Captain America #1 (CGC 9.4) 5 5

[sfcityduck]

2 hours ago, Gotham Kid said:

sounds a bit like a cry-baby ?

when it worked in his favor all is good but when not bwahah no fair.

Sounds to me like CGC is the one at fault, not Verzyl. 

I guess the term "grade inflation" applies to more than just academics.

The "inflation" of the Denver grade from 9.0 to 9.2 (post-press) to 9.4 might explain why the SF is being graded a 9.4 (in my mind generously). 

And if the scale used by CGC for CA 1 is so soft, then it seems that a much better book that looks two increments better than the "9.4s" (if that is what the Allentown is) deserves a 9.8 even if it really should be a 9.6 (and the 9.4s should be 9.2s). 

[Mmehdy]

900K plus bp is my guess...or very close to it possible 850K plus BP

[pemart1966]

4 hours ago, Timely said:

So here's the deal with the Denver & Allentown copies of Cap #1.

John Verzyl owned the Denver copy for decades.  When the Allentown copy became available he went to see it.  It was far nicer than the Denver, so John being John & wanting the best copy, he took the plunge. The Mile High copy had been restored so he had no interest in it.

He felt the Denver was an 8.5 or possibly a 9.0.  He was over the moon when it graded out a 9.0 & he sold it to help cover the cost of the Allentown purchase.  It was then pressed to a 9.2.  It was then regraded a 3rd time as a 9.4 (not sure if it was pressed again). John was upset about this for 2 reasons.

1st, it's obviously worth way more as a 9.2 or 9.4 than it was as a 9.0 when he sold it.

2nd, he felt the Allentown was FAR superior to the Denver, but the Denver was now a 9.4 & his Allentown a 9.6. 

But, John being John, took these lemons & made lemonade.  He went to cgc and argued his case explaining how superior the Allentown was.  It was then regraded a 9.8.

That's the story John told me.

An investment strategy for anyone with a major key currently graded in the 9.0-9.4 range??

[telerites]

4 hours ago, Timely said:

So here's the deal with the Denver & Allentown copies of Cap #1.

John Verzyl owned the Denver copy for decades.  When the Allentown copy became available he went to see it.  It was far nicer than the Denver, so John being John & wanting the best copy, he took the plunge. The Mile High copy had been restored so he had no interest in it.

He felt the Denver was an 8.5 or possibly a 9.0.  He was over the moon when it graded out a 9.0 & he sold it to help cover the cost of the Allentown purchase.  It was then pressed to a 9.2.  It was then regraded a 3rd time as a 9.4 (not sure if it was pressed again). John was upset about this for 2 reasons.

1st, it's obviously worth way more as a 9.2 or 9.4 than it was as a 9.0 when he sold it.

I have never understood a seller being upset that a book is sold for more or is CPRed to grade higher and now worth more than what the original seller sold it for.  It wasn't like John couldn't have CPRed or pressed to begin with.  I had met John a couple of times at shows and was a customer of his auctions and he always was very nice to me.  

2nd, he felt the Allentown was FAR superior to the Denver, but the Denver was now a 9.4 & his Allentown a 9.6. 

Such label fixation and analness.

But, John being John, took these lemons & made lemonade.  He went to cgc and argued his case explaining how superior the Allentown was.  It was then regraded a 9.8. 

Good lord, I hope this isn't true or at least CGC did not grade it subject to John's feelings.  If so, CGC's integrity and supposed objectiveness is sorely lacking and awash down the grading drain.

 

That's the story John told me.

 

[G.A.tor]

Someone would have to correct me if I’m wrong but I believe John told me it took several subs to get the Allentown into a 9.8. He implied he had it pressed but never specifically told me 

[Crowzilla]

14 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

Someone would have to correct me if I’m wrong but I believe John told me it took several subs to get the Allentown into a 9.8. He implied he had it pressed but never specifically told me 

So it's kind of like "three weeks a ago, I thought this was a 9.6, last week I thought this was a 9.6, but now that I am looking at if for the 3rd time it is quite clearly a 9.8"?

Or is it just a case of: now that we've collected $15K in grading fees instead of a mere $5K, we'll go ahead and give you a better grade

[fishbone]

On 5/23/2019 at 1:26 PM, sfcityduck said:

And here's my questions:

(1) I sort of think its a generous 9.4 based on the heritage picture (left corners top and bottom, ), anyone else agree?

(2) Would it benefit from a press?  (top left corner, page misalignment)

Duck, I am SO with you on this !

[G.A.tor]

23 minutes ago, Crowzilla said:

So it's kind of like "three weeks a ago, I thought this was a 9.6, last week I thought this was a 9.6, but now that I am looking at if for the 3rd time it is quite clearly a 9.8"?

Or is it just a case of: now that we've collected $15K in grading fees instead of a mere $5K, we'll go ahead and give you a better grade

Or maybe it took a couple of presses to remove the downgraded flaws? Not sure we will ever know as everything is hearsay (including my account)

Edited May 24, 2019 by G.A.tor

[buttock]

1 hour ago, Crowzilla said:

So it's kind of like "three weeks a ago, I thought this was a 9.6, last week I thought this was a 9.6, but now that I am looking at if for the 3rd time it is quite clearly a 9.8"?

Or is it just a case of: now that we've collected $15K in grading fees instead of a mere $5K, we'll go ahead and give you a better grade

How many times was the 9.0 Action 1 resubmitted?  Include pressing fees & it's like printing money. 

[G.A.tor]

16 minutes ago, buttock said:

How many times was the 9.0 Action 1 resubmitted?  Include pressing fees & it's like printing money. 

At least 3 is my understanding. 8.0 to 8.5 to 8.5 to 9.0

[Crowzilla]

2 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

At least 3 is my understanding. 8.0 to 8.5 to 8.5 to 9.0

Can't you just press it once for a longer period of time and save five-figures of submission fees? If the answer is always "let's press it again", I would start to ask why can't it be pressed right the first time?

[G.A.tor]

5 minutes ago, Crowzilla said:

Can't you just press it once for a longer period of time and save five-figures of submission fees? If the answer is always "let's press it again", I would start to ask why can't it be pressed right the first time?

Does make you wonder. I had a book pressed 8.0 to 8.5. 

After a while , seeing it in 8.5 holder It was suggested it needed to be pressed, so hopeful for a 9.0 I agreed. Came back 8.5 again. 

A year later suggested I press it. Sure, why not. Got a 8.5 again. So sometimes books look like a press will fix but it doesn’t. And then maybe it might. Don’t know. 

[sfcityduck]

3 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

I had a book pressed 8.0 to 8.5. 

After a while , seeing it in 8.5 holder It was suggested it needed to be pressed, so hopeful for a 9.0 I agreed. Came back 8.5 again. 

A year later suggested I press it. Sure, why not. Got a 8.5 again. 

This brings to mind the quote of a famous Texan:  “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”

[N e r V]

I just think it all proves Einstein was wrong.

 

Clearly you can do the same thing over and over again and get different results...

sometimes...

depending on the book...

 

[G.A.tor]

3 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

This brings to mind the quote of a famous Texan:  “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”

Some books clearly have visible tales in the slab that would lead one to believe a pressing will improve, only to realize after it won’t 

[Crowzilla]

9 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

Some books clearly have visible tales in the slab that would lead one to believe a pressing will improve, only to realize after it won’t 

My question is shouldn't the person doing the first pressing notice these defects and put the book back in the presser for you? Seems like a quality job is not always being accomplished - unless being in a slab gives rise to press-able defects.

[G.A.tor]

2 minutes ago, Crowzilla said:

My question is shouldn't the person doing the first pressing notice these defects and put the book back in the presser for you? Seems like a quality job is not always being accomplished - unless being in a slab gives rise to press-able defects.

You would think 

[tth2]

13 hours ago, Timely said:

He felt the Denver was an 8.5 or possibly a 9.0.  He was over the moon when it graded out a 9.0 & he sold it to help cover the cost of the Allentown purchase.  It was then pressed to a 9.2.  It was then regraded a 3rd time as a 9.4 (not sure if it was pressed again).

Man I love this hobby! 

13 hours ago, Timely said:

But, John being John, took these lemons & made lemonade.  He went to cgc and argued his case explaining how superior the Allentown was.  It was then regraded a 9.8.

I really freally freaking love this hobby!

[tth2]

On 5/24/2019 at 3:58 AM, G.A.tor said:

A boardie owns the Denver 9.4

You mean a boardie owns the Denver 9.0 9.2 9.4.

[tth2]

12 hours ago, batman_fan said:

13 hours ago, comicdonna said:

This is why you buy the book, and not the label.  

Unfortunately they are a package deal ...

I'm still waiting for a dealer to tell me "The label says 9.4, but the book looks like it's only a 9.0, so tell you what, I'll sell it to you at a 9.0 price."