CBCS CAME BACK A WHOLE GRADE LOWER 2 2

[Xenosmilus]

On 8/20/2020 at 5:52 PM, J-KComics said:

What is a CVA? LOL

Ugh, you just had to ask.. Get ready for a long thread about how useless it is 

 

[seanfingh]

First off - your logic is unassailable and well presented. But you look at things like an engineer - there is only one right way to build a bridge - so it doesn’t fall. Engineers often struggle in law school because they will often choose the “right” side of the argument and refuse to hear anything about the other side. They struggle because the goal is not to be right, it is to understand the nature of disputes, understanding that in any given situation you may get the plaintiff or the defendant, and you are going to have to deal with whatever you were dealt.

in your situation, you were so clearly the aggrieved party that it seems as if there is no counter argument. But what about the hundreds of books that get sent in where the people “swear” the book was perfect but their own poor grading, eyesight, knowledge or packing was really the culprit.

Your illustration of witnessing signatures also sounds unassailable as well. But if you are dealing with a doddering octogenarian- you are going to get some rough handling of books. You try to make a move at Stan Lee, Frank Frazetta or Joe Simon in that situation and you are likely going to face resistance from their people. 
 

Randall, you present excellent arguments. My position is that real life is just way too messy for your logician’s mentality.

[seanfingh]

1 minute ago, Dolt said:

That's alright, this thread is already long and useless 

D’oh

[Jimmy Linguini]

In 2017 I bought a ASM 129. I thought it was nice and I purchased it to flip. I sent it to CBCS. Why? I'm not sure but I had it pressed and sent it right to CBCS. It came back a 7.0.

"shoot" I thought to myself. "How am I going to get my money back? I thought this book was nicer than a 7.0!"

Dolph Lundgrin signing came up, I said screw it I already overpaid for it. Did not press it again.

It came back CGC 8.5.

 

[kimik]

On 8/20/2020 at 4:20 PM, J-KComics said:

Joe Giella

 

Looks like a bad pressing job (too much humidity) or slabbing job (slab too small or not tight) with all the waviness on the back cover. You will likely need to deal with that at some point.

[kimik]

On 9/3/2020 at 3:36 PM, TC33 said:

Love to hear from the CGC apologists, but the book was the same after as before, I will take the blame for not catching the microchip before cracking it open, I fully admit I should not have cracked it open had I caught it, I would have been more OK with the prior 8.5, but did not expect to get hit another 2 grade levels given how nice the rest of the book was with the resubmit of the same book.  Just got slammed by a different grader which is quite common in both directions if you ask around and my point is be careful cracking open any book, you are taking a big risk in re-grading and getting even the same grade it was given prior.  I had a pre-screen grade attached to the book to ensure 8.5, but somehow it got mixed up with another Av 55 book as I sent in several Av 55's at once and I might of had them out of order or something.   know there is nothing I can do with that one, no big deal and my stupidity for cracking it open to begin with although yes I was unhappy they would drop it 2 full grades (undeservedly) with the original label included. I knew this issue was not going anywhere with CGC based on their policy and thus this was not even one of the issues I even requested help/credit with in my follow up, just my bad luck and shared as food for thought as icing on the cake to a really bad submission experience!  All I really requested was a another resubmit for a green label as was requested and deserved and an accurate label on the very expensive resto book and they totally blew it on and this is how I took their response...we don't care about customer service, we grade how we want to grade and you are stuck with the results good or bad, right or wrong, so go pound sand.   That's not a good long term strategy for continued loyal customers, or in keeping a good long term reputation in my opinion, but if they are so busy that they can't even handle the volume they have (for now), I guess I understand it even though it seems extremely short sighted.    For long timers, none of this should be a shock, for others with fewer personal experiences like this, just food for thought.

What did the grader's notes say before and after? Posting them with the serial numbers would help your case.

Regardless, both companies are hit and miss in the mid grades. I bought two CBCS slabs earlier this year at a good discount to GPA to crack, press and resub to CGC thinking there would be a grade bump. The Silver Surfer #1 CBCS 6.0 came back CGC 5.0 (CGC was right, it was a fugly 6.0), and the FF #45 CBCS 7.5 came back CGC 6.5. The same thing happens with CGC older label books as well. I bought a collection a couple of years ago with nearly 300 CGC slabs from 2001 - 2006 in it, and a number of the books saw a downgrade after pressing and resubmitting by 0.5 - 1.0. Grading is subjective and changes over time. C'est la vie.

[William-James88]

54 minutes ago, kimik said:

What did the grader's notes say before and after? Posting them with the serial numbers would help your case.

Regardless, both companies are hit and miss in the mid grades. I bought two CBCS slabs earlier this year at a good discount to GPA to crack, press and resub to CGC thinking there would be a grade bump. The Silver Surfer #1 CBCS 6.0 came back CGC 5.0 (CGC was right, it was a fugly 6.0), and the FF #45 CBCS 7.5 came back CGC 6.5. The same thing happens with CGC older label books as well. I bought a collection a couple of years ago with nearly 300 CGC slabs from 2001 - 2006 in it, and a number of the books saw a downgrade after pressing and resubmitting by 0.5 - 1.0. Grading is subjective and changes over time. C'est la vie.

Why did you think there would be a grade bump on that silver surfer 1 6.0 which you also stated  was ugly for the grade?

[kimik]

20 minutes ago, William-James88 said:

Why did you think there would be a grade bump on that silver surfer 1 6.0 which you also stated  was ugly for the grade?

I bought it without scans from a dealer I buy a lot of books from. He said it should benefit from a press. It did not, unfortunately. There was a small faint stain that was not noted in the grader's notes.

IMHO, CGC's grading on stains and foxing has changed with changes in the grading team. They are are harsher now on certain defects than they were in the past, and easier on others. Grading is a subjective game, and results from CGC over time shows this. I have been submitting since 2001, and there are ebbs and flows in the tightness of grading.

Edited September 6, 2020 by kimik

[William-James88]

5 minutes ago, kimik said:

I bought it without scans from a dealer I buy a lot of books from. He said it should benefit from a press. It did not, unfortunately. There was a small faint stain that was not noted in the grader's notes.

IMHO, CGC's grading on stains and foxing has changed with changes in the grading team. They are are harsher now on certain defects than they were in the past, and easier on others. Grading is a subjective game, and results from CGC over time shows this. I have been submitting since 2001, and there are ebbs and flows in the tightness of grading.

Well CBCS was founded by earlier members of the CGC team so it makes sense that they would keep their initial grading standards and why older slabbed cgc books and currents slabbed cbcs books have similar grading criteria.

 

[Math Teacher]

Sending in a book for a signature or a resubmit involves risk. If you're not willing to assume that risk, then don't send in your book.

I feel that this is quite similar to the stock market. My financial planner can make recommendations until the cows come home, but there is NO guarantee that you will make money. Over the last five years, our investments have done quite well, even with the downturn at the end of 2018 and the pandemic of 2020. We only have one account that haven't made a contribution in that time period, and it has increased 26.3% over the last five years. If I average 5% growth (and historical averages show this is usually higher), I am pleased with that. Would I like to see 20% growth every year? Of course I would. But expecting that type of growth every year is VERY unrealistic.

[kimik]

3 hours ago, William-James88 said:

Well CBCS was founded by earlier members of the CGC team so it makes sense that they would keep their initial grading standards and why older slabbed cgc books and currents slabbed cbcs books have similar grading criteria.

 

And that is the reason that CBCS books tend to sell at a discount to CGC books in the same grade............

[TC33]

On 9/6/2020 at 3:49 PM, kimik said:

And that is the reason that CBCS books tend to sell at a discount to CGC books in the same grade............

That makes no sense.  Very early original CGC labels were universally known to have some of the tightest grades out there, so by your logic CBCS should have the tightest grades in the industry?  Case in point, so few old label CGC's exist now as most have been cracked open and resubmitted for higher grades.   The actual reason CGC sells for more is they have been around a lot longer and have better brand recognition, they are the 100 pound gorilla in the market.  Like Microsoft windows operating systems vs. some upstart like linux.  Even though the new guy has a great product, its not what many people know, although that may improve over time as CBCS seems like a good service that has good consistency with their grading, but they are still really small in comparison and need a longer track record (and better pricing to get more market share).   I hate that they basically copied CGC's pricing model, seems like being a newer service, that is where they could have made much more headway instead of gouging quite as much on the higher dollar books in the exact same tier level system and virtually the same cost as CGC; the much bigger and far longer time established company that typically yields higher returns and yet is essentially the same cost as the much smaller start up competitor.  

[Randall Ries]

On 9/6/2020 at 10:43 AM, seanfingh said:

First off - your logic is unassailable and well presented. But you look at things like an engineer - there is only one right way to build a bridge - so it doesn’t fall. Engineers often struggle in law school because they will often choose the “right” side of the argument and refuse to hear anything about the other side. They struggle because the goal is not to be right, it is to understand the nature of disputes, understanding that in any given situation you may get the plaintiff or the defendant, and you are going to have to deal with whatever you were dealt.

in your situation, you were so clearly the aggrieved party that it seems as if there is no counter argument. But what about the hundreds of books that get sent in where the people “swear” the book was perfect but their own poor grading, eyesight, knowledge or packing was really the culprit.

Your illustration of witnessing signatures also sounds unassailable as well. But if you are dealing with a doddering octogenarian- you are going to get some rough handling of books. You try to make a move at Stan Lee, Frank Frazetta or Joe Simon in that situation and you are likely going to face resistance from their people. 
 

Randall, you present excellent arguments. My position is that real life is just way too messy for your logician’s mentality.

I agree with you. I look at things through a perfect world lens. I assume that signers are aware that the books mean something to the person who wants them signed. Being in the biz for so long, it's a reasonable assumption. So, be careful with that book!

Also, people are probably sloppy with their packing. And there are all kinds of variables. I think these are all the reasons I won't send my books in to be graded or signed. I prefer the safe route where the books I buy are already graded and in some cases signed. The ones that aren't I can certainly store in top loaders and mylar. Selling has never been a top priority for collecting. Value certainly plays a big part in in, but not the end all/be all. Taking care of my stuff has always been a top priority. After all, I am emotionally invested in the books where unpackers, graders and signers are not.

[Randall Ries]

On 9/6/2020 at 1:14 PM, kimik said:

What did the grader's notes say before and after? Posting them with the serial numbers would help your case.

Regardless, both companies are hit and miss in the mid grades. I bought two CBCS slabs earlier this year at a good discount to GPA to crack, press and resub to CGC thinking there would be a grade bump. The Silver Surfer #1 CBCS 6.0 came back CGC 5.0 (CGC was right, it was a fugly 6.0), and the FF #45 CBCS 7.5 came back CGC 6.5. The same thing happens with CGC older label books as well. I bought a collection a couple of years ago with nearly 300 CGC slabs from 2001 - 2006 in it, and a number of the books saw a downgrade after pressing and resubmitting by 0.5 - 1.0. Grading is subjective and changes over time. C'est la vie.

I kind of wonder - with human nature being what it is - if some CGC graders already have it in their minds to punch out a book that was graded by CBCS. That whole competition thing. Maybe not consciously, but I wonder how many CBCS books that get subbed to CGC see a downgrade compared to an upgrade.

[William-James88]

27 minutes ago, Randall Ries said:

I kind of wonder - with human nature being what it is - if some CGC graders already have it in their minds to punch out a book that was graded by CBCS. That whole competition thing. Maybe not consciously, but I wonder how many CBCS books that get subbed to CGC see a downgrade compared to an upgrade.

From what I understand, graders are made unaware of where the book comes from, nor the value one listed, nor if it was recently cracked out of a CBCS or even CGC holder. Those cracking the comic are not those regrading it. 

[Randall Ries]

1 hour ago, William-James88 said:

From what I understand, graders are made unaware of where the book comes from, nor the value one listed, nor if it was recently cracked out of a CBCS or even CGC holder. Those cracking the comic are not those regrading it. 

Yeah, that's right. I forgot about that. I have two NM/M Swamp Things #7 signed by Wrightson that were discovered in a collection owned by someone in the biz. He would do work for different artists and they would sign some really cherry books for him. I just don't want them messed up in transport or mishandled. They really are nice books.

 

[Randall Ries]

[Chaos_in_Canada]

3 hours ago, TC33 said:

That makes no sense.  Very early original CGC labels were universally known to have some of the tightest grades out there, so by your logic CBCS should have the tightest grades in the industry?  Case in point, so few old label CGC's exist now as most have been cracked open and resubmitted for higher grades.   The actual reason CGC sells for more is they have been around a lot longer and have better brand recognition, they are the 100 pound gorilla in the market.  Like Microsoft windows operating systems vs. some upstart like linux.  Even though the new guy has a great product, its not what many people know, although that may improve over time as CBCS seems like a good service that has good consistency with their grading, but they are still really small in comparison and need a longer track record (and better pricing to get more market share).   I hate that they basically copied CGC's pricing model, seems like being a newer service, that is where they could have made much more headway instead of gouging quite as much on the higher dollar books in the exact same tier level system and virtually the same cost as CGC; the much bigger and far longer time established company that typically yields higher returns and yet is essentially the same cost as the much smaller start up competitor.  

Absolutely true. 

[kimik]

3 hours ago, TC33 said:

That makes no sense.  Very early original CGC labels were universally known to have some of the tightest grades out there, so by your logic CBCS should have the tightest grades in the industry?  Case in point, so few old label CGC's exist now as most have been cracked open and resubmitted for higher grades.   The actual reason CGC sells for more is they have been around a lot longer and have better brand recognition, they are the 100 pound gorilla in the market.  Like Microsoft windows operating systems vs. some upstart like linux.  Even though the new guy has a great product, its not what many people know, although that may improve over time as CBCS seems like a good service that has good consistency with their grading, but they are still really small in comparison and need a longer track record (and better pricing to get more market share).   I hate that they basically copied CGC's pricing model, seems like being a newer service, that is where they could have made much more headway instead of gouging quite as much on the higher dollar books in the exact same tier level system and virtually the same cost as CGC; the much bigger and far longer time established company that typically yields higher returns and yet is essentially the same cost as the much smaller start up competitor.  

Not quite. Some very early original CGC labels were tight. Others were not. After the complaints started pouring in from dealers, and collectors who felt they were hosed by the dealers after sending books to CGC and getting lower grades, CGC loosened things up. Then after it was too loose, they tightened up again. Every couple of years the pendulum swings the other way. That is why you buy the book and not the label.

For a very  short while PGX books were tighter than CGC and you could make good $$$ buying PGX books for a discount, straight resub them, and get a 0.5 - 2.0 grade bump without pressing or cleaning.

CBCS started out looser than CGC and it has hurt them, and I have not seen a change in their grading over time. The last HG CBCS book I bought was a 9.6 GL 87 (picked up last summer), but it looked worse than my CGC 9.4 so I sold it. I was hoping to change it to a CGC 9.6 label, but once I got it in hand it had not chance at that (small faint crease top right corner that did not break color since it is white). Maybe Beckett taking over will tighten their grading up.

Edited September 8, 2020 by kimik

[Randall Ries]

3 minutes ago, kimik said:

Not quite. Some very early original CGC labels were tight. Others were not. After the complaints started pouring in from dealers, and collectors who felt they were hosed by the dealers after sending books to CGC and getting lower grades, CGC loosened things up. Then after it was too loose, they tightened up again. Every couple of years the pendulum swings the other way. That is why you buy the book and not the label.

For a a very while PGX books were tighter than CGC and you could make good $$$ buying PGX books for a discount, straight resub them, and get a 0.5 - 2.0 grade bump without pressing or cleaning.

CBCS started out looser than CGC and it has hurt them, and I have not seen a change in their grading over time. The last HG CBCS book I bought was a 9.6 GL 87 (picked up last summer), but it looked worse than my CGC 9.4 so I sold it. I was hoping to change it to a CGC 9.6 label, but once I got it in hand it had not chance at that (small faint crease top right corner that did not break color since it is white). Maybe Beckett taking over will tighten their grading up.

Sort of makes sense CBCS would use the same paradigm as CGC since I understand they also were the creators of CGC.

I buy the book. I have gotten some fantastic looking books that were graded at 7.0-7.5 that are really nice looking. So I get a 9.0-9.2 looking issue for 7.0-7.5 prices.

 

Edited September 8, 2020 by Randall Ries