Old Label vs New Label

[Mike Dillon-migration]

Newbie here....

 

 

This question may have been asked, but what's the difference between the old cgc labels and the new ones. Looking at them on Ebay, it seems the comics with the new labels are more desired.

[namisgr]

I haven't noticed any consistent difference in prices realized for new or old blue labels.

 

Personally, I prefer the old ones - CGC was definitely tougher on page quality in its early days, and the books are a bit less likely to have been cleaned or pressed. On the other hand, the older books are more likely to have traded hands many times, and having been mailed repeatedly may be more prone to being damaged within the slab.

[KingOfRulers]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

[arexcrooke]

Newbie here....

 

 

This question may have been asked, but what's the difference between the old cgc labels and the new ones. Looking at them on Ebay, it seems the comics with the new labels are more desired.

and WTTB from a fellow NC member.

[Korvac Saga]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

No question that the new label design reads and presents better. It's been said that CGC was stricter in the "old label days" in grading and page quality, as Bob said. There seems to be the perception that an "old label 9.4" is better than a "new label 9.4", more legitimate. I've seen arguments for both points in the books I've bought.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

Old school here, and I'd prefer that the numbers not be visible at all...

 

Never understood why decades of history had to be thrown out and I still refer to books as VF+s and NM-s.

[jduran1]

The only difference I have noticed is the 8.5s. The old label 8.5's are new label 7.5s.

[Mike Dillon-migration]

and WTTB from a fellow NC member.

 

Thanks. Been lurking here for a couple of days and noticed a couple of other forum members from around here. Also seems to be a great group of people hanging around here with lots and lots of knowledge.

[KingOfRulers]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

Never understood why decades of history had to be thrown out and I still refer to books as VF+s and NM-s.

 

Because that system was stupid to begin with With a numerical system even those not as familiar with grading would have an idea to the quality of the book. Everyone would have an idea what a 2.5 out of 10 would look like--although a GD+ would be a mystery to many. "Is it really a "good" book???" The old system was a bad idea from the start.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

Never understood why decades of history had to be thrown out and I still refer to books as VF+s and NM-s.

 

Because that system was stupid to begin with With a numerical system even those not as familiar with grading would have an idea to the quality of the book. Everyone would have an idea what a 2.5 out of 10 would look like--although a GD+ would be a mystery to many. "Is it really a "good" book???" The old system was a bad idea from the start.

 

Considering the total lack of 'new blood' coming into the hobby, the numerical system has turned into CGC trying to teach old dogs new tricks.

 

And the 'bad idea from the start' seemed to work fine and dandy for 25 years, as I'm sure you remember....

[KingOfRulers]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

Never understood why decades of history had to be thrown out and I still refer to books as VF+s and NM-s.

 

Because that system was stupid to begin with With a numerical system even those not as familiar with grading would have an idea to the quality of the book. Everyone would have an idea what a 2.5 out of 10 would look like--although a GD+ would be a mystery to many. "Is it really a "good" book???" The old system was a bad idea from the start.

 

Considering the total lack of 'new blood' coming into the hobby, the numerical system has turned into CGC trying to teach old dogs new tricks.

 

And the 'bad idea from the start' seemed to work fine and dandy for 25 years, as I'm sure you remember....

 

By nature of each rating on the old system having no relative value to each other unless the system is learned and studied...what would make it better then a system where all you must know are you numbers from 1 to 10? If you can explain to me how the old system is better with that being said, then you deserve a cookie.

[Sal]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

Old school here, and I'd prefer that the numbers not be visible at all...

 

Never understood why decades of history had to be thrown out and I still refer to books as VF+s and NM-s.

 

[KingOfRulers]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

Old school here, and I'd prefer that the numbers not be visible at all...

 

Never understood why decades of history had to be thrown out and I still refer to books as VF+s and NM-s.

 

 

So can you answer the million dollar question?

[Sal]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

Old school here, and I'd prefer that the numbers not be visible at all...

 

Never understood why decades of history had to be thrown out and I still refer to books as VF+s and NM-s.

 

 

So can you answer the million dollar question?

 

which one?

[Flaming_Telepath]

I think the new labels are far better. The grade is much more visible as the numbers are a much larger print.

 

Never understood why decades of history had to be thrown out and I still refer to books as VF+s and NM-s.

 

Because that system was stupid to begin with With a numerical system even those not as familiar with grading would have an idea to the quality of the book. Everyone would have an idea what a 2.5 out of 10 would look like--although a GD+ would be a mystery to many. "Is it really a "good" book???" The old system was a bad idea from the start.

 

Considering the total lack of 'new blood' coming into the hobby, the numerical system has turned into CGC trying to teach old dogs new tricks.

 

And the 'bad idea from the start' seemed to work fine and dandy for 25 years, as I'm sure you remember....

 

By nature of each rating on the old system having no relative value to each other unless the system is learned and studied...what would make it better then a system where all you must know are you numbers from 1 to 10? If you can explain to me how the old system is better with that being said, then you deserve a cookie.

 

Or I could simply turn it on it's head and tell you that I know what is allowable in a VF+, or a VG/FN, because it is all laid out very clearly.

 

However, what's allowable in an '8.5' or a '7.0'?

 

You might know the numbers, but nobody except the 'powers that be' actually know what they mean.

 

QED...the old system must be better than the new.

[KingOfRulers]

 

Or I could simply turn it on it's head and tell you that I know what is allowable in a VF+, or a VG/FN, because it is all laid out very clearly.

 

However, what's allowable in an '8.5' or a '7.0'?

The same stuff thats allowable in VF+ or FN/VF...except without a silly, impractical title.

[Warlord]

I haven't noticed any consistent difference in prices realized for new or old blue labels.

 

Personally, I prefer the old ones - CGC was definitely tougher on page quality in its early days, and the books are a bit less likely to have been cleaned or pressed. On the other hand, the older books are more likely to have traded hands many times, and having been mailed repeatedly may be more prone to being damaged within the slab.

 

In this whole "older" vs "newer" debate - what timeframe are we talking about? When did the "old" label stop being used? Sometime around mid-2003?

[blowout]

I haven't noticed any consistent difference in prices realized for new or old blue labels.

 

Personally, I prefer the old ones - CGC was definitely tougher on page quality in its early days, and the books are a bit less likely to have been cleaned or pressed. On the other hand, the older books are more likely to have traded hands many times, and having been mailed repeatedly may be more prone to being damaged within the slab.

 

In this whole "older" vs "newer" debate - what timeframe are we talking about? When did the "old" label stop being used? Sometime around mid-2003?

 

The new label made its debut on August 5th 2003.

[Aman619]

I regretted the CGC adoption of numbers over names for grades, but, it seems like ancient history now. Plus ca change I always say! I cant pronounce it, but I say it anyway!

[Flaming_Telepath]

 

Or I could simply turn it on it's head and tell you that I know what is allowable in a VF+, or a VG/FN, because it is all laid out very clearly.

 

However, what's allowable in an '8.5' or a '7.0'?

The same stuff thats allowable in VF+ or FN/VF...except without a silly, impractical title.

 

You obviously haven't been looking closely at too many CGC-graded books, then.