What's your greatest CGC disappointment? 1 1

[Domo Arigato]

8 minutes ago, BlowUpTheMoon said:

How does he when the massive color breaking creases in a good chunk of them occurred?

I wasn't sure I understood your question.....but I'm thinking you meant for "know" to be the the fourth word in your post.

If so.....that's a good question.  The damage could have been done by the presser.

Edited May 16, 2021 by Domo Arigato
And yes....greggy is still a dork

[Jesse-Lee]

My disappointment is in myself cruising eBay after a few bourbons and putting in best offers on slabs that I assume won't get accepted, then waking up and finding out I owe someone money and I lacked the discipline to stick to my collecting goals... Luckily it doesn't happen often, but it has happened!

[Silver_Couch_Surfer]

2 hours ago, TC179 said:

 

You should check the grader notes on that Marc Spector Moon Knight 57.  I just got back 3 of these with a 9.6 and the grader notes say scratch on the back bottom right side on all 3.  It was clearly not a scratch, but instead a light printed line right from the press.  I sent back all 3 for appearance review with proof from Ebay listings that show that this particular issue has the same printed line in the same exact spot.  Huge disappointment...

No notes unfortunately. I'm looking at my copy, I can see the printed line you're referring to. Please keep me posted! 

I feel ya man, super frustrating..

[lou_fine]

On 5/7/2021 at 1:38 PM, Popeyeak49 said:

When I submitted this I was expecting a 9.4. Sent it in un-pressed and the grader’s notes indicated finger bends on the front cover and a crease on the back cover (which I can’t see). It’s the nicest 7.5 I’ve ever seen…

Well, from checking on the CGC serial number here, it would appear that you submitted this book in for grading just last year and sadly, made the classic mistake of NOT playing the game according to CGC's rules and got punished for it accordingly. 

After all, with Matt it's all about those tiny near invisible NCB ticks and creases (i.e. additional revenue generating defects) which you can see only with the book held up at a certain angle to the light which he hammered, as opposed to those horrid looking misaligned off-centered (i.e. non-additional revenue generating defects) books which you could see clear across the convention floor which he gave a free pass to.       

With Matt now firmly in charge of CGC grading since he moved over from the CCS side of the operations back in 2016, if you don't at least send your book in for a pre-screen for pressing at a minimum (for an additional fee of course ), you and your book will be taken out behind the woodshed and be given your just and deserved dues accordingly upon grading.       

Edited May 17, 2021 by lou_fine

[rexinnih]

5 hours ago, Jesse-Lee said:

My disappointment is in myself cruising eBay after a few bourbons and putting in best offers on slabs that I assume won't get accepted, then waking up and finding out I owe someone money and I lacked the discipline to stick to my collecting goals... Luckily it doesn't happen often, but it has happened!

Substitute Bourbon with beer and I've had one or two similar experiences 

[musicmeta]

Bought an Amazing Spider-man #50. Thought it had a decent shot at a 9.2/9.4.  Came back 9.4.....restored! Had trimming!   
 

[Inhuman Fiend]

22 hours ago, Jesse-Lee said:

My disappointment is in myself cruising eBay after a few bourbons and putting in best offers on slabs that I assume won't get accepted, then waking up and finding out I owe someone money and I lacked the discipline to stick to my collecting goals... Luckily it doesn't happen often, but it has happened!

It's happened to the best of us! 

[Tnexus]

On 5/16/2021 at 3:25 PM, BlowUpTheMoon said:

How does know  he when the massive color breaking creases in a good chunk of them occurred?

Well I should clarify, the top book had a large color breaking crease which was a Star Wars Tales 23 that was very likely a 9.8. It affected up to 4 books. Subsequent books the crease got less. Two failed prescreen that had color breaks and two got 9.6s that didnt break color. I didn't actually notice the 9.6 creases until a few months later when packaging up to sell. You could line up the books and the creases all lined up.

Can I say for sure these were damaged at CGC? No, but they did just come from CFP and were hand delivered for grading. And I trust Joey way more to handle books with care than CGC. This was also the same batch that CGC encapsulated one comic with a large dust bunny on the cover and another than I'm still not sure isn't a Sharpie mark. (The mark moves with the book. Book got a 9.6 so it definitely is something post grading.)

[Gary Strange]

Probably a NM Monster of Frankenstein #1 I bought raw from a dealer at a local comic show who wouldn’t budge on the price that came back at a purple label 9.2. 

Edited May 17, 2021 by Gary Strange

[Number 6]

Ugh, I think I just got one of my greatest CGC disappointments in the mail today. 
 

I told myself I was going to dial it back....but then one of bucket-list books comes along and I decide to go for it. Everything looked on point in the seller’s scans...but in hand was another story. 
 

Looked up the cert and it was graded last month. Hard to believe it was just a few months ago and everyone was howling about CGC being too strict. Now I guess the pendulum has swung hard opposite. 
 

Is consistency too much to ask?  

[JazzMan]

On 5/16/2021 at 7:13 AM, Iconic1s said:

Not sure if I should be disappointed in CGC or myself but this is my most disappointing submission so far.

Bought this raw off the wall of a LCS about 8 years ago for $50.00.  My guess was that it was in the 9.0 range... I was more concerned about the PQ.  Sent it through CCS the end of last year and grade date was this year.

Even with a loupe I still don’t see the crease or the staining.  Not an authority enough on this age of books to accuse anyone of making a mistake.  Just seems to look too good for a 5.5 though!  At least it has WP!!

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I think the back cover kills the grade.  It's happened to me.

[rakehell]

On 5/15/2021 at 9:12 PM, MR SigS said:

A few years ago I purchased the ASM #1 CGC 2.0 that MCS had up for some time iirc. The obvious red flags are the cut out pieces from the cover. The logo clearly rules out the GRR version, so the question remained if it was a pence copy. Naturally I wasn't going to crack it out myself, even though the comic had been discussed on these forums with images. After some communication between MCS and CGC, I sent it to MCS who then sent it to CGC to verify the indicia shows it to be a US copy. I also requested that if it is, I wanted it returned raw so I can see it for myself and show others. If it was a pence, MCS would replace with another copy they had that we both felt was agreeably comparable. 

FYI, all UK Pence Price Variants were printed in the US with a US cents priced indicia. If the price is missing from the cover, there is literally no way to know for certain what price was originally on the cover. The inside pages of the comics all came from the same print run, so are identical. The only change, especially with the earlier Silver Age books was the price slug on the cover. A few UKPPV books were printed with L. Miller or Thorpe & Porter distribution blurbs above or below the indicia, but the price in the indicia was still cents. Interestingly, a couple of early SA cents books were also printed with the L. Miller blurb, but I can't recall which ones off the top of my mildly throbbing brain. Marwood's done some sterling research on this topic. 

[Get Marwood & I]

10 hours ago, rakehell said:

FYI, all UK Pence Price Variants were printed in the US with a US cents priced indicia. If the price is missing from the cover, there is literally no way to know for certain what price was originally on the cover. The inside pages of the comics all came from the same print run, so are identical. The only change, especially with the earlier Silver Age books was the price slug on the cover.

I appreciate the research praise Rachel, but that isn't correct for ASM #1. 

Mr Sigs purchased a slabbed ASM #1 from MCS which had the price and cover month clipped, making it impossible to determine if the book was a cents or pence copy (The Golden Record Reprint can be dismissed by the alternate back cover)

There are three differences between the UKPV and cents copy of ASM #1:

1. UK Cover price
2. Missing month
3. Additional UK indicia detail (Thorpe & Porter)

My pm advice to Mr Sigs at the time was to send the book back to CGC and get them to confirm from the indicia which type his copy was. He did, pointing them to the differences I had outlined, and they said it was the US version. But they reslabbed it without providing any physical evidence so Mr Sigs was left in the same position, wondering whether CGC had correctly identified the absence of the UK indicia. He was expected to take their word for it, even though there was no other plausible reason on the table as to why someone would clip the price and cover month from the book:

  
           UKPV 9d Price             UKPV Cover Month Absent

All CGC had to do was to crack the slab, free the comic, look at the indicia, and see which of the two it was:

 
                       UKPV Thorpe & Porter Indica                                     US Indicia (No T&P)

If I were CGC I would have at least taken a photo as evidence to show that the UK indicia was not present. 

@MR SigS let me know if I got any of that wrong

 

[B2D327]

On 5/7/2021 at 8:42 PM, Buzzetta said:

I have seen Green label 9.8's with unwitnessed signatures.  I don't think I have seen a 9.6 with a detached cover until tonight. 

I was surprised at that too a few months ago when there was a Daredevil 158 on eBay with the same 9.6 graded green label for a detached cover at top staple. Never thought they could grade that high with that flaw but to my understanding, the label is green though graded as if the flaw wasn’t there but would grade significantly lower universal at the submitter’s request

[rakehell]

5 hours ago, Get Marwood & I said:

I appreciate the research praise Rachel, but that isn't correct for ASM #1. 

Ah. Thank you Dolores. I stand/sit/recline (delete as appropriate) corrected. 

[SuperBird]

I sent in a copy of SHIELD 7 (Steranko), which I swear was the nicest copy of any vintage book I ever held in my hands. I didn't want to assume a 9.8, but figured 9.4 was a shoo-in, and 9.6 likely. 

It came back a 7.5, and I got so mad I took it from the CGC mailer box and threw it right in the trash. 

(FWIW, all my other submissions have come back within 1 increment of my pre-submission estimation)

Edited May 18, 2021 by SuperBird

[MR SigS]

8 hours ago, Get Marwood & I said:

I appreciate the research praise Rachel, but that isn't correct for ASM #1. 

Mr Sigs had an ASM #1 slabbed which had the price and cover month clipped, making it impossible to determine if the book was a cents or pence copy (The Golden Record Reprint can be dismissed by the alternate back cover)

There are three differences between the UKPV and cents copy of ASM #1:

1. UK Cover price
2. Missing month
3. Additional UK indicia detail (Thorpe & Porter)

My pm advice to Mr Sigs at the time was to send the book back to CGC and get them to confirm from the indicia which type his copy was. He did, pointing them to the differences I had outlined, and they said it was the US version. But they reslabbed it without providing any physical evidence so Mr Sigs was left in the same position, wondering whether CGC had correctly identified the absence of the UK indicia. He was expected to take their word for it, even though there was no other plausible reason on the table as to why someone would clip the price and cover month from the book:

  
           UKPV 9d Price             UKPV Cover Month Absent

All CGC had to do was to crack the slab, free the comic, look at the indicia, and see which of the two it was:

 
                       UKPV Thorpe & Porter Indica                                     US Indicia (No T&P)

If I were CGC I would have at least taken a photo as evidence to show that the UK indicia was not present. 

@MR SigS let me know if I got any of that wrong

 

All correct, though it's more accurate that I purchased the slab, rather than, "had an ASM #1 slabbed..."

Just in case someone wonders why I didn't look  before subbing.

[Get Marwood & I]

35 minutes ago, MR SigS said:

All correct, though it's more accurate that I purchased the slab, rather than, "had an ASM #1 slabbed..."

Just in case someone wonders why I didn't look  before subbing.

Sorry SigS, I've amended my post to reflect that fact. 

[Bludriver]

I have never sent in a book to CGC and will not be doing so in the immediate future. I am not crazy about their inconsistency. I also don't agree with how much or little they downgrade for certain flaws, but I would not mind that as much if they were at least consistent.

I once bought a silver age book that was 9.6 and when I received it I was shocked at how many flaws it had on the front cover (I should have asked for more/better photos, that taught me to never go by the grade). The best I would have given it was 9.0/9.2. Then I have another 9.6 silver age book and it looks almost perfect. That inconsistency really bothers me.

Edited May 18, 2021 by Bludriver

[lou_fine]

1 hour ago, SuperBird said:

It came back a 7.5, and I got so mad I took it from the CGC mailer box and threw it right in the trash. 

Did you check the Grader's Notes to see the possible reason(s) why, especially since the notes are supposedly free of charge if you are the submittor?