• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

No More Grades, Just BIG NUMBERS!

Started by joe_collector,

635 posts in this topic

THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
People here whine and complain about the things that bother them because that's what groups of friends do. But that's all this forum is. It's a group of like-minded people chatting about every topic under the sun. If you want to sit around drinking beer and swapping lies about who has the dumber boss or the crazier ebay seller or worst-looking scan, this is the place. But if you want to take it beyond that, do it the right way...

 

.

 

I would appreciate if you didn't generalize about a bunch of people you hardly know 893naughty-thumb.gif

 

I don't think that people generally "whine & complain" about things, and I think that most forum members take their comic collecting quite seriously......in a fun way of course. smirk.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blowout

blowout

Posted
Posted
Unfortunately......I have

 

That should have been one of the Poll Options.

 

Chris

 

Do you really think so?

For me this has been one of the best threads I have ever seen on the forums. Sure, I wouldn't want to wade through the whole thing if I arrived late, but for those that have been with it from the start its been great. Some excellent points raised and debated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Illiterati-migration

Illiterati-migration

Posted
Posted

This is directed at no one in particular...

 

1. I want a strict breakdown of CGC's grading standards if we are going to be going "number-only." They want to direct the market this way, fine, but it is crooked and absurd to assume that people should use THEIR grading system without knowing their grading standards.

 

2. You thought it was bad when you were buying a book that you thought was "NM" but was actually "VF"? How about now that people are going to be dealing in books that are "9.6" while in reality they are "9.4"... think about it. That little difference could mean hundreds of dollars depending on the book. Why is giving these insufficiently_thoughtful_persons more rope to hang themselves with a GOOD idea? Do you people think that bad graders are going to go away with a more sophisticated grading system?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ArAich

ArAich

Posted
Posted

1. I want a strict breakdown of CGC's grading standards if we are going to be going "number-only." They want to direct the market this way, fine, but it is crooked and absurd to assume that people should use THEIR grading system without knowing their grading standards.

 

Well stated Khaos and this is exactly my point...

[*]Industry Standard = NM 9.4 is spelled out specifically in OS which is the Industry Standard for grading using this nomenclature.

 

[*]CGC Standard = 9.4 is not spelled out in any CGC forum and is not the Industry Standard for grading.

 

If CGC is going to deviate from I.S. with the lack of traditional nomenclature then it should be incumbent upon them to spell out what their standards are...

 

It seems outlandish that a book graded 9.4 can only be explained by referancing the Industry Standard Manual that specifies the book as NM 9.4 ...

Going by the Manual the 9.4 book has been labeled incorrectly... confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Illiterati-migration

Illiterati-migration

Posted
Posted
1. I want a strict breakdown of CGC's grading standards if we are going to be going "number-only." They want to direct the market this way, fine, but it is crooked and absurd to assume that people should use THEIR grading system without knowing their grading standards.

 

Well stated Khaos and this is exactly my point...

[*]Industry Standard = NM 9.4 is spelled out specifically in OS which is the Industry Standard for grading using this nomenclature.

 

[*]CGC Standard = 9.4 is not spelled out in any CGC forum and is not the Industry Standard for grading.

 

If CGC is going to deviate from I.S. with the lack of traditional nomenclature then it should be incumbent upon them to spell out what their standards are...

 

It seems outlandish that a book graded 9.4 can only be explained by referancing the Industry Standard Manual that specifies the book as NM 9.4 ...

Going by the Manual the 9.4 book has been labeled incorrectly... confused-smiley-013.gif

 

893applaud-thumb.gif Eeexactly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chrisco37

chrisco37

Posted
Posted

Do you really think so?

 

It was a joke. I should've added a tongue.gif. This has been a very interesting debate. One I have yet to chime in on. While I do like the "Big Numbers" (easy to see at convention displays), I would still like to see the alpha-grade as well. It's much more descriptive than just using the numbers. But, then again, I liked when CGC listed defects/comments. And actually would like to have more information on the label.

 

I'd like to have the graders notes and also a rough date of encapsulation (month/year would be fine). If they can't put that on the label, it would be nice to be able to access that info as a member of the Collector's Society. You could printout the graders notes and keep them w/ the book.

 

If enough people make a fuss, I'm sure they will put the alpha-grade back on. But, in the end, it really doesn't matter that much. They aren't changing their grading standards, just the label.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
greggy

greggy

Posted
Posted
Do you really think so?

They aren't changing their grading standards, just the label.

 

Chris

 

How do you know? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Because he graduated and you haven't! 27_laughing.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites
greggy

greggy

Posted
Posted
Do you really think so?

They aren't changing their grading standards, just the label.

 

Chris

 

How do you know? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Because he graduated and you haven't! 27_laughing.gif

 

Greggy! Beans! Quick! Count 'em!

sumo.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Illiterati-migration

Illiterati-migration

Posted
Posted
Do you really think so?

They aren't changing their grading standards, just the label.

 

Chris

 

How do you know? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Because he graduated and you haven't! 27_laughing.gif

 

893Funny-thumb.gif

 

Chris

 

>sigh< The CGC Apologist Union for Grading Terrificness (CAUGHT) none-too-artfully dodges yet another direct question. confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing