No More Grades, Just BIG NUMBERS!

[Darthdiesel]

Has there ever been a CGC 9.8 with TAN to Brittle pages ?

[musicmeta]

Bruce, not speaking to you directly, just again voicing my very strong opinion in keeping the alpha grade on the slab. Sorry for the mix-up, your's just happened to be the one I clicked on.

 

 

[greggy]

Has there ever been a CGC 9.8 with TAN to Brittle pages ?

Nope...not allowed as per Steve at the SD dinner. A 9.4 book can't have soley cream pages according to him so it's not possible to have a worse PQ at a higher grade!

[Darthdiesel]

What was once an adult bookstore had more Barney and Telly Tubbies at the front...

 

That's one FREAKSHOW of adult bookstore... I'm glad you shopped elsewhere...for your sake

 

[BronzeBruce13]

I was thinking that too... adult book store and kids books (Barney) together. Image if it was a video store... putting the wrong tape in the wrong box...

 

Darth:

Here ya go Logan.. a little video for you while daddy and mommy go uhhh talk for a little while.

 

Logan:

goooo goooo tebla tubby goo bahny..... ooooooooohhhhhhhhhh boooobieeeee mmmmm.. boooobieeeee!!!

 

Darth:

Whoa!!..... well maybe this is for the best. Wanna see my Danger Girl covers too?

 

Logan:

goooo??

[lighthouse]

I was thinking that too... adult book store and kids books (Barney) together. Image if it was a video store... putting the wrong tape in the wrong box...

 

Darth:

Here ya go Logan.. a little video for you while daddy and mommy go uhhh talk for a little while.

 

Logan:

goooo goooo tebla tubby goo bahny..... ooooooooohhhhhhhhhh boooobieeeee mmmmm.. boooobieeeee!!!

 

Darth:

Whoa!!..... well maybe this is for the best. Wanna see my Danger Girl covers too?

 

Logan:

goooo??

[THE_BEYONDER]

Has there ever been a CGC 9.8 with TAN to Brittle pages ?

Nope...not allowed as per Steve at the SD dinner. A 9.4 book can't have soley cream pages according to him so it's not possible to have a worse PQ at a higher grade!

 

So miswraps and PQ factor into CGC's grades.....

 

And all this time I thought they only graded "condition".

 

Why even state the PQ, if it's already factored into the grade?

 

 

[greggy]

Has there ever been a CGC 9.8 with TAN to Brittle pages ?

Nope...not allowed as per Steve at the SD dinner. A 9.4 book can't have soley cream pages according to him so it's not possible to have a worse PQ at a higher grade!

 

So miswraps and PQ factor into CGC's grades.....

 

And all this time I thought they only graded "condition".

 

Why even state the PQ, if it's already factored into the grade?

 

Boy...I want to smack you. What Steve basically said (some may or not agree) is that collectors normally don't buy a book for the PQ but for the structuaral integrity of it. He said that a 9.4 with White pages isn't necessarily less structurally sound than a 9.4 with OW pages. However, he said that for a certain grade, the PQ must fall within a certain range. For a 9.4, it can't be worse than cream to off-white pages!

[THE_BEYONDER]

It's all crystal clear now....

[Joanna]

What is it about the number-only label that so offends you?

 

I know you asked JC this, and I'm not "offended" but I do object to the removal of the nomenclature. I stated several reasons in the other thread, but here's another one for you.

 

I don't care for the numbers because it's not a 10 point scale, it's a 24 point scale made to look like a 10 point, with a full 1/4 points between 9 and 10. With the nomenclature, there's no pretending that the scale is a balanced 10 point, the names are what they are. I'm not saying the numbers should be abolished, I'm just saying that this is the basis for my preference for the nomenclature, and why it was very disappointing to see the 2 books I just had graded sporting a label that didn't have the scale I use. I had to look both of them up on the CGC website, since the numbers were meaningless to me.

 

Okay, that's my feeling about it. Now on to a broader theory.

 

Most books are sold raw, and raw sellers use nomenclature. They probably won't change to the numerical system any time soon, because that system doesn't "flatter" mid to low grade raw (the lopsided 24 point scale again). So the gulf between raw and CGC widens. CGC is using a different scale (numbers instead of nomenclature), and the people sending in books are primarily hoping to hit that top 1/4 of the scale, so you don't run into the numbered CGC books all that often in the lower grades. Soon there'll be two distinct ways of grading a comic, instead of one parallel way. The numbers will dissasociate from the nomenclature in most people's minds. Out of sight, out of mind. Yes, you can look it up or memorize it, but that's a lot of trouble for many buyers and sellers. So the gulf will widen between the numbers (most of which will be tiny increments above 9.0) and the nomenclature (covering the rest of the spectrum). It doesn't benefit seller or buyer.

 

Put the nomenclature back, please.

 

-- Joanna

 

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

GIVE US BACK OUR "NM"!!!!!!

[garthgantu]

I think the number-only format stinks, for many reasons:

- it creates a disconnect between slabbed and raw books, which may in turn cause newcomers to the market to give up in frustration.

 

- by the time CGC gets any sort of signal from the market (us), it will be far too late to turn back and reinstate the alpha grading.

 

- it further de-emphasizes the "old school" comic book collecting community, in favor of the speculators/investors and the dealers who cater to them.

 

- it further simplifies the condition of a comic book down to a single notation, when in fact the condition of a comic book is derived from large amounts of data; it moves grading toward a single line item, when in fact a comic book's grade is the result of many considerations, not to mention various and conflicting criteria and perspectives.

 

Now some people would look at that last point above and say "exactly - THIS is why it's a good thing! It will eventually establish CGC's grading as the industry standard." To which I would respond, "that's great, except CGC has never fully disclosed those criteria, so none of us really knows why a given book receives the CGC grade that it does..."

 

CGC is talking out both sides of its mouth. On the one hand they've stated that they're following the Overstreet grading guidelines. On the other hand, they've removed the letter/alpha grading nomenclature, and ignore other aspects of Overstreet's grading criteria such as page quality.

 

CGC, you can't have it both ways - are you responding to market demands/pressures/issues, or are you directing the market with an iron hand in an oh-so velvety glove?

[fantastic_four]

What Steve basically said (some may or not agree) is that collectors normally don't buy a book for the PQ but for the structuaral integrity of it. He said that a 9.4 with White pages isn't necessarily less structurally sound than a 9.4 with OW pages. However, he said that for a certain grade, the PQ must fall within a certain range. For a 9.4, it can't be worse than cream to off-white pages!

 

I've been assuming that PQ must fall within a certain range for a while now, but it's nice to hear that Steve confirmed it. However, the thing about a 9.4 not having worse than cr/ow pages is slightly off...I've seen at least one CGC 9.4 Fantastic Four #8 with just "cream" pages. Maybe they've adjusted that standard over time.

 

I don't get why people are hypothesizing that CGC will end up removing page whiteness. Back when they first started, there was no page whiteness on the label; they added it because people kept asking for it to be listed...not EVERY change they've made to the label has been in the direction of providing less information. Although the removal of most of those condition comments does almost counterbalance it...

[garthgantu]

Has there ever been a CGC 9.8 with TAN to Brittle pages ?

Nope...not allowed as per Steve at the SD dinner. A 9.4 book can't have soley cream pages according to him so it's not possible to have a worse PQ at a higher grade!

 

I love the way Darth counters my valid point with an exception to an overwhelming rule: CGC does not factor page quality into the grade itself. (If they did, we could consider the notations re: page quality to be 'grader's notes,' and we know that's not what they are!)

 

Okay, so we have some limited info from CGC re: how page quality might impact the overall grade of the book... but we also know that page quality is not directly factored into the final grade a book receives, and we know that Overstreet does in fact set parameters on the grade a book can achieve based in part on the quality of the pages.

 

I don't see how Steve Borock tossing out a few tidbits of info over lobster and steak really amounts to a set of grading guidelines/parameters from CGC...?

[blowout]

I don't see how Steve Borock tossing out a few tidbits of info over lobster and steak really amounts to a set of grading guidelines/parameters from CGC...?

 

To be fair to Steve he has answered questions about page quality in the past on the boards. He said that it 'does' factor into the grade but likely has less than a 0.2 impact. The points greggy made about highest grades acievable for a given PQ have also been confirmed before.

[garthgantu]

Okay, maybe that was a tad harsh - my only interactions with Steve B. have been informative and pleasant, and he clearly goes out of his way to be an all-around good guy on these boards and in person.

 

But his almost certain induction into heaven notwithstanding, These single points of data do not constitute "grading guidelines" - if anything, they're almost more frustrating than no information at all... So we know maybe 2 or 3 of the criteria relating to how page quality impacts a given comic's grade...there are dozens of permutations here!

 

My point stands, and I'll even take it a step further... maybe CGC is getting rid of the alpha grades in part because they might ultimately be linked to Overstreet's grading guidelines, which far more people refer to, and which everyone can access pretty easily. It can't be for lack of real estate - since omitting the grader's notes, there's plenty of room on the label for a couple of letters...

[garthgantu]

I don't care for the numbers because it's not a 10 point scale, it's a 24 point scale made to look like a 10 point, with a full 1/4 points between 9 and 10. With the nomenclature, there's no pretending that the scale is a balanced 10 point, the names are what they are.

 

Okay, that's my feeling about it. Now on to a broader theory.

 

Most books are sold raw, and raw sellers use nomenclature. They probably won't change to the numerical system any time soon, because that system doesn't "flatter" mid to low grade raw (the lopsided 24 point scale again). So the gulf between raw and CGC widens. CGC is using a different scale (numbers instead of nomenclature), and the people sending in books are primarily hoping to hit that top 1/4 of the scale, so you don't run into the numbered CGC books all that often in the lower grades. Soon there'll be two distinct ways of grading a comic, instead of one parallel way. The numbers will dissasociate from the nomenclature in most people's minds. Out of sight, out of mind. Yes, you can look it up or memorize it, but that's a lot of trouble for many buyers and sellers. So the gulf will widen between the numbers (most of which will be tiny increments above 9.0) and the nomenclature (covering the rest of the spectrum). It doesn't benefit seller or buyer.

 

Joanna, this is the best post yet on this thread. I hadn't even considered this point, but it makes all the sense in the world - if you're CGC.

 

5 stars for Joanna - but beyond the mostly meaningless stars, you have my utmost respect, which is in rather shorter supply on these boards...

[fantastic_four]

But his almost certain induction into heaven notwithstanding, These single points of data do not constitute "grading guidelines" - if anything, they're almost more frustrating than no information at all... So we know maybe 2 or 3 of the criteria relating to how page quality impacts a given comic's grade...there are dozens of permutations here!

 

CGC claims their guidelines are the same as Overstreet's. Do you know of significant differences between the defects CGC allows and the Overstreet standards? I've always thought CGC graded extremely similarly to the Overstreet standards long before they announced they had "adopted" them.

[comicwiz]

For a 9.4, it can't be worse than cream to off-white pages!

 

I'm not sure if this constitutes an exception to the rule, but in my first year of selling on eBay, I sold a NM/MT 9.8 copy of HomeGrown Funnies that had CREAM to OFF-WHITE Pages. I sent in a second copy within a month apart from the copy I sold, and it came back with the same grade, but it had OFF-WHITE pages.

[greggy]

For a 9.4, it can't be worse than cream to off-white pages!

 

I'm not sure if this constitutes an exception to the rule, but in my first year of selling on eBay, I sold a NM/MT 9.8 copy of HomeGrown Funnies that had CREAM to OFF-WHITE Pages. I sent in a second copy within a month apart from the copy I sold, and it came back with the same grade, but it had OFF-WHITE pages.

There is no exception in this case. COW pages are allowed in 9.8. Seen it a few times.