New CGC holder?

[fantastic_four]

I think they're trying to get the hobby into a "number" focus rather than a grade focus. There may be less stigma attached to a 3.5 rating or a 7.5 rating than the words "very good minus" or "very fine minus", both of which sound "negative". Also gets rid of the slash grading (VG/FN, VF/NM, etc.), which some collectors shy away from for no apparent reason. Maybe in a few generations everyone will forget these grades existed...........?

 

I tend to agree. I can't figure out why 9.9 isn't called "Mint Minus" except the reason you just mentioned, that the word "minus" is inherently negative. If that's true, then "Near Mint Minus" and "Very Fine Minus" need re-evaluating too...

[Illiterati-migration]

I think they're trying to get the hobby into a "number" focus rather than a grade focus. There may be less stigma attached to a 3.5 rating or a 7.5 rating than the words "very good minus" or "very fine minus", both of which sound "negative". Also gets rid of the slash grading (VG/FN, VF/NM, etc.), which some collectors shy away from for no apparent reason. Maybe in a few generations everyone will forget these grades existed...........?

 

I tend to agree. I can't figure out why 9.9 isn't called "Mint Minus" except the reason you just mentioned, that the word "minus" is inherently negative. If that's true, then "Near Mint Minus" and "Very Fine Minus" need re-evaluating too...

 

Great. Now CGC is manipulating our perception of language.

 

 

 

 

(How's THAT for a conspiracy theory? Damn lousy so-and-so's.)

[BachelorOfComix]

Great. Now CGC is manipulating our perception of language.

 

 

 

 

(How's THAT for a conspiracy theory? Damn lousy so-and-so's.)

 

It's all about the money. Money talks, CGC listens.

[Darthdiesel]

Also gets rid of the slash grading (VG/FN, VF/NM, etc.), which some collectors shy away from for no apparent reason.

 

The reason most shy away from the slash grading is due to the prevalence of its improper use in listed auctions with grade such as FR/NM or FN/MT

[fantastic_four]

Great. Now CGC is manipulating our perception of language.

 

(How's THAT for a conspiracy theory? Damn lousy so-and-so's.)

 

Thank Gemstone/Overstreet for that...they're the ones who came up with two Mint grades, and the subsequent Mint and Gem(stone) Mint designations. If the "Standard Catalog of Comic Books" ever comes out with a grading guide...will they call the top grade "Krause Mint"?

[Illiterati-migration]

Great. Now CGC is manipulating our perception of language.

 

(How's THAT for a conspiracy theory? Damn lousy so-and-so's.)

 

Thank Gemstone/Overstreet for that...they're the ones who came up with two Mint grades, and the subsequent Mint and Gem(stone) Mint designations. If the "Standard Catalog of Comic Books" ever comes out with a grading guide...will they call the top grade "Krause Mint"?

 

I'll be damned if I'm going to support the Kaiser with special German grading terminology!

[lighthouse]

Does this bother anyone else?

 

And if you don't know what I am talking about... it should bother you even more...

 

[sfilosa]

Ok, I'm bother more!!!!!

 

 

Actually the only thing that bothers me is that my VF/NM looks better.

 

 

[PovertyRow]

So they don't tell you what the number corresponds to in a written grade anymore? Shoot. I never paid attention to the numbers.

 

Apparantly CGC has decided we are digit-spouting automatons incapable of using or appreciating words to define a grade. Yes, "Nine Point Oh" just flows off the tongue beautifully and, of course, the number conjures up all manner of imagery.

 

The new label's design is hideous. It looks like a toy. The lack of grade terms is appalling.

[Arty]

Ah...much better

 

[ArAich]

[Darthdiesel]

It's too skinny for a silver age book?

[drbanner]

C'mon guys, this is an outrage - the Hulk appearance IS NOT listed before the Green Goblin appearance on the label! Actually though, this book has a great, long, all-out Hulk vs. Spidey battle that often gets overlooked, and I think it's like the 12th Hulk appearance and first meeting of Marvel's Movie heavyweights?

 

Or is the concern with the Norman Osborn "qualifier" on the Green Goblin listing?

[greggy]

The only thing wrong with it is that lighthouse actually received a book with this grade!

[lighthouse]

I was afraid that would be the response... I really was...

 

The book I posted in this pic:

 

 

is exactly the same book as the one in this auction .

 

The new label may be an improvement when buying and selling in person, but the grade box is startling easy to forge for online sales. On the old label it was quite difficult to match fonts and make a book "look" like the label said the grade was higher. Scanner artifacts were very easy to spot. You couldn't cut out the "G+ 2.5" text and replace it with "NM 9.4"...

 

It took me less than 45 seconds to make this book a 9.0... and because of the design of the grade box it is VERY difficult to detect, even at reasonable magnification. Matching the whiteness of the background is very easy, and overlaying a new grade over an erased background is child's play.

 

I would strongly suggest that CGC make a very slight modification to this label, and include some form of background behind the grade number... any background would do, whether a faint image, or low-saturation text... anything so that a "cut-and-paste" job is harder to do...

 

Because if this group of folks was fooled, on a book that had been posted just days earlier, and KNOWING there was something amiss... I don't want to think about what the scammers will do to unsuspecting buyers...

 

 

[supapimp]

the only good thing about the new label is that if your at a con, you can actually see the grade given, instead of asking the dealer what's the grade?

[drbanner]

So, let me get this right - you're saying it wasn't really about the Hulk?

 

I don't see how this label is any easier to graphically forge than the old one, as shown below.

 

[supapimp]

rubbing that 9.8 in my face again aren't you banner? dude! the number is like 10X bigger than the one on the old label. but i agree with the consensus, the new label is U-G-L-Y!

[lighthouse]

So, let me get this right - you're saying it wasn't really about the Hulk?

 

I don't see how this label is any easier to graphically forge than the old one, as shown below.

 

There are two reasons it's a lot easier. The grade number is larger which makes it easier to capture successfully and easier to airbrush around. Plus the box it goes in is nice and big and centered. Before, when someone would try to digitally edit the grade the centering almost never looked right, and because of the smaller text (and smaller footprint for that text) it was harder to brush out the scanner artifacts. Now with a nice big white background space it's as easy as Khaos' girlfriend...

 

Your ADV 431 image is easy to edit because it's nice and large and clear. Most eBay images aren't. And most eBay images didn't allow easy editing... Now they all will... There's a reason why they make security features on checks and currency small...

 

But, yes... it really was about the Hulk...

[garthgantu]

Dr. Banner's got a point... I don't see how the 'current' label is really any harder to alter digitally...?

 

This seems like a great example of why CGC should consult the main audience for slabbed books - the serious collector. You may argue that large dealers are somehow a more influential/important audience for CGC, but those dealers are just using the service, it's the people those dealers sell to that ultimately generate the demand for slabbed books.

 

Since dealers - whether online or brick-and-mortar - would first and foremost be thinking from the standpoint of *selling* slabbed books, maybe CGC *did* conduct some focus groups to evaluate the new label format, and this point about ease of forgery was never raised?

 

It won't take many such frauds to substantially curtail online sales (read eBay sales) of slabbed books bearing the new label.