Manufactured Gold

[ArAich]

So now I'm really confused.. Is popping the staples no longer considered restoration by CGC?

 

I think that the problem is that it is very difficult to tell whether a cover has been removed and replaced on a GA book since the stapling process was so erratic back then as oppossed to now...

You have 2 covers that were originally from the same book that were alledgedly removed and replaced several times...the holes are exactly the same as the interior pages since the covers were married to them since the books inception...so the only way to tell would be to look at the staples on the inside centerfold pages...if the original staples are used then how is one to tell if they were unbent then re-bent if the process was carefully done and was done equal to the process at the books manufacture???...

[ArAich]

The sad thing is CGC knows who submtted the book but takes no action to stop these shenanigans.

 

What makes you so sure that the submitter is the culprit???...

[ArAich]

To remove the old serial # from the database, they would've had to had the original label. Someone didn't put 2 + 2 together or......

 

The equation is more like X + Y = Z ...

[adamstrange]

There is something else I wanted to ask.... who exactly is MasterChief? Has anyone met him at a Con and is willing to vouch for him?

 

Not to pooh-pooh on a Forumite who is obviously willing to devote a lot of personal time and effort in bringing a lot of these books to light, BUT, when I see a poster with precious few posts AND a incredibly in-depth knowledge of restoration and imaging know-how, I immediately start thinking of one person.....

 

Is the identity of the contributing poster really important when discussing the books in this thread? Probably not. But still.....

 

Okay...not sure as to why the inference of being a shill or a poster with an agenda-driven complex keeps rearing its ugly head. I can understand it to a point, but really, when does someone pass the credibility checkpoint?

 

Honestly speaking, if anyone still has a question as to my sincerity or is asking himself or herself “who is this guy and what is he all about”, well, you can pretty much create a word picture by reading my short posting history. It’s not that long, and you could get a good idea of where I’m coming from by reading my very first post (and the stuff regarding the Stan Lee File Copy Collection).

 

Yes, I am a real person. No, I do not have any other forum ID’s. Esquire addressed that line of questioning a couple of months ago when he called me out.

 

I may be getting old but I haven’t forgotten my name...yet. Last time I checked it said Mitch Jordan on my driver’s license – not Daniel Dupcak (don’t laugh, that has been mentioned). I would be happy to introduce myself to any forum member at a convention. Usually, I attended two a year, Wizard World LA and San Diego.

 

BTW...Thanks to Z and RH for the vote of confidence. I have communicated with both of them and they seem like stand-up guys to me.

 

When they complained to Lincoln about Grant's drinking, he offered to buy liquor for his other generals if they would only fight half as well.

 

Even were MC to turn out to be a shill, a forum of such "shills" would be thoughtful and polite. Could we trade JC for one?

[lou_fine]

Why are more people not seriously concerned about this?

 

Those that are concerned go about their purchases with appropriate caution.

 

Those that aren't concerned are firmly in the "certification works" camp.

 

Besides, why the hub-bub? Its just another specimen that has reached its full P.O.T.E.N.T.I.A.L:

 

Pressed

Only

To Squeeze

Every

Nickel

Then

Inconspicuously &

Anonymously

unLoaded

 

The difference between this particular book and every other example listed, is that this book has been disassembled. (There is no doubt about it. There is no way you can reverse the two covers without popping the staples.) And my understanding is that CGC has always said that as soon as a book has been disassembled, it has been restored. CGC has always said that pressing is not restoration, and they also say that cleaning is not restoration as long as the staples are not popped (do I have this correct?). To me, this situation seemed identical to the Ewert situation that had everyone up in arms, where someone managed to sneak restoration past CGC.

 

However, what I didn't realize until just now is that in order to be removed from the CGC database, CGC needs to have the label in hand. That would mean that in this case CGC has to have the Green label in their possession. So they must know that this book has had work done to it and the book is still in a blue label.

 

So now I'm really confused.. Is popping the staples no longer considered restoration by CGC? Or is this case somehow an exception to the rule? Can anyone clarify exactly what happened in this case? Or am I working off of a faulty assumption somewhere?

 

Filter;

 

Sounds like you are making the faulty assumption the staples had to be popped in the first place. Isn't it easy to swap wraps without disassembing the book or did we all forget about the Boy Comics #17 fiasco that went from a 4.0 to a 7.5 before finally settling in at a nice comfy 9.0.

 

Remeber that it's always possible that the staples were never closed in the first place. In this case, swapping and reswapping wraps or covers would simply not be considered to be restoration.

[Filter81]

I think that the problem is that it is very difficult to tell whether a cover has been removed and replaced on a GA book since the stapling process was so erratic back then as oppossed to now...

 

This is what I thought at first.

 

But the fact that they have the label in their possession means they can't not know about this.

 

I mean either the submitter sent the book in to CGC with the Green label (and CGC had the label in their possession when they gave it a blue label)

 

OR

 

Someone sent this book in to CGC and successfully snuck restoration by them. Then after receiving the blue label, sent the green label in to CGC, showing CGC what they did. I don't really see the benefit to someone sending the label in to CGC after the book had been graded. (If they managed to get restoration past CGC, I would think it would be in the submitter's best interest to try to prevent anyone at CGC from finding out.) That would be sort of like Ewert submitting one of his books to CGC with before and after photos wouldn't it? And even if that did happen, at that point wouldn't CGC either take the book back or take some sort of action against the submitter like they did with Ewert?

 

I've dealt with Steve, Mark, and West enough times to know that they are as ethical & honest as anyone in the hobby and would be surprised to learn that CGC intentionally let a restored book into a blue holder. So what is the alternative? Has there possibly some sort of change in grading standards recently or something? I know that everyone at CGC is too busy to respond to every thread on these boards, but could someone clarify what happened with this particular book?

[Harvey Dude]

Sounds like you are making the faulty assumption the staples had to be popped in the first place. Isn't it easy to swap wraps without disassembing the book or did we all forget about the Boy Comics #17 fiasco that went from a 4.0 to a 7.5 before finally settling in at a nice comfy 9.0.

 

Remeber that it's always possible that the staples were never closed in the first place. In this case, swapping and reswapping wraps or covers would simply not be considered to be restoration.

 

Grades don't jump from a 7 to an 8 inside cover and a 9 to a 9.4 outside cover without some form of outside intervention. If CGC dropped the ball on their grading standards then that would be more worrisome than missed restoration.

[lou_fine]

Sounds like you are making the faulty assumption the staples had to be popped in the first place. Isn't it easy to swap wraps without disassembing the book or did we all forget about the Boy Comics #17 fiasco that went from a 4.0 to a 7.5 before finally settling in at a nice comfy 9.0.

 

Remeber that it's always possible that the staples were never closed in the first place. In this case, swapping and reswapping wraps or covers would simply not be considered to be restoration.

 

Grades don't jump from a 7 to an 8 inside cover and a 9 to a 9.4 outside cover without some form of outside intervention. If CGC dropped the ball on their grading standards then that would be more worrisome than missed restoration.

 

Harvey;

 

Well, if CGC can explain away books that can jump from 4.0 all the way up to 9.0 as non-resto activities, I don't see why it would be that difficult for them to explain relatively minor improvements in grade from 7.0 up to 8.0 or from 9.0 up to 9.4.

[awe4one]

Well, if CGC can explain away books that can jump from 4.0 all the way up to 9.0 as non-resto activities, I don't see why it would be that difficult for them to explain relatively minor improvements in grade from 7.0 up to 8.0 or from 9.0 up to 9.4.

 

That's assuming the original explanation was credible...

 

Jim

[Harvey Dude]

Harvey;

 

Well, if CGC can explain away books that can jump from 4.0 all the way up to 9.0 as non-resto activities, I don't see why it would be that difficult for them to explain relatively minor improvements in grade from 7.0 up to 8.0 or from 9.0 up to 9.4.

 

The problem is that I have yet to take the time to review CGC's grading standards. I guess it is my fault.

[Forbush-Man]

I would be happy to introduce myself to any forum member at a convention. Usually, I attended two a year, Wizard World LA and San Diego

 

I'd be happy to meet you at either one of these Cons, I'll be at both of them.

 

 

BTW: Another nice report!

[Flaming_Telepath]

Harvey;

 

Well, if CGC can explain away books that can jump from 4.0 all the way up to 9.0 as non-resto activities, I don't see why it would be that difficult for them to explain relatively minor improvements in grade from 7.0 up to 8.0 or from 9.0 up to 9.4.

 

The problem is that I have yet to take the time to review CGC's grading standards. I guess it is my fault.

 

When you find them, could you let the rest of us know?

[ArAich]

I think that the problem is that it is very difficult to tell whether a cover has been removed and replaced on a GA book since the stapling process was so erratic back then as oppossed to now...

 

This is what I thought at first.

 

But the fact that they have the label in their possession means they can't not know about this.

 

I mean either the submitter sent the book in to CGC with the Green label (and CGC had the label in their possession when they gave it a blue label)

 

OR

 

Someone sent this book in to CGC and successfully snuck restoration by them. Then after receiving the blue label, sent the green label in to CGC, showing CGC what they did. I don't really see the benefit to someone sending the label in to CGC after the book had been graded. (If they managed to get restoration past CGC, I would think it would be in the submitter's best interest to try to prevent anyone at CGC from finding out.) That would be sort of like Ewert submitting one of his books to CGC with before and after photos wouldn't it? And even if that did happen, at that point wouldn't CGC either take the book back or take some sort of action against the submitter like they did with Ewert?

 

 

 

Perhaps another scenario:

Book is purchased in Green Label holder and is removed and promptly sold as a raw book...seller then sends label back to CGC...new owner then either sells the book to another person or does the cover shuffle himself then re-submits to CGC...

[ArAich]

Harvey;

 

Well, if CGC can explain away books that can jump from 4.0 all the way up to 9.0 as non-resto activities, I don't see why it would be that difficult for them to explain relatively minor improvements in grade from 7.0 up to 8.0 or from 9.0 up to 9.4.

 

The problem is that I have yet to take the time to review CGC's grading standards. I guess it is my fault.

 

When you find them, could you let the rest of us know?

 

From what I hear...all you need to do is read that OverStreet book...

[Red Hook]

Perhaps another scenario:

Book is purchased in Green Label holder and is removed and promptly sold as a raw book...seller then sends label back to CGC...new owner then either sells the book to another person or does the cover shuffle himself then re-submits to CGC...

 

Ever hear of Occam's Razor?

 

From the ever-wonderful Wikkepedia......

 

 

Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off," those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. In short, when given two equally valid explanations for a phenomenon, one should embrace the less complicated formulation. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae (law of succinctness):

 

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem,

 

which translates to:

 

entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.

 

(That is, the fewer assumptions an explanation of a phenomenon depends on, the better it is.)

[Flaming_Telepath]

Perhaps another scenario:

Book is purchased in Green Label holder and is removed and promptly sold as a raw book...seller then sends label back to CGC...new owner then either sells the book to another person or does the cover shuffle himself then re-submits to CGC...

 

Ever hear of Occam's Razor?

 

From the ever-wonderful Wikkepedia......

 

 

Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off," those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. In short, when given two equally valid explanations for a phenomenon, one should embrace the less complicated formulation. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae (law of succinctness):

 

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem,

 

which translates to:

 

entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.

 

(That is, the fewer assumptions an explanation of a phenomenon depends on, the better it is.)

 

So....

 

CGC got it wrong?

[Red Hook]

I've been touting the term "passive collusion" for about two years now. Being an indirect accomplice to such goings on, by turning one's head the other way.

[ArAich]

Perhaps another scenario:

Book is purchased in Green Label holder and is removed and promptly sold as a raw book...seller then sends label back to CGC...new owner then either sells the book to another person or does the cover shuffle himself then re-submits to CGC...

 

Ever hear of Occam's Razor?

 

From the ever-wonderful Wikkepedia......

 

 

Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off," those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. In short, when given two equally valid explanations for a phenomenon, one should embrace the less complicated formulation. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae (law of succinctness):

 

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem,

 

which translates to:

 

entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.

 

(That is, the fewer assumptions an explanation of a phenomenon depends on, the better it is.)

 

 

Yup...i watched "Contact" several times... besides...none of this seems complicated...

[sborock]

I think that the problem is that it is very difficult to tell whether a cover has been removed and replaced on a GA book since the stapling process was so erratic back then as oppossed to now...

 

This is what I thought at first.

 

But the fact that they have the label in their possession means they can't not know about this.

 

I mean either the submitter sent the book in to CGC with the Green label (and CGC had the label in their possession when they gave it a blue label)

 

OR

 

Someone sent this book in to CGC and successfully snuck restoration by them. Then after receiving the blue label, sent the green label in to CGC, showing CGC what they did. I don't really see the benefit to someone sending the label in to CGC after the book had been graded. (If they managed to get restoration past CGC, I would think it would be in the submitter's best interest to try to prevent anyone at CGC from finding out.) That would be sort of like Ewert submitting one of his books to CGC with before and after photos wouldn't it? And even if that did happen, at that point wouldn't CGC either take the book back or take some sort of action against the submitter like they did with Ewert?

 

I've dealt with Steve, Mark, and West enough times to know that they are as ethical & honest as anyone in the hobby and would be surprised to learn that CGC intentionally let a restored book into a blue holder. So what is the alternative? Has there possibly some sort of change in grading standards recently or something? I know that everyone at CGC is too busy to respond to every thread on these boards, but could someone clarify what happened with this particular book?

 

There is no restoration to be found here.

 

Obviously, someone opened the staples, switched the covers back to their original manufactured positions, put the staples back in their original positions, probably pressed the book, and someone, whether it was the one who did the work or someone who bought it, submitted it. As I have stated before, if nothing was added, CGC does not consider it restoration. There was no restoration (glue, reinforcement, color touch, etc) to be found on this book.

[tth2]

There is no restoration to be found here.

 

Obviously, someone opened the staples, switched the covers back to their original manufactured positions, put the staples back in their original positions, probably pressed the book, and someone, whether it was the one who did the work or someone who bought it, submitted it. As I have stated before, if nothing was added, CGC does not consider it restoration. There was no restoration (glue, reinforcement, color touch, etc) to be found on this book.

Steve, by definition there was disassembly!