatan's trick... But fast forward a few years and they will be required.

[COI]

Can you honestly say that you would feel comfortable paying 9.4 prices for a book that was slabbed at 9.4 11 years ago? Or have you folks not thought that far ahead?

 

I suspect in 11 years, I will be buying the same way I buy now. If I'm looking for a "NM" copy of a book, I will look for 9.2-9.6 slabs(if possible) and try to find the best copy for the $$$ spent. I've had 2 instances where I owned a 9.2 and a 9.4 of the same book, and opted to keep the 9.2.

 

And since in the course of the next 11 years, books will be stored and handled differently, it will become more important to examine a book as much as possible before buying. I think the slab date will be a consideration, but it will take a back seat to examining the quality of the actual copy in question, at least for me anyway. Hopefuly, this will eventually faze out the "label" collectors.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Can you honestly say that you would feel comfortable paying 9.4 prices for a book that was slabbed at 9.4 11 years ago? Or have you folks not thought that far ahead? Resubmissions may seem like an oddity now... or a charlatan's trick... But fast forward a few years and they will be required.

 

Couldn't agree more with this; I've had this idea in my "about me" ebay page for about two years. It might be 10 years, or it might be 15-20 years, but eventually, standards will tighten a bit and sellers will be reslabbing their 9.2 to 9.6 books. Since I've been buying with the idea I'll keep most of my books for a decade or more, this is why I don't pay the huge multiples for just any 9.4 to 9.8 book...it's gotta be an exceptional copy in EVERY way before I'll do it, with all "eye appeal" defects that CGC barely downgrades for factored in. I figure that if I hold books to higher standards than the general industry does at this point in time, I've got a better chance of my books being worth the same amount or more once the tigher grading in the future hits. How many people who bought books a decade or two ago thought they had NM books only to have CGC tell them they're really VFs? Too many; I don't want to be in the same situation as those unlucky people once the next generation of grading hits.

 

One of the changes I'd love to see is greater grading consistency. I've said this several times before--the 25-notch scale is too ambitious if even the pro graders have a margin of error of 1 to 2 nothces on that scale. The standards have to be more well-defined, and grading on the 25-notch scale has to become a consistently repeatable process. Somebody asked whether CGC has been ISO-certified earlier. I assume from their revenues the answer is 99.99% likely to be no, but still, they do need written, documented internal guidelines to make sure all the graders grade the same way. They may have this, but they may not; I haven't heard them say anywhere that they do. And based upon some of the inconsistency I've seen, they must not have them, unless they've been changing those guidelines and I saw one book with a defect before the standards were changed and another after the change.

 

If the back-issue industry ever gets consistent on the 25-notch scale, or if the standards actually get so good that we go back to the 100-point scale Overstreet proposed in the early 90s that we eventually realized was too ambitious, then without a doubt, these early CGC books will be looked at as a risk and reslabbing will have to occur to have a shot at getting fair market value or better in the future.

[murph0]

The same thing could be said about buying a book raw.. who's to say the book you're buying raw as a 9.2 wasn't sold to the person you're buying it from as a 9.0?

 

Brian

[lighthouse]

The same thing could be said about buying a book raw.. who's to say the book you're buying raw as a 9.2 wasn't sold to the person you're buying it from as a 9.0?

 

Brian

 

I actually was not talking about changes in grading standards...

 

My point was that even if the standards are identical, even if the grading accuracy is identical, a more recently graded book is superior to one graded years earlier.

 

If you have a choice between a book that was a 9.4 yesterday, and a book that was a 9.4 eleven years ago, the book graded yesterday is the superior book. Because the condition of the book graded eleven years ago has deteriorated since it was put in the slab. Whether from humidity, light, temperature, slab degradation or handling damage, the book is just not as nice as it was at the time it was graded. There is no getting around that.

 

You know why we pay huge amounts of money for Edgar Church's books and Curator copies? Because those books were stored in conditions 100 times better for the preservation of paper than in our own homes. More damage is done to the paper of a Mile High in one year in a typical air-conditioned home than was done in 30 years of storage in the stacks in the Church residence. A typical Curator copy has deteriorated more in the last 3 years than it did in the 3 decades of museum storage.

 

If you have a choice between a book that was 9.4 yesterday and one that was 9.4 eleven years ago, I really question whether you can justify buying the 11-year-old slab without a re-sub... because it is an absolute fact that the book is not as nice as it was the day it was slabbed, and knowing just how much it has deteriorated is pretty darn important.

[murph0]

I wasn't replying to you and hadn't read what you said. I was more referring to the inference made that CGC should be 100 percent accurate and that people would be turned off to getting a CGC 9.4 that used to be a CGC 9.2

I'll bet "upgrading" happens more often then not when resale occurs.

 

Brian

[Darthdiesel]

My point was that even if the standards are identical, even if the grading accuracy is identical, a more recently graded book is superior to one graded years earlier.

 

If you have a choice between a book that was a 9.4 yesterday, and a book that was a 9.4 eleven years ago, the book graded yesterday is the superior book. Because the condition of the book graded eleven years ago has deteriorated since it was put in the slab. Whether from humidity, light, temperature, slab degradation or handling damage, the book is just not as nice as it was at the time it was graded. There is no getting around that.

 

good point...how do you know that collectors nowadays aren't taking the same precautions or better care than church or the curator copies in regards to the preservation of their comics

[Amazing_Bag_man]

I don't know if this was mention before but there is a double edge sword when re-(submitting) any comicbook let alone Incredible Hulk 181 to death. The number of submition of these books (Ex.- Incrediable Hulk 181 or any key book) at the Census board would distorted the actual number and in turn over inflate the true number. The number 9.4 or higher is no longer acturate and now is more than before and could cause a "slight" de-valuating and maybe no longer a gruante investment.

 

In my opinion it's killing the investment portion of any book being re-submitted???

 

[dikran]

Found this old thread, thought I'd contribute my experience 18 years later. Sent in 2 old labels for pressing and regrade. Hulk 181 8.5 (obviously) OW-W came back 8.5 WP and X-men 12 9.0 OW came back 9.0 WP also. Not sure the PQ bump counts 2-2 or 0-2

Honestly for the cost of pressing & resubbing via walkthru, you're more than likely better off leaving things be.

[BrntWS6]

Iron fist #14 8.0.  I cracked and pressed it.  Came back a 9.4.

I have a x-men 266 9.6 I would like to do the same and try for a 9.8.  But I feel like it's too risky. 

[dikran]

38 minutes ago, BrntWS6 said:

Iron fist #14 8.0.  I cracked and pressed it.  Came back a 9.4.

Wow! That's quite a bump!

[Drummy]

I've been having mild success with buying 'the other guy's' books and sending them in for pressing and grading.  Both times the grade went up by one notch and the PQ stayed the same.  With CGC's discount on grading books in other slabs, it was financially a win-win.  

Dan