9.9... dare I say 10.0....!?

stumpy · Post by **stumpy** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:49 pm

wallywest wrote:I have heard people say things like this before, but doesn't this just negate CGC as a reliable entity?

Unforunately, the answer is yes, in my opinion.

I mean, isn't that what their existence is all about...consistency?

That's a fairytale they want you to believe. Truth is they grade by a modifed version of Overstreet's guidelines (flaws and all), and they have no intention of EVER disclosing how they arrrive at the 'uber-high' grades. They don't want to share that information because they are afraid that any criticism will undermine their credibility. If they are so credible, why do collectors and dealers like Doug Schmell resubmit high grade issues they feel weren't given a high enough grade? I have heard of books getting bumped up a complete grade before. Can you imagine the jump in price between a 9.2 and a 9.8? Astronomical, to say the least. How do you explain it? Sometimes it seems like their existance depends upon the ignorance of noobs and the collectors who don't know how to properly grade. Oh, and did I mention that they have been known to do special 'favors' for the comic-elite dealers who are their main 'bread and butter'?

Try posting your scan on the CGC board for a grade.

Jrdawg · Post by **Jrdawg** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:20 pm

The spine is the number one reason this book gets downgraded, along with discoloration of the back cover. I purchased this book off a very good scan but was nervous until I recieved it. I have no doubt it will be at least a 9.6 and I do have moderate experience with CGC. I'm expecting a 9.8, hoping for more.

stumpy · Post by **stumpy** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:16 pm

If you can spot ANY defects, forget about anything higher than a 9.6.

Just speaking from my own experiences with CGC.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:06 pm

wallywest wrote:As for potential grades, it is obviously a really nice book. I think you will get dinged for it being very slightly off-center on the front,

There are CGC graders, most of them, who do not grade down for off-centeredness. Why? Because it's a manufacturing flaw, not wear. Unless the book is radically off-center (at which point, the people who hate off-centering will scream bloody murder), it's not going to be discounted.

There may be a few CGC graders, 2-3, who grade down for being off-center, but they should not. These aren't sportscards, they're comics, and have a lot more square footage to cover.

Just as error coins (off-center, etc.) are graded based on WEAR, so too are comics.

and there seems too be some "whiteness" along the top right edge of the back cover. FWIW (for what it's worth, ZWH),

I KNOW what "FWIW" means, *SQUEE*. But thanks for looking out for me.

I personally don't think you have a shot at 10.0. I would put my money on 9.8 with a 10% chance at 9.9 and 20% chance at 9.6.

As I think I stated elsewhere, this book I believe, due to the nature of the materials used, and the method of manufacture, will NEVER get a CGC 10.0 grade. I don't believe it's possible, because I don't believe they exist. Could I be wrong? Of course. Am I? The census bears that idea up pretty well, with only 8 (less than 2%) at 9.8 and none above (with a whopping 440 submitted!)

Jrdawg · Post by **Jrdawg** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:11 pm

You know, I purchased a 9.6 and after I got it, I was disgusted. The spine was awful with major splits and the back cover was discolored. I couldnt beleive it got a 9.6. I felt kinda guilty but I resold it on ebay a few weeks later and the guy who bought it, loved it.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:24 pm

wallywest wrote:
stumpy wrote:CGC goes easier on Moderns, Marvels in particular. I see color breaks along the spine, but I've also seen Moderns with color breaks on the spine get a 9.6. Look at the DRACULA #70 on the www.pedigreecomics.com website, for example. My personal guess would be a 9.2...with CGC you NEVER know for sure. There are many UNFAIR factors that could cause your book to grade several points higher or lower, depending on who is grading, and who is checking the original graders notes. Good Luck!
I have heard people say things like this before, but doesn't this just negate CGC as a reliable entity? I mean, isn't that what their existence is all about...consistency?

Yes and no.

Yes - all books should be treated the same way, regardless of their age. This is a philosopy that Bob Overstreet preached for decades, and is pretty well entrenched in the minds of serious collectors. Modern books should be treated the same as any other book with respect to grading. The only qualifier to that would be books with known PRODUCTION flaws (many of the 1990 and 1991 Marvel Annuals, for example, are badly wrinkled at the spines because of the way they glued the books at the printer [the transition from Sparta to Quebecor was in full swing, and Qeubecor wasn't used to printing these]...should those be graded "Fine" because of a flaw that is entirely unrelated to wear? What about printing creases (a flaw that affects nearly the entire Direct Market print run for Cap #241, for example)....? That still needs to be worked out.

No - We're talking about the differences between HALF and QUARTER grades! That's PHENOMENAL! Before CGC came around, people would (usually because they were motivated by self interest) have WILD swings in grades, two, three, whatever. I've seen sellers BUY books at VG, and then put them up as VF, with a STRAIGHT FACE. With CGC, despite the vast differences in PRICE between a 9.2 and 9.6, we're talking about a HALF GRADE difference, and well within anyone's accepted tolerance for grading. Never again will you have one person grade a book 5.0 and another grade it 9.4, when talking about CGC books. CGC has brought a level of consistency to the market heretofore completely unknown.

Eventually, people are going to realize that there's such a minute difference between a 9.8 and 9.6 that the prices will normalize, and not be so wildly skewed for the upper grades....especially for modern books that aren't rare in upper grades. This has happened with coins, too. The only real stratosphere prices you see for moderns are for MS70s, the equivalent of 10s. But for MS65-69 (the rough equivalent of 9.6-9.9), the prices aren't that radically different.

People still love to see those numbers, though. If you submit a book that you think is a strong 9.8 candidate, and it gets a 9.6...play the resubmission game! Everybody does it, and there's nothing wrong with it. Remember...the difference between 9.6 and 9.8 is a quarter grade. It could very easily be the grader's opinion that on THIS day, it's a 9.6, and on THAT day it's a 9.8. But trust that, barring damage, it will never come back a 7.5 if it was a 9.6.

And, eventually, the market will force CGC and hopefully other graders, to incorporate all 11 grades between 9.0 and 10.0.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:26 pm

Jrdawg wrote:You know, I purchased a 9.6 and after I got it, I was disgusted. The spine was awful with major splits and the back cover was discolored. I couldnt beleive it got a 9.6. I felt kinda guilty but I resold it on ebay a few weeks later and the guy who bought it, loved it.

What can ya do? I have a 9.6 Platinum Darkness #1 with a half inch heavy spine crease (no color break) near the bottom staple.

I would never grade that higher than a VF/NM.

I guess that tells me that when I was selling raw books on eBay, I was giving them away for free because they were so radically undergraded.

Ooops.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:31 pm

stumpy wrote:
wallywest wrote:I have heard people say things like this before, but doesn't this just negate CGC as a reliable entity?
Unforunately, the answer is yes, in my opinion.

I mean, isn't that what their existence is all about...consistency?
That's a fairytale they want you to believe. Truth is they grade by a modifed version of Overstreet's guidelines (flaws and all), and they have no intention of EVER disclosing how they arrrive at the 'uber-high' grades. They don't want to share that information because they are afraid that any criticism will undermine their credibility. If they are so credible, why do collectors and dealers like Doug Schmell resubmit high grade issues they feel weren't given a high enough grade? I have heard of books getting bumped up a complete grade before.

I'd have to see evidence of that before believing it. There's a VAST difference between 9.0 and 9.8 (a complete grade.)

Of course, I HAVE seen the Ewart CHOP CHOP scandal, and the FF #3 with my own eyes (restored 8.5 turns into an unrestored 9.0.)

Can you imagine the jump in price between a 9.2 and a 9.8? Astronomical, to say the least. How do you explain it? Sometimes it seems like their existance depends upon the ignorance of noobs and the collectors who don't know how to properly grade. Oh, and did I mention that they have been known to do special 'favors' for the comic-elite dealers who are their main 'bread and butter'?

Try posting your scan on the CGC board for a grade.

If this is true....and there has been scuttlebutt about this since CGC opened in 2000....then there NEEDS to be another grading company for competition. And no, the *SQUEE* in Oregon doesn't count.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:31 pm

Jrdawg wrote:The spine is the number one reason this book gets downgraded, along with discoloration of the back cover. I purchased this book off a very good scan but was nervous until I recieved it. I have no doubt it will be at least a 9.6 and I do have moderate experience with CGC. I'm expecting a 9.8, hoping for more.

If you get more than a 9.8, you will have defied immense odds, and should probably buy a lottery ticket.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:32 pm

stumpy wrote:If you can spot ANY defects, forget about anything higher than a 9.6.

Just speaking from my own experiences with CGC.

I can point out defects on my Fathom v2 #1 10.0.

They're tiny...but they exist, and they are visible through the case.

Jrdawg · Post by **Jrdawg** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:39 pm

I thought about sending some stuff back to re-grade but there is always a chance its gets damaged in transit or shuffled around enough. That makes me itchy.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:43 pm

Jrdawg wrote:I thought about sending some stuff back to re-grade but there is always a chance its gets damaged in transit or shuffled around enough. That makes me itchy.

There is always that chance, yes....

stumpy · Post by **stumpy** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:47 pm

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if CGC splinters into two or more Grading Companies (of no association) in the not-to-distant future. They know the market is ripe for it, and they're trying their best to keep the status quo.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:57 pm

stumpy wrote:I wouldn't be a bit surprised if CGC splinters into two or more Grading Companies (of no association) in the not-to-distant future. They know the market is ripe for it, and they're trying their best to keep the status quo.

That won't work, unless it's kept entirely secret (which is doubtful.)

superman-prime · Post by **superman-prime** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:39 pm

1 grading company is more then enough sports cards has 2 and thats 1 to many.

400yrs · Post by **400yrs** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:37 pm

wizardofutopia wrote:
That's a fairytale they want you to believe. Truth is they grade by a modifed version of Overstreet's guidelines (flaws and all), and they have no intention of EVER disclosing how they arrrive at the 'uber-high' grades. They don't want to share that information because they are afraid that any criticism will undermine their credibility. If they are so credible, why do collectors and dealers like Doug Schmell resubmit high grade issues they feel weren't given a high enough grade? I have heard of books getting bumped up a complete grade before. Can you imagine the jump in price between a 9.2 and a 9.8? Astronomical, to say the least. How do you explain it? Sometimes it seems like their existance depends upon the ignorance of noobs and the collectors who don't know how to properly grade. Oh, and did I mention that they have been known to do special 'favors' for the comic-elite dealers who are their main 'bread and butter'?

I agree with pretty much all of this. However, CGC remains the most credible source in the world of professional comic grading.

The part about special favors, unfortunately and sadly, is true. Of course, in the business world "special favors" are expected and common, but in the comic world, it just seems a lot dirtier to me for some reason.

depluto · Post by **depluto** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:39 pm

Wizard of Utopia! Holy cow!

400yrs · Post by **400yrs** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:40 pm

ZephyrWasHOT!! wrote:
I can point out defects on my Fathom v2 #1 10.0.

They're tiny...but they exist, and they are visible through the case.

Pffffttt. Sounds like CGC messed up on that one. Have it regraded.

Jrdawg · Post by **Jrdawg** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:39 pm

I actually "lol'd" at that one. Pee'd my pants a lil too

stumpy · Post by **stumpy** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:29 am

depluto wrote:Wizard of Utopia! Holy cow!

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:47 am

stumpy wrote:
depluto wrote:Wizard of Utopia! Holy cow!

That would really suck if you were VK. I hope you're not VK.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:49 am

400yrs wrote:
ZephyrWasHOT!! wrote:
I can point out defects on my Fathom v2 #1 10.0.

They're tiny...but they exist, and they are visible through the case.
Pffffttt. Sounds like CGC messed up on that one. Have it regraded.

I'm gonna resubmit it. I'm hoping I get a 10.2.

ckb · Post by **ckb** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:12 am

Jrdawg wrote:You know, I purchased a 9.6 and after I got it, I was disgusted. The spine was awful with major splits and the back cover was discolored. I couldnt beleive it got a 9.6. I felt kinda guilty but I resold it on ebay a few weeks later and the guy who bought it, loved it.

I bought a 9.8 Rai 2 on eBay and returned it for the same reason. Buy the book not the label...

400yrs · Post by **400yrs** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:34 am

ckb wrote:
Jrdawg wrote:You know, I purchased a 9.6 and after I got it, I was disgusted. The spine was awful with major splits and the back cover was discolored. I couldnt beleive it got a 9.6. I felt kinda guilty but I resold it on ebay a few weeks later and the guy who bought it, loved it.
I bought a 9.8 Rai 2 on eBay and returned it for the same reason. Buy the book not the label...

What bothers me about this is that slab sellers will often still say "No returns due to condition since it's professionally graded."

I've bought 9.8 and 9.6 books that didn't look so hot. I felt ripped off not only by the ebayer, but also CGC. But what can you do? It's professionally graded. Can you argue it? Not really.

Now, I'm not saying that books in a 9.8 slab looked like a 4.0 obviously, but when I think 9.8, I think the books should have at least a tight spine with maybe just one tiny knick.

Then of course, there are the shaken slab books.

I'm not collecting slabs anymore primarily due to $ issues, but if I were, I know that I'd still be frustrated.

wallywest · Post by **wallywest** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:17 am

stumpy wrote:It is run by humans. Your books are graded by humans. Humans make mistakes EVERYDAY.

I referenced (or at least tried to reference) human error in my post noting that I make changes in my own grading. When a company uses multiple graders, there HAS to be consistency issues. However, I believe these inconsitencies should be limited to a reasonable normal variance in grading. Ideally, a professional company should push that consistency to a new level.

The issue I am having a problem with is the notion that a Modern gets special treatment over a Golden Age book (I would expect the exact opposite if there is actually a difference), or that a Marvel would get preferential grading over a DC. That would have to be a company policy, and that would get out into the marketplace sooner or later.