By the numbers comparison: CGC vs. CBCS (hint: CBCS wins HARD)14689
 You can't get good wood on the ball every time.
|
HotKeyComics private msg quote post Address this user | |
I'm more of a numbers guy and I decided to just look at the numbers and see what they say. They say that CGC hands out 9.8's more than twice as much as CBCS does on the 2 major keys I checked and I would bet that data holds up across other major keys. How long will it take the market to catch up with this data?  |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
pkpickard private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Or maybe it's that people with those keys that think they have 9.8s preferentially send them to CGC because they plan on selling them on Ebay where CGC tends to get more $$$? I'm not saying you're wrong, just that the data here is more correlative that causal. The only way to really test your theory would be to submit the exact same books to one service, crack them and send them to the other, and see what the percentages said then. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7358684/ Sorry - data nerd. |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Mikeoliver1313 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| But if more books are sent to CGC of course they would have more 9.8’s | ||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
You can't get good wood on the ball every time.
|
HotKeyComics private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Mikeoliver1313 It's not about the total number of 9.8s they have, its about the total number of 9.8s they have vs their total graded numbers for that issue, the percentages. CGC grades nearly 30% of their submitted UF4 9.8s while CBCS only grades 13.3% of their total submissions for that comic. Those are huge statistical differences and sure, you can say more high end copies go to CGC, but even taking that into consideration, there shouldn't be the gap in the top grades assigned that there is. |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
moodswing private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @pkpickard Dude on youtube did this. Sent to cbcs, pgx and cgc. Cgc came back the highest grade. I do think the info is interesting. 20% of the books submitted are getting a 9.8. That seems high to me. Definitely more data would need to be collected. |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
 Have I told you about the time I dropped off 3,000 comics at SDCC?
|
Scifinator private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Percentages people, percentages! | ||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
 The Fifth Golden Girl
|
sborock private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Remember, they had a 13 year lead on grading. So....of course they have graded many more books than CBCS. |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
 I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Mikeoliver1313 It's based on percentages and not strictly volume. The cgc gives a higher percentage of books graded a 9.8 than CBCS does. The argument that one could make is that more people who think they have a 9.8 copy submit their book to the cgc. However, I'm leaning toward the idea that the cgc does indeed give out more 9.8s than CBCS based on volume of submissions. I know that New Mutants 98 the cgc gave a 10. I have my own theory about that. |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Haljordanfan private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DrWatson I’m going with your option 1. People looking to flip their books thinking they have a 9.8 are going to CGC for the $. People who prefer CBCS are going to CBCS. |
||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user | |
| This proves nothing at all. It suggests a conclusion that you want, but doesn't prove it. To me it also says if you have those books in high grade you send them to cgc to get more money, and slightly lower, cbcs for your pc. Can't ignore that the bigger submitters and pros ask use cgc too, to the offscreen are possibly better. Literally the only way to prove this is to take a selection of books that's hi enough to be statistically viable, say maybe 2500, and send them to the grading houses and measure how they come back. It has to be obviously the same book send to all three, although while you would bother with PgX I have no idea. They are completely useless. From my own personal experiences I have books that are questionable from both companies. I've seen some pretty shady ones from cgc, I feel that's more a factor of volume. I mean let's face it if the best golfers in the world can sometimes nail somebody in the head in the crowd, every company on the planet is bound to screw up here and there. It's like a lemon Factor I suppose. Ideally that should never happen, but we all know that it does. |
||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
 Captain Corrector
|
CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user | |
| . Maybe this approach is easier than crunching numbers and analyzing data... @sborock, is CBCS grading more strict than CGC? |
||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
 Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
| You can't really draw any scientific conclusions from these numbers. The books CBCS was initially grading were 13 years older than the books that CGC was initially grading. To get a more meaningful insight, you would need to chose a book that was printed in the last 7 years (since CBCS came into existence). Even then the closest you could get to a conclusion would be by looking at 9.6's as a ratio of 9.8's. If one company has three 9.8's for every two 9.6's and the other has two 9.8's for every three 9.6's, that would be meaningful enough data for me. Although still not scientific. | ||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
 past performance is no guarantee of future actions.
|
KatKomics private msg quote post Address this user | |
| would you have to sort out the first 10 years of data at CGC...since our own Mr. Borock was the head grader for that time frame? You really need to compare only books released after what....2010? even then..it would have been all staff left that Steve had trained..might have to go to 2015 to get a feel how grading may have changed after Steve's influence was lessened. |
||
| Post 13 • IP flag post | ||
|
Have I told you about the time I dropped off 3,000 comics at SDCC?
|
Scifinator private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Haljordanfan @DrWatson - I am thinking option one is not the case. When I first started submitting to cgc it wasnt with the thought i was going to flip nor did i think I only had 9.8’s. I suspect that was the case for most people over that past decade plus years. Additionally, CBCS Free grade screen would suggest that a higher % of CBCS submissions should be 9.8 which doesn’t seem to be the case. Way too much anecdotal evidence, you tube videos, unrealistic on-site grading output, and census percentages per grade reflect what many of our eyes have seen, inordinate percentage of questionable and high grades handed out by cgc. |
||
| Post 14 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Oteemorse private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I appreciate your number crunching but you lost me at right at the beginning What does the “best”mean? They give out more 9.8s so why is that a bad thing ? You think resellers care. Don’t get me wrong I love what CBCS does and I think they grade stricter but saying their the best is misleading. Again I don’t have a dog in the fight either I think CGC are overpriced, and I like the gentleman who run CBCS. So just saying |
||
| Post 15 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user | |
| On a side note, I sent 3 perfect asm 316s to cgc, and those bastards sent back 9.6s. Easy 9.8s my arse.  |
||
| Post 16 • IP flag post | ||
|
The Fifth Golden Girl
|
sborock private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck I doubt that we are stricter, but I believe we are a smaller crew which IMHO means we grade more together to get better consistency. |
||
| Post 17 • IP flag post | ||
|
Captain Corrector
|
CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by sborock There you have it folks. |
||
| Post 18 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Haljordanfan private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @sborock Humble answer kind sir. Well played. |
||
| Post 19 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by sborock This is a very solid and respectable answer. |
||
| Post 20 • IP flag post | ||
|
Have I told you about the time I dropped off 3,000 comics at SDCC?
|
Scifinator private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Additionally, another piece of anecdotal evidence is the widely held belief that taking comics with the old/original style cgc labels and sending in for re-grade without a press have a good chance of grading higher. Wait, wasn’t that part of the Borock cgc era. Obviously certification has become much more prolific over the past several years and most of the grades provided in the above samples have come in that time, which further underscores the likely leniency and inconsistency of cgc grading standards in the last 5 years compared to the @sborock cgc era. Nuff said on my part so I am out. |
||
| Post 21 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by sborock Silky smooth. Artfully crafted answer to a question that is fraught with danger. |
||
| Post 22 • IP flag post | ||
 Secret Moderator
|
MatterEaterLad private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I've unboxed books from both companies on the same day. There wasn't always a same grade comparison but when there was, CGC's grades were softer. (At least in the last year). How soft? I sent in a CGC 8.0 for a signing and it came back this week as CGC 9.0. Oddly, if CBCS starts to have a rep for tighter grading, this may push more business to CGC, for people who care more about the number than the book  |
||
| Post 23 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by MatterEaterLad Exactly, that's why this whole conversation is a minefield fraught with danger. I don't feel like a "winner" if got 9.6's from CBCS worth $180 and I could have got 9.8's from CGC worth $480. |
||
| Post 24 • IP flag post | ||
|
Secret Moderator
|
MatterEaterLad private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @EbayMafia It's like a casino with a roulette wheel that hits black more often than the casino down the street. Gamblers are going to go where they can get an easier win. (I know, PGX is notoriously soft on grades too, but if they were in this analogy they'd be a bingo hall). |
||
| Post 25 • IP flag post | ||
 I'll probably wake up constipated.
|
Pre_Coder private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by sborock Not stricter, but definitely more accurate.  |
||
| Post 26 • IP flag post | ||
 I'm waiting.... (tapping fingers).Splotches is gettin old! |
Nuffsaid111 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| And in the end...... accuracy/consistency is #1 for me. Not the label, not the case, not rivets or lack thereof; not the colors of the label, not the TAT not who's been around longer or has a bigger facility or better marketing. For me, It's all about accuracy & consistency because that is why the grading companies were bought into existence - a 3rd party impartial grade. |
||
| Post 27 • IP flag post | ||
|
I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by EbayMafia I don't really see it as fraught with danger as I have had that very thing happen with books previously graded by the cgc. I had a Giant Size X-Men #1 and an X-Men 94 both graded 9.6 by the cgc. I sold both and each customer that bought them resubmitted each issue to the cgc and got 9.8s. So, you really don't have to have CBCS in the equation to feel like you were screwed over by a grading company. |
||
| Post 28 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Pre_Coder I guess we are kind of fooling ourselves if we don't admit that being less accurate more often than not means being more lenient. But in the long run, I'm still more comfortable with consistent and accurate over "sometimes lenient". |
||
| Post 29 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Sebastsk8 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Another angle to possibly look at is CGC being around for a good while before CBCS. Meaning books could have been graded when they were much newer and thus more likely to be higher grades. The part about speculation and using cgc for the higher price point on higher grade keys is also relevant. Personally, if I'm buying a book for PC and want a slabbed book I'm just as pleased with a CBCS case as a CGC(although I do like some of their custom labels, but then again I also like verified sig options). However if speculating, I'm more likely to buy a CGC book as generally they will fetch a higher price and sell quicker. That obviously has nothing to do with quality of cases or accuracy of given grades and more strictly based on previous sales and current demands etc. If it were the other way around and CBCS slabs sold for more then they would be my preferred case for speculation and resale. That being said, personally I prefer CBCS for sig verification, price and turnaround when looking to submit books that will go into my PC. |
||
| Post 30 • IP flag post | ||
Thread locked. No more posts permitted. Return home.