• 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.

CGC Comments Regarding the JIM 83

Started by plitch,

390 posts in this topic

kav

kav

Posted
Posted

This is a great explanation and was all I was asking for the whole time. It makes sense. And now, CGC has learned something and their detection will be better in future. Bad move on short sighted seller now his name is mud and turns out he didn't even have to withhold info-the book is untrimmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKB

CKB

Posted
Posted
My guess is natural wear over time since the covers stick out a little highe than the pages.

 

Even more so than the top edge of the front cover, it is very hard to reconcile that the ink did not bleed down the front cover like it did the back. Even a micro trim of the front cover only would not have removed it all.

 

I think I have to conclude that the top of the front cover, was, against all odds, missed by the ink completely.

 

There is nothing about the top edge of that book that even whispers "trimmed" to me. I think all the subtle manipulation that goes on has CGC chasing shadows. Shouldn't the standard be near-certainty about restoration before giving a book a restored grade? If there is reasonable doubt that the book is clean maybe it should result in the book returned to the owner ungraded, with a note that the resto check was "inconclusive".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
My guess is natural wear over time since the covers stick out a little highe than the pages.

 

Even more so than the top edge of the front cover, it is very hard to reconcile that the ink did not bleed down the front cover like it did the back. Even a micro trim of the front cover only would not have removed it all.

 

I think I have to conclude that the top of the front cover, was, against all odds, missed by the ink completely.

 

There is nothing about the top edge of that book that even whispers "trimmed" to me. I think all the subtle manipulation that goes on has CGC chasing shadows. Shouldn't the standard be near-certainty about restoration before giving a book a restored grade? If there is reasonable doubt that the book is clean maybe it should result in the book returned to the owner ungraded, with a note that the resto check was "inconclusive".

 

Wow. That's something to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluehorseshoe

bluehorseshoe

Posted
Posted
I applaud CGC for stepping up to the plate and addressing this transparently. Having said that, one wonders how many purple slabs might be out there with the "cover trimmed" designation that aren't trimmed.

 

Time to buy up "Top Cover Trimmed" books with Dist ink and resubmit...

 

Blue Horseshoe loves "Top Cover Trimmed" books with Dist ink.

 

:takeit:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluehorseshoe

bluehorseshoe

Posted
Posted

The only true outstanding issue is will these that keep doing this with this JIM 83 not press their luck anymore.

 

At some point, you can modify the procedure, but if there is any hint of "unscrupulous" activity (as set out in the OP,) then you have to think CGC just washes their hands of it and turns it over to law enforcement for fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lazyboy

Lazyboy

Posted
Posted

Even more so than the top edge of the front cover, it is very hard to reconcile that the ink did not bleed down the front cover like it did the back. Even a micro trim of the front cover only would not have removed it all.

 

I think I have to conclude that the top of the front cover, was, against all odds, missed by the ink completely.

 

Is that really so surprising? Distributor ink was hardly an exact science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted

Especially since they inked em in stacks so where the ink went was kinda haphazard

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Waylander

Waylander

Posted
Posted
My guess is natural wear over time since the covers stick out a little highe than the pages.

 

Even more so than the top edge of the front cover, it is very hard to reconcile that the ink did not bleed down the front cover like it did the back. Even a micro trim of the front cover only would not have removed it all.

 

I think I have to conclude that the top of the front cover, was, against all odds, missed by the ink completely.

 

There is nothing about the top edge of that book that even whispers "trimmed" to me. I think all the subtle manipulation that goes on has CGC chasing shadows. Shouldn't the standard be near-certainty about restoration before giving a book a restored grade? If there is reasonable doubt that the book is clean maybe it should result in the book returned to the owner ungraded, with a note that the resto check was "inconclusive".

 

 

But the odds of an overhanging front cover not getting any spray whereas the inner pages and overhanging back cover does. Moreover, there is none of the equivalent wear on the back cover - confused (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MatterEaterLad

MatterEaterLad

Posted
Posted
This could not have been an easy thing to address publicly, especially in light of the history on this particular book. Mad props to Paul and CGC for coming out and being an open book in the situation, and for handling the matter concerning Spider-Dan in the manner you have.

 

+1

 

+2

 

+3

 

 

This whole mess illustrates how shaky resto check is and how shady some sellers are. But kudos to Paul for being a stand-up guy. (thumbs u

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
My guess is natural wear over time since the covers stick out a little highe than the pages.

 

Even more so than the top edge of the front cover, it is very hard to reconcile that the ink did not bleed down the front cover like it did the back. Even a micro trim of the front cover only would not have removed it all.

 

I think I have to conclude that the top of the front cover, was, against all odds, missed by the ink completely.

 

There is nothing about the top edge of that book that even whispers "trimmed" to me. I think all the subtle manipulation that goes on has CGC chasing shadows. Shouldn't the standard be near-certainty about restoration before giving a book a restored grade? If there is reasonable doubt that the book is clean maybe it should result in the book returned to the owner ungraded, with a note that the resto check was "inconclusive".

 

 

But the odds of an overhanging front cover not getting any spray whereas the inner pages and overhanging back cover does. Moreover, there is none of the equivalent wear on the back cover - confused (shrug)

 

Possibly another book in the stack was just overlapping in such a manner that the front cover didnt get hit. A one in a million type situation. I was in a car wreck and a tiny pin ended up inside my sock. How it flew up under my pants then down into sock I do not know. Strange things happen at high speeds.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davenport

Davenport

Posted
Posted
The only true outstanding issue is will these that keep doing this with this JIM 83 not press their luck anymore.

 

At some point, you can modify the procedure, but if there is any hint of "unscrupulous" activity (as set out in the OP,) then you have to think CGC just washes their hands of it and turns it over to law enforcement for fraud.

And what law governs the undisclosed re-trimming of a factory-trimmed comic book? (shrug)

 

Would it be the same law that governs undisclosed re-pressing of factory-pressed paper, undisclosed re-assembly, or undisclosed re-folding of factory-folded spines? Those laws?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
The only true outstanding issue is will these that keep doing this with this JIM 83 not press their luck anymore.

 

At some point, you can modify the procedure, but if there is any hint of "unscrupulous" activity (as set out in the OP,) then you have to think CGC just washes their hands of it and turns it over to law enforcement for fraud.

And what law governs the undisclosed re-trimming of a factory-trimmed comic book? (shrug)

 

Would it be the same law that governs undisclosed re-pressing of factory-pressed paper, undisclosed re-assembly, or undisclosed re-folding of a factory-folded spines? Those laws?

I think the mattress tag police handle these cases

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comix4fun

comix4fun

Posted
Posted
The only true outstanding issue is will these that keep doing this with this JIM 83 not press their luck anymore.

 

At some point, you can modify the procedure, but if there is any hint of "unscrupulous" activity (as set out in the OP,) then you have to think CGC just washes their hands of it and turns it over to law enforcement for fraud.

And what law governs the undisclosed re-trimming of a factory-trimmed comic book? (shrug)

 

Would it be the same law that governs undisclosed re-pressing of factory-pressed paper, undisclosed re-assembly, or undisclosed re-folding of a factory-folded spines? Those laws?

 

 

There actually is one. It's boring to explain though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mob_medina7

mob_medina7

Posted
Posted
The only true outstanding issue is will these that keep doing this with this JIM 83 not press their luck anymore.

 

At some point, you can modify the procedure, but if there is any hint of "unscrupulous" activity (as set out in the OP,) then you have to think CGC just washes their hands of it and turns it over to law enforcement for fraud.

And what law governs the undisclosed re-trimming of a factory-trimmed comic book? (shrug)

 

Would it be the same law that governs undisclosed re-pressing of factory-pressed paper, undisclosed re-assembly, or undisclosed re-folding of a factory-folded spines? Those laws?

I think the mattress tag police handle these cases

:applause: uh oh everyone check your mattresses! :o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mob_medina7

mob_medina7

Posted
Posted
The only true outstanding issue is will these that keep doing this with this JIM 83 not press their luck anymore.

 

At some point, you can modify the procedure, but if there is any hint of "unscrupulous" activity (as set out in the OP,) then you have to think CGC just washes their hands of it and turns it over to law enforcement for fraud.

And what law governs the undisclosed re-trimming of a factory-trimmed comic book? (shrug)

 

Would it be the same law that governs undisclosed re-pressing of factory-pressed paper, undisclosed re-assembly, or undisclosed re-folding of a factory-folded spines? Those laws?

 

 

There actually is one. It's boring to explain though.

wow could they get real jail time for this or fined?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing