• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About plitch

  • Boards Title
    CGC Primary Grader

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    CGC Primary Grader
  • Hobbies
    Hwa Rang Do, punk rock, art & BEER
  • Location
    CGC World Headquarters

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Since when? 2010 Yup. I was hoping to see CGC institute a booth-based breathalyzer or THC test for witnesses. The last thing we'd need are impaired witnesses, not that anything like that is likely.
  2. Since when? 2010 Yup.
  3. plitch

    New Sig Series Guy!!!!!!!

    Daw!!! I feel like a proud Grandpa! Just remember...
  4. plitch


    Happy 41st birthday, Josh!
  5. plitch

    Twin Cities Pedigree Census Integrity

    No worries. I was confused at the beginning, until I saw where you were pulling info from. Then it all made sense. Glad I could help. I guess you are correct, in this case the registry and the census do not match. I thought I validated a few of these before posting but apparently I am going crazy. Sorry Plitch, I was WRONG. BTW, I did ask for someone else to verify if I was seeing this correctly ? From the responses, I thought everyone concurred.
  6. plitch

    Twin Cities Pedigree Census Integrity

    Yea, looks like a slight issue with the CGC Registry, not the CGC Census. Apparently registry books with deleted numbers still stay in people's sets. It is up to the users to maintain their sets. (thumbs u
  7. plitch

    Twin Cities Pedigree Census Integrity

    Have you ever used the CGC verification tool? It's on the bottom of our home page I type in that cert number you just posted - 0914365020 It comes up No Match Found - because it has been deleted from our system.
  8. plitch

    Twin Cities Pedigree Census Integrity

    No one is "cleaning this up as we speak." Nothing to clean up. 1010423 001 is the Twin Cities book - it is deleted from our system. It was a 9.2 Off white to white graded on 6/20/11 1203501 017 is the same book, same grade, same PQ. It IS on our census. It was graded 02/09/15 It has not affected the census. One off, One on. Plitch, first off thanks for responding. Maybe somebody is cleaning them up as we speak. Here's another example....Avengers 11 .... In Sufunks's registry Comic Description: Avengers 11 Universal Grade: 9.2 Page Quality: OFF-WHITE TO WHITE Pedigree: Twin Cities Certification #: 1010423001 Owner: sufunk15 The book is on Pedigree as 1203501017 Certification #: 1203501017 Title: Avengers Issue: 11 Issue Date: 12/64 Issue Year: 1964 Publisher: Marvel Comics Grade: 9.2 Pedigree: Twin Cities Page Quality: OFF-WHITE TO WHITE Grade Date: 02/09/2015
  9. plitch

    Twin Cities Pedigree Census Integrity

    I'm confused. 1059691 001 is an Avengers #12 9.4 white pages we graded on 10/12/11. It is still in our system and it is NOT the Twin Cities copy. 1107022 001 is in our system and it IS the Twin Cities copy, also a 9.4 white pages that we graded on 06/14/13 Looking through my system, the other Avengers #12 Twin Cities was 0914684 003 and was graded on 02/23/11 (also a 9.4 white pages) and was deleted from the census. Looking at the census, there are 19 copies of Avengers#12 in 9.4 (+1 restored copy). 1059691 001 & 1107022 001 are not the same copy. There are 17 other copies out there in 9.4.