• 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.

No More CGC Submissions for me
3 3

Started by cigars&comix,

222 posts in this topic

Domo Arigato

Domo Arigato

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, GomerPyleUSMC said:

Care to explain what is "silicon residue"?

 silicone residue  noun

sil·i·cone res·i·due | ˈsi-lə-ˌkōn ˈre-zə-ˌdü

Definition of silicone residue

: the remains of various polymeric organic silicone compounds that are left on Greggy after he inflates and "gets to know" his girlfriend.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
greggy

greggy

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Domo Arigato said:

 silicone residue  noun

sil·i·cone res·i·due | ˈsi-lə-ˌkōn ˈre-zə-ˌdü

Definition of silicone residue

: the remains of various polymeric organic silicone compounds that are left on Greggy after he inflates and "gets to know" his girlfriend.

 

:banana:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tarn Kronos

Tarn Kronos

Posted
Posted

Ok...some good feedback I see above, but take a look at these two books and tell me all you self proclaimed "experienced" graders and agree or not with the grade that CGC gave this 9.2...please?   I will also sent a link for the exact same book but graded in a 8.5....I see a lot of slop in Grading using these two books as evidence.   

Here's the 8.5 on Ghost rider 1  https://www.ebay.com/itm/GHOST-RIDER-1-CGC-8-5-WP-1st-SON-OF-SATAN-UNDER-GRADED-SEE-OUR-9-2-AUCTION-/283494880372?oid=283494568560

 

Here's the 9.2 on Ghost rider 1 and to me it looks much worse than a 9.2 but there seems to be no doubt when you look at it side by side to the 8.5.  thx

https://www.ebay.com/itm/GHOST-RIDER-1-CGC-9-2-WHITE-PAGES-1st-FIRST-SON-OF-SATAN-BEAUTIFUL-COPY-/283494568560?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l10137&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FlyingDonut

FlyingDonut

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Tarn Kronos said:

Ok...some good feedback I see above, but take a look at these two books and tell me all you self proclaimed "experienced" graders and agree or not with the grade that CGC gave this 9.2...please?   I will also sent a link for the exact same book but graded in a 8.5....I see a lot of slop in Grading using these two books as evidence.   

Here's the 8.5 on Ghost rider 1  https://www.ebay.com/itm/GHOST-RIDER-1-CGC-8-5-WP-1st-SON-OF-SATAN-UNDER-GRADED-SEE-OUR-9-2-AUCTION-/283494880372?oid=283494568560

 

Here's the 9.2 on Ghost rider 1 and to me it looks much worse than a 9.2 but there seems to be no doubt when you look at it side by side to the 8.5.  thx

https://www.ebay.com/itm/GHOST-RIDER-1-CGC-9-2-WHITE-PAGES-1st-FIRST-SON-OF-SATAN-BEAUTIFUL-COPY-/283494568560?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l10137&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true

 

Ok - with the caveat that you cannot grade from a scan....

the 8.5 has creases on the spine, especially on the top staple, has a little ding on the bottom left corner, and has a small stain on the top back cover. The 9.2 doesn't have the corner ding nor the back cover stain. Does have some spine creases, also on the top staple, but not as many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Supa-Bad-Mofo

Supa-Bad-Mofo

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, FlyingDonut said:

Ok - with the caveat that you cannot grade from a scan....

the 8.5 has creases on the spine, especially on the top staple, has a little ding on the bottom left corner, and has a small stain on the top back cover. The 9.2 doesn't have the corner ding nor the back cover stain. Does have some spine creases, also on the top staple, but not as many.

Yes! You beat me to it. The light stain URC, back cover is the culprit on the 8.5. There appears to be some very light transfer on the back cover as well.

Edited by Supa-Bad-Mofo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, FlyingDonut said:
23 minutes ago, Tarn Kronos said:

Ok...some good feedback I see above, but take a look at these two books and tell me all you self proclaimed "experienced" graders and agree or not with the grade that CGC gave this 9.2...please?   I will also sent a link for the exact same book but graded in a 8.5....I see a lot of slop in Grading using these two books as evidence.   

Here's the 8.5 on Ghost rider 1  https://www.ebay.com/itm/GHOST-RIDER-1-CGC-8-5-WP-1st-SON-OF-SATAN-UNDER-GRADED-SEE-OUR-9-2-AUCTION-/283494880372?oid=283494568560

 

Here's the 9.2 on Ghost rider 1 and to me it looks much worse than a 9.2 but there seems to be no doubt when you look at it side by side to the 8.5.  thx

https://www.ebay.com/itm/GHOST-RIDER-1-CGC-9-2-WHITE-PAGES-1st-FIRST-SON-OF-SATAN-BEAUTIFUL-COPY-/283494568560?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l10137&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true

 

Ok - with the caveat that you cannot grade from a scan....

Worth repeating.

You cannot grade from a scan.

24 minutes ago, Tarn Kronos said:

tell me all you self proclaimed "experienced" graders

Dayum. :whatthe:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number 6

Number 6

Posted
Posted
Just now, Supa-Bad-Mofo said:

Yes! You beat me to it. The light stains URC, back cover is the culprit on the 8.5. There appears to be some very light transfer on the back cover as well.

And there seems to be wear to the ink on the front cover along the spine of the 8.5 copy. 

Thought I'll agree that the 9.2 copy has a bit more color-breaking spine stress than I'd be comfortable with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted

Couple more pages, and this bears repeating as well:

It is ok to disagree with CGC's opinion.

Once more:

It is OK to disagree with CGC's opinion.

Back in the 00s, there was a TON of hooting and hollering over people cracking out slabs and listing books for sale at a higher grade, as if the CGC grade was THE grade of the book, and any deviance from that was evil.

Fast forward to 2016-present, and you find the same sort of nonsense on the CBCS forum: people AGHAST that someone would disagree with the number on the label, because THAT'S the correct grade!!

It was silly then, and it's silly now.

It depends ENTIRELY ON good faith...but if someone in GOOD FAITH disagrees with CGC's grade...there's nothing ethically wrong with cracking a slab and listing at a different grade.

Remember: the whole system only works if EVERYONE agrees on the grading. That requires everyone to be educated about what they're buying, and not just using the label as a crutch. It's why a LOT of people are really unhappy when they crack what (they don't know) is a gift grade, to get signed or whatnot, and the book comes back lower. Armed with education, you CAN buy the book, and not the label.

Granted, there are a ton bunch of people who can't be bothered to learn how to grade, and will rely solely on CGC's opinion anyways...but that's on them, and it's their loss.

And, believe it or not, CGC doesn't want people to just blindly accept their grading, either. They want everyone to agree. That's the only way this works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Supa-Bad-Mofo

Supa-Bad-Mofo

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Number 6 said:

And there seems to be wear to the ink on the front cover along the spine of the 8.5 copy. 

Thought I'll agree that the 9.2 copy has a bit more color-breaking spine stress than I'd be comfortable with. 

Yes. I'd agree that the 9.2 is on the lower spectrum of the grade. Probably just made the grade. I assume the pristine back cover, nice color, white pages and decent centering likely contributed to the books overall grade.

Edited by Supa-Bad-Mofo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Supa-Bad-Mofo said:

Yes. I'd agree that the 9.2 is on the lower spectrum of the grade. Probably just made the grade. I assume the pristine back cover, nice color and centering likely contributed to the books overall grade.

Eye appeal DOES factor into the grade...there's just no way to quantify it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LordRahl

LordRahl

Posted
Posted
On 6/1/2019 at 11:34 AM, lou_fine said:

Well, from observing the major auctions ever since the big Jon Berk Auction on CC a couple of summers ago, it's quite apparent to me that the prices realized would indicate a much greater acceptance for both Conserved and even Restored books relative to the early CGC days when everybody simply tried to avoid the PLOD's.  Of course, a Conserved copy of the same book in the same equivalent grade would most likely and should go for less than a Universal unrestored copy.  At the same time though, the Conserved copies of the same book in the same equivalent grade would also go for a premium to the Unrestored copy of the same book. 

In fact, with many of the HTF or classic cover GA books, it is common for Conserved copies to be selling for a huge premium or even multiples to guide.  The only Conserved book which I won the other year ended up costing me over 2X condition guide and which I still consider as a steal to this day. :luhv:  These types of premiums or even multiples are definitely not as common for the restored copies, although there are still many that do sell for premiums to guide.  Definitely still more than before when it was limited more to books like Action 13, Cap 3, or even Amazing-Man #26 where I still remember a restored CGC 2.5 graded PLOD copy with a guide valuation of only $198 at the time selling for a rather astounding $6,300 back about 8 years ago.  :whatthe:  :whatthe:

As for CGC being harsh on defects such as stains, is it possible that they just might want to entice you to use their additional revenue generating "cleaning" services to help that book maximize its potential a little bit more?  hm  lol

Going to answer your question as if you’re being serious although I assume you’re actually joking. But no, it is not possible. The number of books with stains that can be removed with chemical washing, which would get a PLOD previously and a Conserved now, which would be worth enough that the fee for the restoration would be justified is pretty small. Chemical washing is considerably more expensive than pressing. Additionally, the bump in grade would have to be great enough to overcome the change in label color. The majority of books graded 8.0 Blue are worth more than a 9.4 PLOD and probably Grey as well. You have to remember that for 20 years a chemical washed book would have gotten a PLOD, the grey label is very recent. The bias against stains is not a recent phenomenon. Unlike pressing, the math does not work out in this scenario MOST of the time so... no it is not possible that CGC has been harsh on stains for 20 years so that the few hundred books that would actually work out financially to be solvent cleaned by them would generate a few thousand extra bucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
awakeintheashes

awakeintheashes

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Tarn Kronos said:

Ok...some good feedback I see above, but take a look at these two books and tell me all you self proclaimed "experienced" graders and agree or not with the grade that CGC gave this 9.2...please?   I will also sent a link for the exact same book but graded in a 8.5....I see a lot of slop in Grading using these two books as evidence.   

Here's the 8.5 on Ghost rider 1  https://www.ebay.com/itm/GHOST-RIDER-1-CGC-8-5-WP-1st-SON-OF-SATAN-UNDER-GRADED-SEE-OUR-9-2-AUCTION-/283494880372?oid=283494568560

 

Here's the 9.2 on Ghost rider 1 and to me it looks much worse than a 9.2 but there seems to be no doubt when you look at it side by side to the 8.5.  thx

https://www.ebay.com/itm/GHOST-RIDER-1-CGC-9-2-WHITE-PAGES-1st-FIRST-SON-OF-SATAN-BEAUTIFUL-COPY-/283494568560?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l10137&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true

 

WTTB

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
3 3
Go to topic listing