How common is this in our hobby? 1 1

[duplicatecomics]

On 10/26/2019 at 10:24 PM, Black_Adam said:

As soon as I saw your post I was 99% sure it was Worldwide and proceeded from there. This isn't the first time their practice in regards to cracking out graded books and selling them as ungraded at a higher grade has been noted. There is nothing illegal about this - it isn't fraud - as grading is subjective and buyers should always buy the book, not the label. But hiding this info from a buyer while at the same time disclosing it on other comics listed on your site is highly questionable and, in my opinion, beneath the standards of our hobby.

I noticed WW typically does denote cracked books though, with their corresponding former grades? Or at least that's what I see on their site.

[Black_Adam]

1 hour ago, duplicatecomics said:

I noticed WW typically does denote cracked books though, with their corresponding former grades? Or at least that's what I see on their site.

They have many cracked books listed and noted as such, which makes the omission even more suspect when they elect not to note it on a listing for a cracked comic.

[WoWitHurts]

On 10/26/2019 at 8:47 PM, gino2paulus2 said:

Look at this from the stance of my original post. This was never meant to be about any one book specifically I’ve been pretty crystal about that with more than one post. It was an example used with the the fewest amount of specifics as I could to get my question across which was, “is this a common practice in the GA community to crack and relist” and my question was answered by a few folks. This can turn into the subjectivity of grading and OS vs CGC grading standards that’s fine by me. Ive never done business with Worldwide this wasnt meant to be about them and to be quite honest this won’t deter me from doing so in the future either if they have a tough book I need at what I can live with price wise I’m a buyer whether that is raw or slabbed I agree with the old adage buy the book not just the label and I put a premium on cover presentation first and foremost. Everyone has their likes and dislikes, phobias of certain flaws etc this wasn’t meant to be about that but i’m ok if it goes there it is always an interesting debate. Crack and relist without mention of just being cracked was my question and any specifics used in this story were only meant to paint a picture 👍

 

I see no problem with what is being described. CGC has an opinion and sometimes people disagree with them. If you disagree with them and discard their opinion that's fine by me. Do you agree with the CGC grade or the WW grade? I have passed on many CGC graded books and passed on purchasing as I felt they were gift grades. I have done the same with dealers. 

If I buy a book from a dealer or someone on the boards described as 9.2 raw and I get it and it is 9.4 all day long and I choose to sell it what do I need to disclose? "Bought from Fred as 9.2 but I think it is 9.4" and who did Fred by it from and what was their grade.

CGC is good but not infallible. We do not need to kiss their ring on everything.

Most copper high grade raw books I look at from certain people are failed pre-screens I suspect.

 

[RareHighGrade]

The argument that "reasonable minds could differ regarding the grade" is really not the point, nor an argument to support nondisclosure.  When CGC grades a book, most experienced collectors have at least a general understanding of what that grade means.  Therefore, if CGC grades a book as a 6.0, collectors typically know what to expect.  But when a dealer grades a de-slabbed CGC 6.0 as a 7.0 without disclosing the CGC grade, although the 7.0 may align with the dealer's subjective view, it does not necessarily align with what a buyer is expecting.  On the other hand, if the dealer discloses the prior CGC grade - while perhaps explaining why he subjectively grades it higher - the buyer at least has a benchmark from which to make an informed decision.  

[G.A.tor]

I don't think Ritter is on the boards, but I know a little bit about his business model from our previous discussions ( I don't think it is a secret). One part of his model is to identify books that have upgradable flaws (certified or raw), crack them and fix those flaws (via pressing, or reattaching with tape, etc).

He then sells the "improved" book at the grade he feels it is (and he is pretty darn accurate, from my experience) and a price relative to the grade...

I've never known him to just crack a book and inflate grade/price...I've viewed a ton of these type raw books he offers (why pay for grading, as that cuts into the profit margin) ...he always "improves" the grade somehow...

 

Edited October 29, 2019 by G.A.tor

[Callaway29]

Hate the idea of people cracking & taping for a grade bump.

[bounty_coder]

How does taping create a grade bump? That is counter intuitive to me. 
 

[Comicdey]

2 hours ago, G.A.tor said:

I don't think Ritter is on the boards, but I know a little bit about his business model from our previous discussions ( I don't think it is a secret). One part of his model is to identify books that have upgradable flaws (certified or raw), crack them and fix those flaws (via pressing, or reattaching with tape, etc).

He then sells the "improved" book at the grade he feels it is (and he is pretty darn accurate, from my experience) and a price relative to the grade...

I've never known him to just crack a book and inflate grade/price...I've viewed a ton of these type raw books he offers (why pay for grading, as that cuts into the profit margin) ...he always "improves" the grade somehow...

 

It’s hard to defend the approach of improved grades but at the end of the day the collectors desire is to have all information available to them.  Information is power when buying or selling.  

 

Buy the book not the label is the key.   If the price works for you then grab it.  Return it if not as described.   

[jimbo_7071]

On 10/29/2019 at 3:43 PM, bounty_coder said:

How does taping create a grade bump? That is counter intuitive to me. 
 

It shouldn't, but it used to. However, CGC changed the way it treated tape several years ago. I don't think it's still possible to get a grade bump by taping a book. It's still possible to get a grade bump by pressing a book even if the book looks worse after the press; that's because CGC gives undue weight to how flat a book lies--so much weight that even if the cover shrinks and stress lines appear around the staples (making the book look like junk), the book will still get a grade bump.

ETA: Check the slabbing date of any book that has tape. There are many taped books out there that were graded before CGC changed the way it treated tape; those books would receive lower grades today.

Edited November 1, 2019 by jimbo_7071

[gino2paulus2]

On 10/29/2019 at 1:33 PM, G.A.tor said:

I don't think Ritter is on the boards, but I know a little bit about his business model from our previous discussions ( I don't think it is a secret). One part of his model is to identify books that have upgradable flaws (certified or raw), crack them and fix those flaws (via pressing, or reattaching with tape, etc).

He then sells the "improved" book at the grade he feels it is (and he is pretty darn accurate, from my experience) and a price relative to the grade...

I've never known him to just crack a book and inflate grade/price...I've viewed a ton of these type raw books he offers (why pay for grading, as that cuts into the profit margin) ...he always "improves" the grade somehow...

 

Good info to know Rick thanks man 👍

[gino2paulus2]

On 10/29/2019 at 8:40 AM, WoWitHurts said:

I see no problem with what is being described. CGC has an opinion and sometimes people disagree with them. If you disagree with them and discard their opinion that's fine by me. Do you agree with the CGC grade or the WW grade? I have passed on many CGC graded books and passed on purchasing as I felt they were gift grades. I have done the same with dealers. 

If I buy a book from a dealer or someone on the boards described as 9.2 raw and I get it and it is 9.4 all day long and I choose to sell it what do I need to disclose? "Bought from Fred as 9.2 but I think it is 9.4" and who did Fred by it from and what was their grade.

CGC is good but not infallible. We do not need to kiss their ring on everything.

Most copper high grade raw books I look at from certain people are failed pre-screens I suspect.

 

I don’t think I ever implied kissing anyone’s ring by any stretch of the imagination but when it comes to grading comic books CGC is viewed as a standard whether you agree with it or not and there is absolutely no arguing that. For your example of raw grades I guess yes I would disclose that if I used the spare a grade section and it depends who gave their opinion on the grade. Was it my opinion (someone who’s collected comics for years to read and appreciate but never really got too much into looking at books and counting spine ticks on high grade books as I collect rags anyways) or is it someone like Roy @VintageComics who is renowned for his subjectivity and accuracy to the pinpoint grade because if I bought a book from him raw and resold the answer is absolutely yes I would disclose his opinion whether mine was .2 away from his or not. In a market where 1 full point can make the difference in hundreds to hundreds of thousands of dollars the information is what is ultimately the most important. So here is a question for you using your own example. I don’t swim in this pool or collect near mint books but have always highly respected those that do as it adds an entirely new later to the equation of collecting. Let’s say you buy an AF15 in a CGC 9.0 and you pay about 400K for said book. You get the book and think it looks nicer more like a 9.4 and are pumped. Are you cool cracking the book and listing it as a 9.4 raw with a new price of 700K because that’s at least what it’s worth now in your subjective grade and if you do list it you are telling me you wouldn’t mention that you just cracked it as soon as you got it in the mail, list it’s flaws, and why you think the book is better than the grade it was assigned by one of the hobbies largest standards in grading? 

[fifties]

9 hours ago, gino2paulus2 said:

Let’s say you buy an AF15 in a CGC 9.0 and you pay about 400K for said book. You get the book and think it looks nicer more like a 9.4 and are pumped. Are you cool cracking the book and listing it as a 9.4 raw with a new price of 700K because that’s at least what it’s worth now in your subjective grade and if you do list it you are telling me you wouldn’t mention that you just cracked it as soon as you got it in the mail, list it’s flaws, and why you think the book is better than the grade it was assigned by one of the hobbies largest standards in grading? 

Why would that disclosure be necessary?  Like you, I don't swim in the big boy's pond AFA multi-thousand dollar books, but the concept is the same at any price level.  I'v bought books from Metropolis numerous times, and do I agree with the grading they use?  Hell no, and they are possibly the biggest comic book dealer in the country, but that doesn't make them infallible. Once one buys a book it's his to do with as he pleases, including jail breaking it out and assigning his own subjective grade.  Just because CGC graded it doesn't have to make any more importance than if an experienced collector or retail dealer had done it.  CGC grading is simply an available standard, to be used or not.

[gino2paulus2]

7 hours ago, fifties said:

Why would that disclosure be necessary?  Like you, I don't swim in the big boy's pond AFA multi-thousand dollar books, but the concept is the same at any price level.  I'v bought books from Metropolis numerous times, and do I agree with the grading they use?  Hell no, and they are possibly the biggest comic book dealer in the country, but that doesn't make them infallible. Once one buys a book it's his to do with as he pleases, including jail breaking it out and assigning his own subjective grade.  Just because CGC graded it doesn't have to make any more importance than if an experienced collector or retail dealer had done it.  CGC grading is simply an available standard, to be used or not.

Yes and it is a standard that all of us have at our disposal to level the playing field. Again no one is saying you have to agree with the grade my friend but the standard was used in this case. Why not disclose? What could it hurt? Let the buyer decide with the all the available information unless you are hiding something and intentionally being shady. 

Here is a fun question. How often do you think people who do this (crack and re-list with, "their grade" without including CGCs assigned grade) list the book at a LOWER grade than what CGC assigned ??  Come on...be honest now. 

[shadroch]

I recently bought a SA book listed as a 5.0. When I had it in hand, I'd call it a 3.5, maybe a 4. Expressed my dissatisfaction to the seller who promptly sent me a scan of the book next to a label. He says it's the cracked out book and CGC called it a 5.0. For all I know, he has a dozen of this common, yet expensive, book in stock and pulls the label argument / trick each time he sells a copy. I kept the book as it was an okay price for the grade, but I only bought it because it was originally a bargain.  I don't know if he was honest about the book or not. He's got a good reputation but everyone has ,until they get caught.

 

[jimbo_7071]

19 hours ago, gino2paulus2 said:

I don’t think I ever implied kissing anyone’s ring by any stretch of the imagination but when it comes to grading comic books CGC is viewed as a standard whether you agree with it or not and there is absolutely no arguing that. For your example of raw grades I guess yes I would disclose that if I used the spare a grade section and it depends who gave their opinion on the grade. Was it my opinion (someone who’s collected comics for years to read and appreciate but never really got too much into looking at books and counting spine ticks on high grade books as I collect rags anyways) or is it someone like Roy @VintageComics who is renowned for his subjectivity and accuracy to the pinpoint grade because if I bought a book from him raw and resold the answer is absolutely yes I would disclose his opinion whether mine was .2 away from his or not. In a market where 1 full point can make the difference in hundreds to hundreds of thousands of dollars the information is what is ultimately the most important. So here is a question for you using your own example. I don’t swim in this pool or collect near mint books but have always highly respected those that do as it adds an entirely new later to the equation of collecting. Let’s say you buy an AF15 in a CGC 9.0 and you pay about 400K for said book. You get the book and think it looks nicer more like a 9.4 and are pumped. Are you cool cracking the book and listing it as a 9.4 raw with a new price of 700K because that’s at least what it’s worth now in your subjective grade and if you do list it you are telling me you wouldn’t mention that you just cracked it as soon as you got it in the mail, list it’s flaws, and why you think the book is better than the grade it was assigned by one of the hobbies largest standards in grading? 

I wouldn't kiss CGC's ring, but if anything their grading usually seems loose to me. I haven't sold a raw book for several years, but when grading raw books that I see for sale on e-Bay, I use the original (early 90s) Overstreet Grading Guide. CGC's methods are different in that they don't seem to say that a particular defect is only allowable in a certain grade or below, etc., but in the range I typically collect (6.5--9.4), CGC usually seems to give books higher grades than someone using the guide would.

Therefore, if a dealer is even looser than CGC, that's a dealer I probably don't want to bother with unless he's selling one of my grails.

Edited November 1, 2019 by jimbo_7071

[fifties]

6 hours ago, gino2paulus2 said:

Yes and it is a standard that all of us have at our disposal to level the playing field. Again no one is saying you have to agree with the grade my friend but the standard was used in this case. Why not disclose? What could it hurt? Let the buyer decide with the all the available information unless you are hiding something and intentionally being shady. 

Here is a fun question. How often do you think people who do this (crack and re-list with, "their grade" without including CGCs assigned grade) list the book at a LOWER grade than what CGC assigned ??  Come on...be honest now. 

Anyone is going to try to get the best price he can.  If the CGC grade is lower, in his opinion, than what he would grade it as, of course he will leave it slabbed.  That's as honest as I can be.

[jimbo_7071]

6 hours ago, fifties said:

Anyone is going to try to get the best price he can.  If the CGC grade is lower, in his opinion, than what he would grade it as, of course he will leave it slabbed.  That's as honest as I can be.

True. I can't imagine selling a slabbed 8.0 book and saying, "This book probably should have been a 7.0; CGC went way too easy on the spine wear."

 

[Knightsofold]

On 10/26/2019 at 6:52 PM, Dr. Love said:

I'm sorry Gino if it feels like I'm trying to get you to throw Ritter under the bus.  At this point I'm interested in your point of view as a buyer of this type of material in this grade range.  Is an undisclosed detached cover a deal breaker, frowned upon, or just no big deal in the 1.0-2.5 grade range?

As a buyer, if a book arrived detached cover, I would first assume it was damaged in the mail/packaging, then I would assume once contacted, the seller could think I opened the book up and caused the detached cover.  All this from expecting detached cover to be noted.  

I often buy low grade GA books and a detached cover is perhaps the easiest defect to grade, but unless it’s cgc I suppose I shouldn’t expect that it’s noted.
 

All said, if the price I paid for the book seemed fair even with the detached cover I might just keep it and note the seller as someone to be more cautious with in the future.  

 

[Knightsofold]

On 10/30/2019 at 2:09 AM, jimbo_7071 said:

It shouldn't, but it used to. However, CGC changed the way it treated tape several years ago. I don't think it's still possible to get a grade bump by taping a book. It's still possible to get a grade bump by pressing a book even if the book looks worse after the press; that's because CGC gives undue weight to how flat a book lies--so much weight that even if the cover shrinks and stress lines appear around the staples (making the book look like junk), the book will still get a grade bump.

ETA: Check the slabbing date of any book that has tape. There are many taped books out there that were graded before CGC changed the way it treated tape; those books would receive lower grades today.

What was the date the grade regarding tape was changed?  Thanks.

[Knightsofold]

On 11/1/2019 at 6:20 AM, gino2paulus2 said:

Yes and it is a standard that all of us have at our disposal to level the playing field. Again no one is saying you have to agree with the grade my friend but the standard was used in this case. Why not disclose? What could it hurt? Let the buyer decide with the all the available information unless you are hiding something and intentionally being shady. 

Here is a fun question. How often do you think people who do this (crack and re-list with, "their grade" without including CGCs assigned grade) list the book at a LOWER grade than what CGC assigned ??  Come on...be honest now. 

I think of it this way, if you crack a book out and then try to sell it, you KNOW no one gives a F if you show the deslabbed label with the book.  That grade along with any other former grades (even hand written on a backing board by a reputable dealer) is considered useless to 99% of buyers.   That said, the rules of the game dictate the reverse for the seller.  

That said, if the buyer asks for info and finds out the answer given is a lie, then they’re untrustworthy and accepts and should expect exposure.  

I think if we as a community expect 100% disclosure of former grades from dealers, then we should expect former cgc grades to be printed on the label as well.  Now wouldn’t that be something?