Comic Verification Authority (CVA) ?!?!?! 2 2

[sfcityduck]

The problem I have with CVA is that they spend more time talking on their website about the quality of their sticker than they do the criteria they use to determine whether it is warranted.  

Here's how they describe their service: 

Quote

 

NO! Two comic books in the exact same CGC or CBCS grade can exhibit different eye appeal.  That does NOT mean one book is accurately graded, and one is not.  Eye appeal is one of numerous factors contributing to a CGC or CBCS assigned grade.  However, "Exceptional" eye appeal is the critical factor in applying the CVA Exceptional sticker. 

When dealing with the subjective nature of grading the inescapable truth is that some do not possess superior eye appeal for the assigned grade, and others do.  CVA's assessment that the CGC or CBCS graded comic book does not warrant it’s sticker, DOES NOT mean that CVA believes the comic book has been overgraded. It simply means that it does not outstanding eye appeal and superior structure for the grade assigned by CGC or CBCS..   CVA will reject many accurately graded comic books. We are simply looking for the outstanding ones in grade.

 

So what is the criteria for "exceptional eye appeal"?  

Apparently, the same criteria the Supreme Court uses for determining obscentity:  I know it when I see it.  

But, don't we all?  

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

29 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

What he doesn't realize is that CVA doesn't exist to make the customer happy...but to convince prospective buyers.

So, using his house analogy, if he hires a painter, no, he doesn't need someone else to tell him if he's satisfied...but if he's planning on selling the house, the buyer, if they're wise, will insist on an independent inspection.

That is the exact Model. 

[Logan510]

15 minutes ago, mattn792 said:

An independent home inspector is making sure you didn't paint your house with lead or radium, they're not telling you that the blue paint is indeed blue.

And if we want to work CVA into your analogy, then the IVA would need to show up to inspect the inspection.

His analogy makes no sense, of course as a prospective buyer I would want a 3rd party inspector, in IL it's required as part of the sale of the house.

What you said about an inspector inspecting the original inspectors work is more apt.

Is it me or does that seem incredibly dumb?

Who certifies the certifier?

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

16 minutes ago, Ditch Fahrenheit said:

And yes, a thin film layer of contamination from the out-gassing of the materials used in the construction of the case could THEORETICALLY cause newton rings under the right circumstances, but there is no current or historical information to back up such a claim.

Finally. I appreciate that you understand my previous commentary. Now on to the theoretically but no current or historical information: I  assume you mean for comics, and the present encapsulation model. I agree,and the reason is it has not been tested, and the previous encapsulation product (utilizing Barex, IIRC), has also not been tested in final form/usage and then evaluated against current encapsulation product. However, there is ample historical information that supports contamination via gassing/heat/improper combination of the Copolymers, to include moisture contamination emanating from the point of manufacture...be it a result of vapor transmission form the flooring construction or HVAC system and/or...the other previous aspects I have mentioned. I think we have a meeting of the minds, and a partial understanding if nothing else that there is work to do, and merely stating it is natural we can not do anything may not be a good business approach.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

21 minutes ago, Ditch Fahrenheit said:

 

 

 He was right, though....and was ahead of the game by a wide margin.

[sfcityduck]

Just now, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

 He was right, though....and was ahead of the game by a wide margin.

He was way behind the curve:

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

18 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

The problem I have with CVA is that they spend more time talking on their website about the quality of their sticker than they do the criteria they use to determine whether it is warranted.  

Here's how they describe their service: 

So what is the criteria for "exceptional eye appeal"?  

Apparently, the same criteria the Supreme Court uses for determining obscentity:  I know it when I see it.  

But, don't we all?  

This is almost a mimic of the beginning of the CAC Model.

[RockMyAmadeus]

12 minutes ago, Logan510 said:

His analogy makes no sense,

Says the guy who compared "hiring a painter to paint your house" to what CGC does...

[mattn792]

21 minutes ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

That is the exact Model. 

That is not the "exact Model".  If anything, the independent inspector serves the role CGC fulfills. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 minute ago, mattn792 said:

23 minutes ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

That is the exact Model. 

That is not the "exact Model".  If anything, the independent inspector serves the role CGC fulfills. 

You are confusing what he's referring to. Ignore the house. It's not relevant. Focus on the "getting a second opinion" aspect.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

1 minute ago, mattn792 said:

That is not the "exact Model".  If anything, the independent inspector serves the role CGC fulfills. 

1st sentence. the pickup comprehension point is an analogy is not a business Model.

[mattn792]

26 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

The problem I have with CVA is that they spend more time talking on their website about the quality of their sticker than they do the criteria they use to determine whether it is warranted.  

Here's how they describe their service: 

So what is the criteria for "exceptional eye appeal"?  

Apparently, the same criteria the Supreme Court uses for determining obscentity:  I know it when I see it.  

But, don't we all?  

CGC does the heavy lifting, CVA takes two minutes and says "Yep, looks good to me.  Sticker that sucker!" 

Great scam if you can profit from it.

[mattn792]

2 minutes ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

1st sentence. the pickup comprehension point is an analogy is not a business Model.

Streams seem to have crossed, let's take the house off the market and reset.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

4 minutes ago, mattn792 said:

That is not the "exact Model".  If anything, the independent inspector serves the role CGC fulfills. 

BTW, have you had time to think about the hypothetical question I presented to you?

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

2 minutes ago, mattn792 said:

CGC does the heavy lifting, CVA takes two minutes and says "Yep, looks good to me.  Sticker that sucker!" 

Great scam if you can profit from it.

2008.  CAC. Same. 2018 CAC. Collectors are profiting from it.

[mattn792]

Just now, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

BTW, have you had time to think about the hypothetical question I presented to you?

If you directed a hypothetical at me, I missed it. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

CVA isn't grading the book. They're simply looking at it in the slab and determining if the grade given by whomever (really, just CGC) is commensurate with the APPEARANCE of the book in the case. Sometimes, it's quite obvious that a book was overgraded. Those cases are easy to spot. Sometimes, a book looks much better than graded, and perhaps there's a flaw on the interior that no one but the graders know about. In that case, they're only giving you an assessment based on what they can see.

If there's a 9.6 copy with a CVA sticker...provided I know that CVA knows what they're doing...I'm absolutely paying a premium for that book as a 9.6, because there's a good chance I can make it a 9.8. A much better chance than flying blind (and I have plenty of slabs that I discovered weren't remotely upgradeable when received in hand.)

Edited August 28, 2018 by RockMyAmadeus
CVS is a drug store. :D

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

2 hours ago, mattn792 said:

So you quote me out of context and toss in McKnowitall's blatantly obvious "Human nature to seek assurance is the same", then act like you've done us all a great service?  Bra-vo

 

2 hours ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

Setting aside my blatantly obvious words, I do have a question. Hypothetical (maybe not), concerning the existence of a 4PG, and the possible value to a comics collecting community.

You have an encapsulated comic. A 3PG grades it a 9. It has Newton Rings. You send it back. It is encapsulated again, with the same grade...a 9. It has the Newton Rings. The 3PG states it is normal. You send it to a 4PG. The 4PG does not sticker it with a "green", which would be agreement with the stated grade. You call the 4PG to discuss it (the existing "coin" 4PG  will do so), and the 4PG explains to you there is a possible contamination issue, because of newton rings, and eye appeal is significantly reduced because of the Newton Rings. What would you do? 

For your pleasure.

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

2008.  CAC. Same. 2018 CAC. Collectors are profiting from it.

In some cases, it's almost like they're just copying and pasting the arguments from 2008, that's how spot on the naysaying is...

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Just now, RockMyAmadeus said:

In some cases, it's almost like they're just copying and pasting the arguments from 2008, that's how spot on the naysaying is...

I had the uncanny same thought at close to the same time as you.