my buddy tested pgx cbcs cgc with the same book10362
 past performance is no guarantee of future actions.
|
KatKomics private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Does CGC also grade magazines with the PGX scale??? I have a few I want to send in and would prefer CBCS but no large book slabs  |
||
| Post 101 • IP flag post | ||
 PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @.@ Grading is subjective. "Accurate grade" is a pretentiously inaccurate statement. Some people need to take off their glasses and leave their bias at the sign-in screen. Both reputable brands have times of seemingly 'tight' or 'loose' grading. Both companies make mistakes. That will always occur with the human element. |
||
| Post 102 • IP flag post | ||
 I'll probably wake up constipated.
|
Pre_Coder private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by theCapraAegagrus When you get below mid grade I can see subjectivity coming into play, but 6.0 and above becomes a no-brainer IMO. You may call it a subjective no-brainer if you wish. |
||
| Post 103 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Pre_Coder There is no objectivity in any grades above 5.5 (other than Gem Mint). What you've said here makes no sense. Turning the market into a 'CGC vs CBCS' mentality is about as dumb as 'Marvel vs DC'. Healthy competition is only good for the customer. |
||
| Post 104 • IP flag post | ||
 Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock
|
Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by theCapraAegagrus Well, that's clearly not true. Grades are, by and large, objective, up and down the scale. Hell, "the scale" exists because the whole industry believes there is objectivity in grading. Sure, there is still a slight subjective part in determining relative weight for various virtues and defects. And sometimes it is unclear what caused a flaw. (I.e., was it a printer flaw - which should "count" less - or something else, post printing?) But this uncertainly - this subjectiveness - is only at the margins. A comic book grading system has emerged and been curated over time, and that system has a tremendous amount of information on comic book virtues, defects, definitions, ranges, categories, and context; such that professional graders are very, very close to each other in their assessment of a particular comic. To say grading has NO objectivity? That is just ignorant and absurd. The two major grading companies - and, actually, everyone who buys and sells comics - have built their business model predicated on the idea that grading can be overwhelmingly objective. Still some slight, tiny amount of subjectivity, sure. But evidence - and the entire comic collecting industry - supports the idea that grading is mostly objective. If grading were not objective, then any grade assigned to any comic by anyone would be meaningless. |
||
| Post 105 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Tedsaid This is incorrect, because different people perceive different flaws to impact grades differently. There is no objectivity in grading. Don't fool yourself or others. You already contradicted yourself via the bolded. "Close" is not absolute - and neither is grading. |
||
| Post 106 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Zipper private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by theCapraAegagrus Seems like a strange hill to die on. Of course there is a subjective element, but to argue there is NO objectivity above 5.5 is simply false. If this was true, then you'd routinely see pro graders and experienced dealers and collectors confuse 9.8s with 6.5s and vice versa. That never happens. |
||
| Post 107 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Zipper There is literally no objectivity above a single-user randomly selected grade of 5.5 other than Gem Mint. The fact that 5.5 was chosen doesn't change anything. You're wrong. Arguing that there is an objective difference between numbers is math. Not comic book grading. Don't confuse the two. |
||
| Post 108 • IP flag post | ||
 I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Zipper Is this Steve? If it is, then welcome to the board, a year late, lol. Not everyone here is as argumentative as some and some of us are a lot less than we used to be.  |
||
| Post 109 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Zipper private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DrWatson It is! I've been lurking for a year with occasional posts. I'm getting too old to argue online anymore. Or maybe it's "maturity." LOL Good to see you around.  |
||
| Post 110 • IP flag post | ||
|
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock
|
Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by theCapraAegagrus I think @theCapraAegagrus is confusing "there is no objectivity in grading" with "grading is not 100% objective?" Or maybe he's only defining "objective" and "subjective" in absolute terms, so it can only be one or the other, not some mixture of both? Regardless, I'm not sure what he's on about. Also, welcome to the board @Zipper ! |
||
| Post 111 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Tedsaid Of course not - because you believe in something that isn't real. One person's perceived "5.5" is another person's "6.0". Do you know the definition of "objective"? Google is at your disposal. Grading is 99% opinion (outside of the aforementioned Gem Mint). Devoid of opinion = objectivity. You can't say that "6.0 and above are objective". I mean, you can (as you have), but it doesn't make sense. How can you even attempt to make 'objective sense' of only half the grading scale? Further nonsense. The fact that any consumer can reasonably disagree with CGC's or CBCS' assessed grade(s) is absolute evidence of this being the case. The majority of people will probably agree with the "pro's" opinions (as I often do). Those who don't are not lacking objective understanding. Are you confusing "personal standard" with objectivity? You may have a personal definition of how you perceive a flaw to impact a comic book, but considering that you skew half of the scale as personally "objective", I highly doubt that. |
||
| Post 112 • IP flag post | ||
|
I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Zipper Ah, age and maturity. If only they went hand in hand. |
||
| Post 113 • IP flag post | ||
|
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock
|
Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by theCapraAegagrus I didn't divide the scale in half; you did. I think the whole scale is mostly objective. We can quibble about the percentages, but I'd put it well above 90%. That's why most expert opinions on any particular comic are within a grade point. That the grading scale even exists is proof that grades have a very high degree of objectivity. What use would such a scale be if no one could get close to the right grade? At any rate, you seem to be confusing what I said. When I say grades are "mostly objective," that could be taken in two different senses. Either, most of the grades are 100% objective. (That's not what I meant.) Or, all of the grades are almost 100% objective. It's the latter. No grade, not even gem mint, is 100% objective. But all are very close to it. It's a scale, you see? A ratio, where you try to maximize the objective part, with definitions and categories and consensus, and minimize the subjective part. The subjective part will always be there, but it is very, very small. |
||
| Post 114 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Tedsaid LMFAO. No, I didn't. Read up. The fact that the scale exists is to apply a numeric estimation of a comic's condition. That number is subjectively applied on a P2P basis. The fact that people argue CGC vs CBCS vs PGX is the simplest factual evidence that you need to realize this reality. Not a single person's opinion of a comic's condition is objective or "correct". "Close" is not objective. Gem Mint exists as an objective standard. If that isn't objective - then literally nothing grade-wise is. There is no consensus on grading. CGC and CBCS do not have the same standards. Price Guide doesn't have the same standards. |
||
| Post 115 • IP flag post | ||
|
I'll probably wake up constipated.
|
Pre_Coder private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DrWatson Too true! Many people grow old without ever growing up. |
||
| Post 116 • IP flag post | ||
 I'd like to say I still turned out alright, but that would be a lie.
|
flanders private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I'm surprised this is going for more than a 9.6 CBCS or CGC: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Spiderman-301-PGX-9-8-White-Pages-rarer-Newsstand-variant-cgc-cbcs/174089093604 |
||
| Post 117 • IP flag post | ||
 If the viagra is working you should be well over a 9.8.
|
xkonk private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @flanders I believe 9.8s for that issue are unicorns. | ||
| Post 118 • IP flag post | ||
|
I'd like to say I still turned out alright, but that would be a lie.
|
flanders private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I know, but it's less of a unicorn in that slab. | ||
| Post 119 • IP flag post | ||
 I'm a #2.
|
BigRedOne1944 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I believe there is more objectivity toward the top of the scale (9.4 9.6 9.8) as the flaws allowed are less and less. The further down the scale where more and more flaws are allowed is where it becomes much more subjective. While there are plenty of inexperience overgraders out there who don't know the difference between a 6.0 and a 9.2, 9.4, 9.6, 9.8, CGC and CBCS are most certainly not among them and the reason they even exist in the first place. TPGers (CGC CBCS and even PGX) are most certainly objective enough to know the differences between a mid-grade 5.5, 6.0 and the higher(9.2, 9.4, 9.6, 9.8) Grades. To say there's no objectivity with TPGing between a mid-grade 6.0 and a High grade 9.6 is simply fasle on every level IMHO |
||
| Post 120 • IP flag post | ||
|
I'd like to say I still turned out alright, but that would be a lie.
|
flanders private msg quote post Address this user | |
| It sold for $760! Much higher than I expected. | ||
| Post 121 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Paint_Monk private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DrWatson Thanks. I just spit my coffee out all over my keyboard. |
||
| Post 122 • IP flag post | ||
|
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock
|
Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by flanders Wow! I don't think PGX is as bad as some people say, but damn! That's some confidence. Or, conversely, you could say: that's a $400 discount off CGC prices. So I guess, in those terms, it's not wholly unexpected? |
||
| Post 123 • IP flag post | ||
 Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by BigRedOne1944 This is certainly true. More evidence for the "objectivity" argument is that since the intro of TPGers, grading has become far more consistent among individuals who are not professional graders. The presence of so many slabbed books has given honest folks a visual reference that helps reduce the margin for subjectivity in grading. It used to be that you could take a book to 5 dealers in 5 different states and get very different grades. That's much more rare these days except for a few holdouts who insist on their own standards either because their loose standards makes their stock more valuable or their tight standards makes them feel superior. If grading were completely subjective, the introduction of TPGers would have had no impact on the grading standards of the general market. |
||
| Post 124 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
| There is no such thing as an absolute in grading (again, outside of Gem Mint), though. No absolution = no objectivity. One person can appraise a comic book at 9.8 condition, and another can say "9.6". Are either correct? No. You're arguing math of the system. It's not the same thing. A grade is simply a subjective appraisal of condition. To most, something around the NM-range of the scale is obviously not a 5.0 book. A half-blind man might see a 5.0, though. Whose to tell him that he's wrong? It's their perception. That's grading, folks. |
||
| Post 125 • IP flag post | ||
|
Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock
|
Tedsaid private msg quote post Address this user | |
| "No absolution" ... heh. That's right folks: no grade can ever be forgiven. | ||
| Post 126 • IP flag post | ||
This topic is archived. Start new topic?