CGC vs. PGX

[october]

Hold everything!

 

This is slightly off topic, but I call BS on MathMan's Red Raven. That's a scan of the Red Raven that Great Escape had for sale in the Marketplace last Saturday, not a copy he paid $8500 for on ebay as claimed!

 

 

you mean this book?

BUSTED

 

is Krazy back yet again, trying to stir up?

 

The pic of all the boxes is also stolen from another thread. Someone else posted that pic awhile back.

 

Annoying to see so many good posters apologizing to a worthless shill.

 

That figures, I'm not surprised. He also posted those boxes as his in the Show Your Comic Room thread. And one of his first posts involved calling Harley Yee a d-bag.

 

I looked and he was the one I remembered posting them before. I changed my post.

 

In any case, it's obvious that the boxes in the pic are empty, so all it proves is that he has $200 worth of drawer boxes.

[nik]

What a phoney

[divad]

What a phoney

 

Mods were notified the minute the dude started posting trash . . . but hey, I'm clairvoyant!

[garthgantu]

What a phoney

 

Mods were notified the minute the dude started posting trash . . . but hey, I'm clairvoyant!

 

...or you just like to go running to the mods?

[Ze-man]

It's typically best to ignore sarcastic baiting questions, but here goes...

 

The erasure damaged the book and left a color loss. The damage should be factored into the grade accordingly.

 

Since the erasure didn't return anything to its original state, it wasn't restoration and should not be in a purple label.

 

The erasure certainly didn't return the book to its original state - it removed some of the book's original color/ink/gloss... how is that any different from removing a frayed edge or sharpening a corner via trimming?

 

In this particular case, I think the book would look better without the erasure. In some instances, books DO look better from erasure/cleaning, and in other instances I'm sure it could prove difficult to substantiate that cleaning had occurred. But this example cries out for closer examination, IMHO... just because it can't consistently be identified (exactly like pressing), it *should* be noted/identified in clear-cut cases like this.

 

With respect to cleaning, it either returns a book closer to its original state, or it removes some of its original material (ink, gloss, even paper)...often both. Either way, it seems like resto to me. It's just resto that's hard to consistently identify.

 

I agree, this book needs to be looked at in person to better understand what we are looking at. It makes me wonder why ,or who would want to remove the Larson name from the cover in the first place, an amateur long ago? Because anyone who knows even a little about dry cleaning knows you dont touch the inked areas, and if you do you sure would not try and totally erase a name that identifies the book as a Ped.

 

The book is still identified as a Larson on the CGC label so it was not done to hide that fact when resubbed. And imho , dry cleaning isn't resto. But it should be noted on the label if it is a clear cut case like a name erased from the cover.

 

Not sure if the thought was that since it is all to easily visible , why bother noting it on the label? Just downgrade for it and move on.

 

Ze-

[Ze-man]

And unless Great Escape is listing that RR #1 for MM , all I have to say to MM is

 

"Don't let the door hit ya, ok?"

 

 

Ze-

[GreatEscape]

For privacy sake I very rarely reveal what all's in my personal collection. But since you want be a bit cocky, I will go ahead and tell you that I was the only who paid $8,400 off of EBay for the Red Raven #1. Check my UserName KissComicsGuru. I also own 2 copies of Marvel Comic Super Special in CGC 9.8. I am still hunting for the last copy (Help!).

 

MathMan

 

 

 

Thanks to Ze-man for the heads up. I own the Red Raven #1 CGC 5.5 (only 1 in census) that is pictured above. I listed it last month on eBay (under my ID stars-and-stripes) and some zero-feedback bidder "stella_ashley (0)" BIN'd it for $8,400 but never paid nor replied to emails! In fact, the eBay info (name, address, tel#) was fraudulent.

 

Anyway, I sold the Red Raven #1 in a private transaction last week...and the buyer is not yet a member of these boards (although I did invite him). Since MathMan has been registered here since 5/19/07....he can't possibly be the NEW OWNER.

 

MathMan...care to comment? I didn't think so...

 

Dino

[dannyboy]

It's typically best to ignore sarcastic baiting questions, but here goes...

 

The erasure damaged the book and left a color loss. The damage should be factored into the grade accordingly.

 

Since the erasure didn't return anything to its original state, it wasn't restoration and should not be in a purple label.

 

The erasure certainly didn't return the book to its original state - it removed some of the book's original color/ink/gloss... how is that any different from removing a frayed edge or sharpening a corner via trimming?

 

In this particular case, I think the book would look better without the erasure. In some instances, books DO look better from erasure/cleaning, and in other instances I'm sure it could prove difficult to substantiate that cleaning had occurred. But this example cries out for closer examination, IMHO... just because it can't consistently be identified (exactly like pressing), it *should* be noted/identified in clear-cut cases like this.

 

With respect to cleaning, it either returns a book closer to its original state, or it removes some of its original material (ink, gloss, even paper)...often both. Either way, it seems like resto to me. It's just resto that's hard to consistently identify.

 

I agree, this book needs to be looked at in person to better understand what we are looking at. It makes me wonder why ,or who would want to remove the Larson name from the cover in the first place, an amateur long ago? Because anyone who knows even a little about dry cleaning knows you dont touch the inked areas, and if you do you sure would not try and totally erase a name that identifies the book as a Ped.

 

The book is still identified as a Larson on the CGC label so it was not done to hide that fact when resubbed. And imho , dry cleaning isn't resto. But it should be noted on the label if it is a clear cut case like a name erased from the cover.

 

Not sure if the thought was that since it is all to easily visible , why bother noting it on the label? Just downgrade for it and move on.

 

Ze-

 

Not making a case for cleaning/pressing are resto or not, but since it can't be identified anywhere near all the time I think that's pretty much end of story. If it was considered resto people would go to greater lengths to hide it and any cleaned/pressed book that was unable to be identified would get a price bump as a result (since a buyer would be looking for cleaning/press identification and would put a premium on any other unidentified book).

 

If it's undetectable a "substantial" part of the time - then that's really the sticking point.

[sborock]

Hold everything!

 

This is slightly off topic, but I call BS on MathMan's Red Raven. That's a scan of the Red Raven that Great Escape had for sale in the Marketplace last Saturday, not a copy he paid $8500 for on ebay as claimed!

 

 

you mean this book?

BUSTED

 

is Krazy back yet again, trying to stir up?

 

Say it ain't so, Joe!

[garthgantu]

 

Not making a case for cleaning/pressing are resto or not, but since it can't be identified anywhere near all the time I think that's pretty much end of story. If it was considered resto people would go to greater lengths to hide it and any cleaned/pressed book that was unable to be identified would get a price bump as a result (since a buyer would be looking for cleaning/press identification and would put a premium on any other unidentified book).

 

If it's undetectable a "substantial" part of the time - then that's really the sticking point.

 

I hear ya, Danny...and this is the rub, so to speak... if cleaning could be identified consistently, I think CGC would consider it resto. This might also be true for pressing, but since there's no alternate universe we can visit to confirm this, we'll never know. Perhaps we should be grateful that CGC can identify some forms of restoration with pretty solid consistency, but that's not how my mind works.

 

My mind works like this: is there anything even remotely in the "restoration" category that CGC can identify consistently but doesn't view as resto? Or is it only the things they've acknowledged not being able to identify consistently that CGC officially views as being acceptable forms of 'enhancement'? Why does it seem that only the things CGC can't consistently detect end up being lumped into the "acceptable" category? It just seems very 'convenient' to me.

[mr.schomburg]

For privacy sake I very rarely reveal what all's in my personal collection. But since you want be a bit cocky, I will go ahead and tell you that I was the only who paid $8,400 off of EBay for the Red Raven #1. Check my UserName KissComicsGuru. I also own 2 copies of Marvel Comic Super Special in CGC 9.8. I am still hunting for the last copy (Help!).

 

MathMan

 

 

 

Thanks to Ze-man for the heads up. I own the Red Raven #1 CGC 5.5 (only 1 in census) that is pictured above. I listed it last month on eBay (under my ID stars-and-stripes) and some zero-feedback bidder "stella_ashley (0)" BIN'd it for $8,400 but never paid nor replied to emails! In fact, the eBay info (name, address, tel#) was fraudulent.

 

Anyway, I sold the Red Raven #1 in a private transaction last week...and the buyer is not yet a member of these boards (although I did invite him). Since MathMan has been registered here since 5/19/07....he can't possibly be the NEW OWNER.

 

MathMan...care to comment? I didn't think so...

 

Dino

 

Whats funny is I appolgized out of decorum. I actually thought he was full of it, do to him claiming he had purchased a Showcase 22 in VF 8.0 PGX graded, and resubed to CGC and got a 7.0. Now this wouldn't be a problem, but the PGX census shows highest graded at 7.0, and a call showed no 8.0 graded. I didn't choose to talk about it, since PGX's census is often not up to date. I would much rather him show 100 boxes of modern and copper of his own then pirate someone elses book as his. I wouldn't expect him to be back soon. Unless he is a glutten for punishment. You know when you have the radar go off in your head, but no proof, that is exactly what I felt with Mathman, he didn't add up! Not to mention he was brash and a name dropper! Fairwell and good ridance, and if you choose to come back by another name, maybe he will learn to be his own person and not a shill Arse!

 

What I find amazing is that while I may have different views then a lot of my fellow boardies, I try to be respectfull even if I don't agree. You all know my stance on graded books, I am a fan of both companies. I sometimes get a little offended when people are harsh of PGX since my hard earned loved books are graded by them. However I did sub all of those books myself, and I am confident of what work has been done. At the same time I recognize CGC as the leader, but I also don't work 1 mile away from CGC's headquarters, but I do from PGX. I don't knock CGC, I wouldn't want to SH$T in the yard I like to play, and I really don't have anything negative to say. Many of you guys have become friends to some degree, and look forward to meeting you in person in Chi Town. I myself am a man of my word, and most here are the same, and being that many of us spend a large amount of time interacting via on the web, trust is paramount.

 

I guess my point is, one doesn't have to shill, or pretend here. These are good people who will like you and respect you whether you have a Luke Cage #1 in FN or a Action #1 in 6.0, as long as you contribute in a manner which benifits or adds to the forum. There is room for difference, and room for discourse, but there should never be room for false identies and decievers who detract from our little disfucntional family.

 

Paul

[sborock]

"I guess my point is, one doesn't have to shill, or pretend here. These are good people who will like you and respect you whether you have a Luke Cage #1 in FN or a Action #1 in 6.0, as long as you contribute in a manner which benifits or adds to the forum. There is room for difference, and room for discourse, but there should never be room for false identies and decievers who detract from our little disfucntional family."

 

QUOTE OF THE YEAR!!!!!!!!!

 

If you come to San Diego or Chicago this year, it would be my honor to buy you a drink!

[mr.schomburg]

Thank you,

and I must say, I am going to Chicago. Meeting up with the rest of the Timely geeks, so I will take you up on the Beer, and buy you one as well.

Paul

[GreatEscape]

"I guess my point is, one doesn't have to shill, or pretend here. These are good people who will like you and respect you whether you have a Luke Cage #1 in FN or a Action #1 in 6.0, as long as you contribute in a manner which benifits or adds to the forum. There is room for difference, and room for discourse, but there should never be room for false identies and decievers who detract from our little disfucntional family."

 

QUOTE OF THE YEAR!!!!!!!!!

 

If you come to San Diego or Chicago this year, it would be my honor to buy you a drink!

 

Well said, Paul...Bravo!

 

GE

[mr.schomburg]

GE, Did you sell the RR #1, if not and you are interested in trade and cash let me know. I do have interest.

Paul

[AbsoluteCarnage]

Entertaining thread to say the least

[sborock]

 

Not making a case for cleaning/pressing are resto or not, but since it can't be identified anywhere near all the time I think that's pretty much end of story. If it was considered resto people would go to greater lengths to hide it and any cleaned/pressed book that was unable to be identified would get a price bump as a result (since a buyer would be looking for cleaning/press identification and would put a premium on any other unidentified book).

 

If it's undetectable a "substantial" part of the time - then that's really the sticking point.

 

I hear ya, Danny...and this is the rub, so to speak... if cleaning could be identified consistently, I think CGC would consider it resto. This might also be true for pressing, but since there's no alternate universe we can visit to confirm this, we'll never know. Perhaps we should be grateful that CGC can identify some forms of restoration with pretty solid consistency, but that's not how my mind works.

 

My mind works like this: is there anything even remotely in the "restoration" category that CGC can identify consistently but doesn't view as resto? Or is it only the things they've acknowledged not being able to identify consistently that CGC officially views as being acceptable forms of 'enhancement'? Why does it seem that only the things CGC can't consistently detect end up being lumped into the "acceptable" category? It just seems very 'convenient' to me.

 

Tape removal/stains

Erasure (NOT dry cleaning)

Tape

 

These three things we can consistently detect and DO NOT consider restoration.

 

These are also three things "remotely" (considered by some hobbyists and by some conservation definitions) in the resto arena.

 

I happen to consider any regular tape BAD NEWS for comic books.

[sborock]

Thank you,

and I must say, I am going to Chicago. Meeting up with the rest of the Timely geeks, so I will take you up on the Beer, and buy you one as well.

Paul

 

AWESOME!!!!!!

[eddly]

deleted, i was in a state of confusion, but im ok now

[Fedoraman]

Wow - my honestly innocent question has really taken on a life of it's own in this thread!

 

I want to say that if I stepped on anyone's toes in the grading forum or the seller's only forum that I whole-heartedly apologize.

 

I am very new to serious collecting and if it shows please forgive me or give me a

 

This is really a very interesting thread and I hope that I am not opening old wounds or creating new ones. This is a great group and if I keep my mouth shut and my ears (eyes) open - I am sure I can learn alot