Questions for CGC and the Liason Committee

[FFB]

Hey guys...nice conversation and all...but isn't this thread about bringing up questions and responding to community questions to CGC?

 

BTW, I hope the liason team saw my post buried in this otherwise interesting conversation.

 

I spoke to Steve about this issue. I just need to write it up and PM it to him for approval, but basically it is a programming issue and a budgetary issue.

[drbanner]

Hey guys...nice conversation and all...but isn't this thread about bringing up questions and responding to community questions to CGC?

 

BTW, I hope the liason team saw my post buried in this otherwise interesting conversation.

 

I spoke to Steve about this issue. I just need to write it up and PM it to him for approval, but basically it is a programming issue and a budgetary issue.

 

Sounds like not much progress has been made since Steve commented on this in October:

 

"As to graders notes, I was in what might be the next to last meeting on graders notes being put on the web. At this point in time it will be only comics that are graded from the point of the implementation of the program, but as people call for notes on a book or graders have some free time, they will then be moved to "viewable". As always, graders can only give out notes on a few books as we are very busy grading. This will, probably, only be available for Collectors Society members and member dealers. Also, please remember, many modern comics (aprox. 1990) graded 9.6 and above will not have graders notes."

[bluechip]

By definition a book that is poor is not restored because there is no lower grade. Restored means brought back to a previous grade. What is lower than poor?

"Poor" or "0.5" encompasses a pretty wide range of books. Some "0.5" books are better than other "0.5" books, and in the case of a big ticket book it might affect how much I'd be willing to pay (counter-intuitively, many books in GD and below command close to full Guide, whereas most books in VG to F tend to go at a discount to Guide).

 

Considering you're the supposed champion of more information on labels, why are you now presuming to judge for us that this information is not important enough to be disclosed to us?

 

The first time I saw a book labelled "apparent poor" I jcouldn't help laughing. I thought it was just my reaction, but later on I was standing by when several other people watched as a guy pulled an "apparent poor" out of bag and they had the same reaction.

Perhaps what they were laughing at was why someone would even bother to color touch a ragged out Poor book? That would be why I would laugh in that situation.

 

I didn't say the information should not be disclosed. I said that calling it "restoration" seems like inaccurate information since it hasn't been restored to any condituion, if poor is the lowest. Sure, note all the defects, note all the color touch on the label. But adding a color to the label and an incongruous definition that it's an "apparent poor" doesn't help the buyer figure out what it is.

 

I also agree that poor .5 covers a wide range and I think that's part of the problem. The range is so wide that giving it a grade in a slab is of little or no help. It can even be worse than having no information.

 

Books printed yesterday and worth maybe a few dollars are being graded with enormous care to different between a 9.0. 9.2. 9.4. 9.6. 9.8 or 9.9 ofr a 10.0 Yet books worth tens of thousands even in poor condition are treated as if it doesn't even matter whether it's a handful of brittle pages missing a cover and much of the story, or a very nice appearing book except it's got some marks on it and is missing a few non-story pages.

 

That seems like opinions about low grade and restoration are affecting the labelling (all resto is bad, so it doesn't matter whether it improves the book; all low grade is bad, so it doesn't matter if one is better than another, doesn't even matter if we're talking about a truly important book). The end result is less information and even misleading information.

[bluechip]

 

I was referring to color touch and glue, etc that does not hide a defect at all but is really an added defect. In many cases it is called restoration even when the color touch glue, whatever makes the book appear far worse. In those cases it makes much more sense to note the defect than it does to imply, inaccurately that the book is restored to a previous grade, or to say it is an "apparent (grade)."

 

"Apparent" means it appears to be one thing but may not actually be that thing. "Apparent poor" would mean it is not, or potentially is not, actually poor. "Aparrent fine" is supposed to mean it is not fine, or might not be fine.

 

Ideally, restoration ID would tell a potential buyer what grade the book was before and what grade it apparently is now. If the buyer can see the grade is one and the same, that might make a big difference to tbe buyer. If the buyer can see the grade was a fair, but is an apparent VF now only because the cover was simply reattached, that buyer might be more likely to be okay with paying a decent price for the book. If he sees it has been rebuilt, reglossed, repainted and more, he might be more inclined to say I'll pass no matter how it looks.

 

But the way the labels are now the buyer doesn't get enough info. instead he gets a label that IMO essentially says "The most important thing you need to know is that it's bad."

[Flaming_Telepath]

But the way the labels are now the buyer doesn't get enough info. instead he gets a label that IMO essentially says "The most important thing you need to know is that it's bad."

 

I agree with you 100% on the first point...more info helps with education, helps with possible acceptance and understanding.

 

However, you're going to convince almost nobody that the purple label is an inappropriate tool. It doesn't say the book is bad, it says that the book is restored, as defined by CGC.

 

The majority of the market have made the leap from 'restored' to 'bad'...and that those books are easily identified is actually a 'good' thing.

 

Like anything else, give the customer as much transparency as possible...and then let them decide what's good and bad.

[bluechip]

But the way the labels are now the buyer doesn't get enough info. instead he gets a label that IMO essentially says "The most important thing you need to know is that it's bad."

 

I agree with you 100% on the first point...more info helps with education, helps with possible acceptance and understanding.

 

However, you're going to convince almost nobody that the purple label is an inappropriate tool. It doesn't say the book is bad, it says that the book is restored, as defined by CGC.

 

 

I think you're right that nobody will ever convince the hardcore that the purple label isa good thing, because the hardcore believes all resto is bad and wants everybody else to act, or be made to act,the same way.

 

I think there have been more than a few others on this board, though, who feel the purple label has had unintented and in some case undesired consequences, like the very debate over what restoration should be "as defined by CGC." That means that instead of grading a book, they're put in the business of arbitrating between people arguing about what makes a book reach a threshold that earns it a "bad" ;abel. ("the glue on mine is not resto, but it is on yours so you get the 'bad' label")

 

If CGC gave all the information, then people could decide for themselves. But instead people look to CGC for a determination not on what's defective about a book but on whether it's an innocent defect or an evil defect.

[nik]

I have been reading your posts and trying to understand what point you are trying to make.

 

Are you saying that they should do away with the purple label because it stigmatizes a book as restored? or people dont know the extent of whats been done to it because they dont want to look past the purple label.

[Red Hook]

Bluechip, I assume you remember CGC trying to do away with the purple label and adding info regarding levels of restoration.

 

That went down in flames.

[mica]

I don't think there should be a "cutting off point" based upon a book being lower than Good condition.

For example Jeff D is looking for the back cover for Supes 34 (free plug).

Maybe that apparent book he finds is a rat chewed/half a staple/brittle paged nightmare but the backcover; centerfold; and page 17 are smooth with sharp looking corners.

 

He's a desperate dude, but I'm sure he'd appreciate knowing just what type of restoration was done

[FFB]

No, restored means that a defect is being hidden or removed. If you have a book that is an 8.0 and then you hit one spine nick with color touch, you've "restored" the book even though it still might be an 8.0. It is irrelevant whether the grade of the book actually increases.

 

I was referring to color touch and glue, etc that does not hide a defect at all but is really an added defect. In many cases it is called restoration even when the color touch glue, whatever makes the book appear far worse. In those cases it makes much more sense to note the defect than it does to imply, inaccurately that the book is restored to a previous grade, or to say it is an "apparent (grade)."

 

"Apparent" means it appears to be one thing but may not actually be that thing. "Apparent poor" would mean it is not, or potentially is not, actually poor. "Aparrent fine" is supposed to mean it is not fine, or might not be fine.

 

Ideally, restoration ID would tell a potential buyer what grade the book was before and what grade it apparently is now. If the buyer can see the grade is one and the same, that might make a big difference to tbe buyer. If the buyer can see the grade was a fair, but is an apparent VF now only because the cover was simply reattached, that buyer might be more likely to be okay with paying a decent price for the book. If he sees it has been rebuilt, reglossed, repainted and more, he might be more inclined to say I'll pass no matter how it looks.

 

But the way the labels are now the buyer doesn't get enough info. instead he gets a label that IMO essentially says "The most important thing you need to know is that it's bad."

 

I agree that it would be nice if a buyer knew what grade a book was prior to restoration, but the fact of the matter is that this is usually not possible to pin down with enough certainty for CGC to put it on a label. How in the world can you guess as to the pre-restoration grade of a book that has been cleaned and/or bleached? Once that is done, you have no way of knowing what stains were present and to what extent. You have no way of knowing if the cover and pages were badly tanned, not tanned at all, or somewhere in between. You run into similar problems when you have a book that is reglossed (how much gloss was there beforehand? F if I know!) or heavily inpainted a la Matt Wilson (how much original ink is still sitting below that nasty layer of acrylic that he slathered all over the cover?).

 

If you can inspect the book outside of the slab, you can make an educated guess if you know what you're looking at, but there is a big difference between a potential buyer making an educated guess on the one hand, and on the other hand, CGC being certain enough about the pre-restoration grade to put that pre-restoration grade on their label.

 

On your other point re: the inconsistency in calling a book an "apparent poor," what you say makes logical sense from a semantic point of view, but when you're talking about a book that started out in PR 0.5 condition and is still in apparent PR 0.5 condition following some ugly, amateurish restoration, does it really matter? It isn't like the PLOD has any impact on the sales price of a book that is in PR 0.5 condition. That being the case, I don't see any real need to create a special carve-out for PR 0.5 books that have been restored but haven't increased in grade.

 

As for the "Apparent Fine," point you're making, I disagree. The "Apparent" simply means that the book has restoration on it and it appears to be in Fine condition. That does not necessarily mean that the book started out lower grade than that.

[FFB]

Bluechip, I assume you remember CGC trying to do away with the purple label and adding info regarding levels of restoration.

 

That went down in flames.

 

Only the former (doing away with the purple label) went down the flames. The restoration rating system is still in the works, but is taking a while because the entire system needs to be reprogrammed (including all the printers) and that is not an easy task, nor an inexpensive one.

[bluechip]

Bluechip, I assume you remember CGC trying to do away with the purple label and adding info regarding levels of restoration.

 

That went down in flames.

 

Only the former (doing away with the purple label) went down the flames. The restoration rating system is still in the works, but is taking a while because the entire system needs to be reprogrammed (including all the printers) and that is not an easy task, nor an inexpensive one.

 

I am not sure where the first qupte came from, but I actually do not recall that. I wasn't part of the discussion. Perhaps a lot of other people who might've favored doing away with it were not part of the discussion, either. And pehaps a new discussion along those lines would be a good thing.

 

If FFB is correct then now is a good time to weigh in. I would just urge those in favor of purple labels to give really sound reason why they should be retained, and not simply that you think all restored is *spoon*, or that people who restored books in the past were bad people, or whatever. The argument about people wanting to be able to spot the book from a country mile away at least has a grain of logic, though I think the counter arguments are stronger. Like the fact it doesn't help even those people if the gudelines are not what they agree with.

 

.How's this for a couple out the box notions. (hate that cliche but don't want to think up another one) Instead of a purple label with a higher grade you simply grade the book as what it actually is. If it's a fair-good that has been made to loo like a FVF, then you give it a fair-good grade with label notes like spine reopaired, etc. No need for a purple label -- you can see the number from ten feet away,

 

Or -- if you love the purple label as a way of making nice looking books look bad -- then maybe It gets a purple label only if the book appears to be a higher grade than the big number grade in the little window.

 

After al, wasn't the real purpose of the purple label to tell people "hey, heads up; this is not what it appears to be"? If so then you only need to do that when it really does appear to be something different. A fine with color touch that doesn't xhange the grade gets a fine with a notation it has color touch. If the color touch fills in cracks that would've given the book a vg grade, then it gets a purple label because it looks better than it actually is.

[nearmint]

Bluechip, I assume you remember CGC trying to do away with the purple label and adding info regarding levels of restoration.

 

That went down in flames.

 

Only the former (doing away with the purple label) went down the flames. The restoration rating system is still in the works, but is taking a while because the entire system needs to be reprogrammed (including all the printers) and that is not an easy task, nor an inexpensive one.

 

Can the committee please recommend to Steve that the resto rating scale be 1-10, and not the 0-10 scale they previously announced? A book with zero resto is unrestored! It's going to confuse people if a book gets a purple label with a resto rating of zero.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Why purple? I can't think of a single reason to use that color other than to intentionally stigmatize restored books. They might as well be pink....

[bluechip]

Why purple? I can't think of a single reason to use that color other than to intentionally stigmatize restored books. They might as well be pink....

 

You are preaching to the choir, here, my friend. I cannot speak to the intent behind making it a special purple label in the first place, but it seems like many who want tio kjeep the colored label want it because it makes the book look bad. I think some of them would like it even better if it were the color of diarrhea.,

[THE_BEYONDER]

Why purple? I can't think of a single reason to use that color other than to intentionally stigmatize restored books. They might as well be pink....

 

You are preaching to the choir, here, my friend. I cannot speak to the intent behind making it a special purple label in the first place, but it seems like many who want tio kjeep the colored label want it because it makes the book look bad. I think some of them would like it even better if it were the color of diarrhea.,

 

I think that would still be an improvement over purple. In a male dominated hobby such as comics.....you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that CGC didn't realize that the majority wouldn't want a purple collection of slabs.

 

Had they went with red instead.....I think the current market for restored slabs would be completely different.

[FFB]

Why purple? I can't think of a single reason to use that color other than to intentionally stigmatize restored books. They might as well be pink....

 

You are preaching to the choir, here, my friend. I cannot speak to the intent behind making it a special purple label in the first place, but it seems like many who want tio kjeep the colored label want it because it makes the book look bad. I think some of them would like it even better if it were the color of diarrhea.,

 

I think that would still be an improvement over purple. In a male dominated hobby such as comics.....you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that CGC didn't realize that the majority wouldn't want a purple collection of slabs.

 

Had they went with red instead.....I think the current market for restored slabs would be completely different.

 

I think CGC knew that certain people would not want restored books in their collection, but the fact that they tried to do away with the PLOD tells me that they did not anticipate the reaction that the market would have to the purple label, i.e., treating all restored books as "equal," regardless of the amount of work done to each book. This is an overgeneralization, obviously, but hopefully you get my point.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Why purple? I can't think of a single reason to use that color other than to intentionally stigmatize restored books. They might as well be pink....

 

You are preaching to the choir, here, my friend. I cannot speak to the intent behind making it a special purple label in the first place, but it seems like many who want tio kjeep the colored label want it because it makes the book look bad. I think some of them would like it even better if it were the color of diarrhea.,

 

I think that would still be an improvement over purple. In a male dominated hobby such as comics.....you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that CGC didn't realize that the majority wouldn't want a purple collection of slabs.

 

Had they went with red instead.....I think the current market for restored slabs would be completely different.

 

I think CGC knew that certain people would not want restored books in their collection, but the fact that they tried to do away with the PLOD tells me that they did not anticipate the reaction that the market would have to the purple label, i.e., treating all restored books as "equal," regardless of the amount of work done to each book. This is an overgeneralization, obviously, but hopefully you get my point.

 

They may not have anticipated such a degree of stigmatization, but they had to know Purple labels would be anything but desirable to collectors. As I said....they might as well made them pink with tassles.

[PovertyRow]

Why purple? I can't think of a single reason to use that color other than to intentionally stigmatize restored books. They might as well be pink....

 

You are preaching to the choir, here, my friend. I cannot speak to the intent behind making it a special purple label in the first place, but it seems like many who want tio kjeep the colored label want it because it makes the book look bad. I think some of them would like it even better if it were the color of diarrhea.,

 

I think that would still be an improvement over purple. In a male dominated hobby such as comics.....you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that CGC didn't realize that the majority wouldn't want a purple collection of slabs.

 

Had they went with red instead.....I think the current market for restored slabs would be completely different.

 

I think CGC knew that certain people would not want restored books in their collection, but the fact that they tried to do away with the PLOD tells me that they did not anticipate the reaction that the market would have to the purple label, i.e., treating all restored books as "equal," regardless of the amount of work done to each book. This is an overgeneralization, obviously, but hopefully you get my point.

 

They may not have anticipated such a degree of stigmatization, but they had to know Purple labels would be anything but desirable to collectors. As I said....they might as well made them pink with tassles.

 

Absolutely 100% agree. All they have to do is put an R after their now huge non-alpha grade (such as 8.5R) and it can be seen from a con floor looking at a wall book The Slight/Moderate/Extensive and Amateur/Professional can be in the usuall small size below the grade. That "R" should be sufficient for a quick flag. This is so not new. I have been against the colored labels for the last 4-5 years of my posting here. I was originally for the PLOD until I realized early on folks tended to be "restoists" - where anything even slightly smacking of restoration was equated to the worst of resto..

 

The fact that some books can glean a Universal Blue with slight glue or CT goes 100% contrary to the (pardon my saying so) inane concept that resto requires something be "addded" to the book. Even slight ct/glue are things "added" to the book. The book IS restored ased on that criteria. So why not put in in a PLOD? If the PLOD is NOT a financial/market detractor then why not assign such books a PLOD?

[bluechip]

Why purple? I can't think of a single reason to use that color other than to intentionally stigmatize restored books. They might as well be pink....

 

You are preaching to the choir, here, my friend. I cannot speak to the intent behind making it a special purple label in the first place, but it seems like many who want tio kjeep the colored label want it because it makes the book look bad. I think some of them would like it even better if it were the color of diarrhea.,

 

I think that would still be an improvement over purple. In a male dominated hobby such as comics.....you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that CGC didn't realize that the majority wouldn't want a purple collection of slabs.

 

Had they went with red instead.....I think the current market for restored slabs would be completely different.

 

I think CGC knew that certain people would not want restored books in their collection, but the fact that they tried to do away with the PLOD tells me that they did not anticipate the reaction that the market would have to the purple label, i.e., treating all restored books as "equal," regardless of the amount of work done to each book. This is an overgeneralization, obviously, but hopefully you get my point.

 

They may not have anticipated such a degree of stigmatization, but they had to know Purple labels would be anything but desirable to collectors. As I said....they might as well made them pink with tassles.

 

Absolutely 100% agree. All they have to do is put an R after their now huge non-alpha grade (such as 8.5R) and it can be seen from a con floor looking at a wall book The Slight/Moderate/Extensive and Amateur/Professional can be in the usuall small size below the grade. That "R" should be sufficient for a quick flag. This is so not new. I have been against the colored labels for the last 4-5 years of my posting here. I was originally for the PLOD until I realized early on folks tended to be "restoists" - where anything even slightly smacking of restoration was equated to the worst of resto..

 

The fact that some books can glean a Universal Blue with slight glue or CT goes 100% contrary to the (pardon my saying so) inane concept that resto requires something be "addded" to the book. Even slight ct/glue are things "added" to the book. The book IS restored ased on that criteria. So why not put in in a PLOD? If the PLOD is NOT a financial/market detractor then why not assign such books a PLOD?

 

 

The last few posts are especially interesting when you compare them to this quote recently posted by a guy who was happy with the way slabs enhanced the appearl of his newly graded modern books.

 

<<<<<The case I picked up also gave off a sense of importance to the comic inside. Kind of shouted "Hey come look at me, I'm worth a lot of money".>>>>

 

 

Conversely, the purple label gives an entirely diferent kind of shout. Something more like: "Hey don't look at me. I'm a worthless piece of dung."

 

Avert your eyes and your investment dollars from the PLOD Action 1 and pick up that sweet sweet sweet universal grade Ghost Rider special edition foil cover.