CGC vs. PGX

[sborock]

"Church and Larson to me are the only true pedigree's"

 

Mathman-

 

I appreciate all comments made about our company as long as they are for a positive change (oh, yeah, don't get me wrong, I like positive comments about the things CGC has also already done )

 

This statement you made about Pedigrees, really made me scratch my head.

 

Have you ever seen or owned a few S.F's, Penn copies, or even a Rockford? If not, you should try and check out some of them. All of these are considered pedigrees, by even some of the most vocal anti-pedigree hobbyists (The kind who believe that Pacific Coasts should not be a pedigree ). Many examples of these books blow away many of the Larsons. I am not knocking the Larsons (I like them quite a bit!), but I have owned and seen thousands of examples from all five of these (and many other pedigrees), and I do not believe the Larsons would make it on the list if I could only choose 2 (or even 3)collections to call pedigrees just based on condition and depth alone. Granted, many of the rockfords have a lower PQ than many of the Larsons, but no where near the foxing, dirt, and writing on them. Jon Berk ( jbcomicbox on these boards) loves Larsons (And rightly so! ), he can tell you a great deal more than I about them

 

I hope this helps

 

Have a great day!

-Steve

[MrBedrock]

Steve, I know what you are trying to say. And I am sure you know I respect you a great deal. But if you are going to start dumping on Larsons, even indirectly, we might have to throw down.

[sterlingcomics]

Mathman,

 

There is also some confusion from some collectors because "From the Collection of" is not the same as pedigrees. It's simply a notation that CGC provides for bulk/group encapsulation. There's simply no information I have that suggests that these types of books sell for a significant premium...unless of course, the book is truly scarce. I'm not sure if you are one of those collectors but just wanted to point it out just in case.

 

Your opinions about what is considered a "pedigree" and what isn't has been debated here on the boards...some good information if you mine for it.

[MathMan-migration]

Thanks guys for getting back with me. Hopefully I wasn't too harsh! I am so insecure with PGX that I have actually (on more than once occasion) bought a PGX book ,then cracked the case open and sent it of to CGC. I did this with my CGC Unrestored 7.0 Showcase 22.

 

 

[mr.schomburg]

So your worst fears came true, it didn't have restoration? What was the grade from PGX?

[MathMan-migration]

I didn't care that the grade dropped from a 8.0 to 7.0. CGC'd books not only sell a hell of a lot easier, but typically sell for a bit more money. When I bought the book at the Atlanta Comic Con I paid just a little over guide for it. I am still happy though. Most of you top of line Overstreet Advisors such as Vincent Zurzolo, Gary Dolgoff, and Chris Foss do not buy PGX books. Even if they happened to do so, after taking with two of them they told me that they would pay just straight guide. Why? Come to your own conclusion, mine is that they do not trust there whole authentification process.

[sborock]

Steve, I know what you are trying to say. And I am sure you know I respect you a great deal. But if you are going to start dumping on Larsons, even indirectly, we might have to throw down.

 

Never would dump on Larsons, even indirectly

 

BTW......Those look so nice only because Larson had them pressed and dry cleaned

[Jayman]

BTW......Those look so nice only because Larson had them pressed and dry cleaned

 

Now that is a

[MrBedrock]

BTW......Those look so nice only because Larson had them pressed and dry cleaned

 

Actually, they look so nice because you didn't note it on the label!

[mr.schomburg]

BTW......Those look so nice only because Larson had them pressed and dry cleaned

 

Actually, they look so nice because you didn't note it on the label!

 

Now, thats a funny post

 

So being the whole world knows that these are touched books, how about I take em off your hands. I have low standards, at least that is the consensus.

[MathMan-migration]

Hey Steve why doesn't CGC hand out the Purple Label to books that have been pressed? I mean in a since books that have pressed have been tampered with. I don't see how this differs from other sorts of restoration. I consider restoration anything that take a comic from its original state and gives it more of an overall appeal.

 

Thanks!

 

MathMan

[MrBedrock]

I consider restoration anything that take a comic from its original state and gives it more of an overall appeal.

 

Thanks!

 

MathMan

 

There is not a general consensus that pressing is restoration. While many agree with your definition, many others (myself included) do not.

[MathMan-migration]

I love your Mystic books. Even more so because they are Larson.

 

MathMan

[MutantKeys]

Steve, I know what you are trying to say. And I am sure you know I respect you a great deal. But if you are going to start dumping on Larsons, even indirectly, we might have to throw down.

Nice books I like the cover to 2

[TeenTitans]

the holder for pgx is very nice,

 

peace

[TeenTitans]

i will never take a raw comic on ebay over a graded comic.

 

peace

[valiantman]

the holder for pgx is very nice,

 

peace

 

 

Sounds like you need to have a plastics company grade your comics... and cut out the middle man.

[Straw-Man]

Steve, I know what you are trying to say. And I am sure you know I respect you a great deal. But if you are going to start dumping on Larsons, even indirectly, we might have to throw down.

 

hey mrbedrock, do i see the 'Larson' is erased in the 'M' of Mystic on issue 2? that's dry-cleaning isn't it [graphite removal with an eraser, i'd say]? and unlike pressing, which i understand CGC can't definitively detect [how can you note a thing you can't know on a label, or put it in purple], that's easy to spot. why isn't that book in a purple holder? and why aren't the 'tampered with to return to original state' guys all over it? any clues?

[Straw-Man]

Nice books I like the cover to 2

 

i'm with you; the #2 cover is so pulp-like--just great.

[Sal]

Steve, I know what you are trying to say. And I am sure you know I respect you a great deal. But if you are going to start dumping on Larsons, even indirectly, we might have to throw down.

 

hey mrbedrock, do i see the 'Larson' is erased in the 'M' of Mystic on issue 2? that's dry-cleaning isn't it [graphite removal with an eraser, i'd say]? and unlike pressing, which i understand CGC can't definitively detect [how can you note a thing you can't know on a label, or put it in purple], that's easy to spot. why isn't that book in a purple holder? and why aren't the 'tampered with to return to original state' guys all over it? any clues?

 

how can anyone be "all over it" if they haven't seen it?

 

put the book in a thread in General, and i expect some people would be asking why that book isn't in a purple holder