Grading for same condition are now much lower 0

[marvinjoan]

Just rcvd seven Golden Age comics back.

Really low grading.

1943 comic with cover no major defects, all pages in tact and off white grade a .5 ??  

Others stated detached cover. They were on when sent. 1.5

1963 Sgt Fury. White pages cover almost perfect. 4.0 ??

Every comic is off by 2 grade points.

I have had numerous other rated and not sure what is up as these ratings are a travesty.

 

[ThothAmon]

Photos?  My recent slabs seem about right. The 9.4 ASM 129 was a little low ...

[Bomber-Bob]

21 minutes ago, marvinjoan said:

Just rcvd seven Golden Age comics back.

Really low grading.

1943 comic with cover no major defects, all pages in tact and off white grade a .5 ??  

Others stated detached cover. They were on when sent. 1.5

1963 Sgt Fury. White pages cover almost perfect. 4.0 ??

Every comic is off by 2 grade points.

I have had numerous other rated and not sure what is up as these ratings are a travesty.

 

Regarding detached covers, maybe you didn't package them up properly and they were damaged in transit.  Did you have them pressed first ? Show us some pics, it could simply be you are over grading. Using terms like 'almost perfect' leads me to believe you are new to all this. Have you submitted before ? Show us the grader's notes, that should explain your grades. Sorry for all the questions but you didn't give us much here other than complaints. I'm sure CGC didn't pick on you.

[marvinjoan]

22 hours ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Regarding detached covers, maybe you didn't package them up properly and they were damaged in transit.  Did you have them pressed first ? Show us some pics, it could simply be you are over grading. Using terms like 'almost perfect' leads me to believe you are new to all this. Have you submitted before ? Show us the grader's notes, that should explain your grades. Sorry for all the questions but you didn't give us much here other than complaints. I'm sure CGC didn't pick on you.

I have been submitting comics a few at a time for about four years. All Gold (between 1943-1946 or Silver Age comics (1962-1965).

As always, I inspected and packaged each properly (certified covers, boards, etc). All were connected to the cover and none were reconditioned (though one came back rated as reconditioned (?). Also a few were of the same year, type of condition and even continued sequential numbered issues for previously submitted books (ex Batman #18, 19, etc.).

This time all 7 comics are graded up to 2 levels below the previous two years submissions. Batman 18 was rated at a .5..It has the cover attached (with some tape) no pages missing, off white pages. I have two similar condition comic previously rated over the past two years at 2.0.  There are other examples, but you get my point.

 

[W16227]

1 hour ago, marvinjoan said:

I have been submitting comics a few at a time for about four years. All Gold (between 1943-1946 or Silver Age comics (1962-1965).

As always, I inspected and packaged each properly (certified covers, boards, etc). All were connected to the cover and none were reconditioned (though one came back rated as reconditioned (?). Also a few were of the same year, type of condition and even continued sequential numbered issues for previously submitted books (ex Batman #18, 19, etc.).

This time all 7 comics are graded up to 2 levels below the previous two years submissions. Batman 18 was rated at a .5..It has the cover attached (with some tape) no pages missing, off white pages. I have two similar condition comic previously rated over the past two years at 2.0.  There are other examples, but you get my point.

 

Reconditioned? - you mean restored? what was the restoration listed and how are you so sure it was not restored.

 

Pictures help. So do grader notes.  a .5 can be caused by more than just wear. The grader notes should be readily available and this will tell you if there is something you missed like a panel or coupon cut - or even missing pages ( golden age is not always consistent so you need to do more than a simple page count). If the cover is ONLY attached by tape - it is graded as a detached cover so that may be partially the reason.

 

Many of your reasons listed - are not realistic comparisons. Sequential numbers is meaningless for grading. Type of condition - not a good description of any of the defects. Books can have a similar look - but drastically different levels of defects.

 

If you want help or better comments  - post a decent scan of each book front and back -  and the graders notes. Lot of people on the boards have submitted thousands of books and will be able to provide you better insight . Honestly - without that information you will not get much real help.

 

 

 

 

[Bomber-Bob]

7 hours ago, marvinjoan said:

I have been submitting comics a few at a time for about four years. All Gold (between 1943-1946 or Silver Age comics (1962-1965).

As always, I inspected and packaged each properly (certified covers, boards, etc). All were connected to the cover and none were reconditioned (though one came back rated as reconditioned (?). Also a few were of the same year, type of condition and even continued sequential numbered issues for previously submitted books (ex Batman #18, 19, etc.).

This time all 7 comics are graded up to 2 levels below the previous two years submissions. Batman 18 was rated at a .5..It has the cover attached (with some tape) no pages missing, off white pages. I have two similar condition comic previously rated over the past two years at 2.0.  There are other examples, but you get my point.

 

Maybe some of this has to do with the fact that CGC will no longer recognize a book attached with tape anymore. It will now be considered as detached, which hammers the grade. Due to public demand, this was a policy change in the recent past.