By the numbers comparison: CGC vs. CBCS (hint: CBCS wins HARD)14689
 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 | ||
|
Collector
|
Sebastsk8 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Another issue I'd assume is also the size of the companies. CGC being bigger most likely stretches their talent thin when it comes to grading etc. In recent years that has been the norm for most companies, mine being a perfect example. As older generations who had such extensive knowledge and expertise retire, you're left scrambling to fill those voids with those with less experience or none at all. I'd assume the same goes for them, I'm sure insanely increased demand forced expansion and that led to dilution of talent, which then could lead to softer grades. |
||
| Post 31 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DrWatson That's a lot of confidence on the part of the buyers. There are lots of anecdotes that keep indicating there is an insiders game going on at CGC. I'm guessing there will be a documentary on Netflix one day. |
||
| Post 32 • 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 An employee of the cgc actually told the person who bought the 94 that he should resubmit it just from looking at it in the 9.6 slab. |
||
| Post 33 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I had a CBCS Red Label 9.6 come back and 9.4 yellow label, then have unpressable errors magically disappeared when I sent it in for a Press and regrade and it came back a 9.8. I'll repeat it again just for the sake of consistency but both companies make mistakes, both companies put out some suspect grades sometimes, and neither company is perfect.nor could they be really, at least IMO. They are both considerably better than Pgx. Steve's answer earlier is about as perfect as it could be, because he's spot on. I doubt cbcs is stricter, but lower volume and a more team oriented approach help minimize errors. CGC apparently r uses a multi-grader approach too, but the pressure to keep up most be immense. Make no mistake though, cbcs will likely run into the same problems if their volume picks up significantly. Just like any other company would. |
||
| Post 34 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DrWatson Well I must admit, that's nowhere near as diabolical as what I was thinking. |
||
| Post 35 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by mediaslave @mediaslave I'm having a really tough time with this statement. When you sent for press and regrade you didn't think it would improve? |
||
| Post 36 • 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 The person who bought it was an extremely large Signature Series submitter with his own personal witness and the person telling him to resubmit it was the Signature Series director. |
||
| Post 37 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DrWatson OK, now it's getting back to the insider/VIP treatment game I was thinking could be going on there. I personally am uncomfortable buying CGC books from large customers of CGC who might be receiving some form of Concierge service. |
||
| Post 38 • IP flag post | ||
 You can't get good wood on the ball every time.
|
HotKeyComics private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Wow was not expecting this much response. Some great points made, especially about getting data from comics only after CBCS was formed, so that will be my next step. To clarify what I meant by "best", I meant what 9.8 was the hardest to obtain, which should therefore be the premium priced slab, in theory. I'll be doing some more numbers tomorrow on issues from the last decade. |
||
| Post 39 • IP flag post | ||
|
I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Here's another tidbit for you. A recent submission to the cgc contained thirty seven books that had previously failed a 9.8 pre-screen. Of those thirty seven that failed the first time, fifteen came back 9.8s this time. There was about three years between submissions. | ||
| Post 40 • IP flag post | ||
 I live in RI and Rhode Islanders eat chili with beans.
|
esaravo private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DrWatson - Obviously they (the books, not CGC) improved with age. | ||
| Post 41 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
pkpickard private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Those advising that no company is without fault have opinions that coincide with my own experience, for whatever that is worth. I bought a CGC 8.5 X-Men 94 that had clearly visible pressable defects. I sent it to my presser, and it cleaned up REALLY nicely. Submitted, and had it come back at 8.5. So it either wasn't an 8.5 originally, or it was undergraded and was better than the newly assigned grade. Either way - pretty clear evidence of a flub somewhere. I also bought a CBCS 9.6 Captain America 111, and had it cracked for a signing with Joe Sinnot and Jim Steranko. I had it pressed before the signing with a well known facilitator/presser, and submitted to CGC. It came back a 9.4. When I read the graders notes off to the facilitator (who submits to both) his response was that yes, the flaw the CGC grader noted WOULD be cause for a 9.4, and that he was surprised CBCS missed it. I submit to both companies, and have been surprised with grades above and below what I was expecting from both. If you like CBCS, submit here - they do a great job. If you want CGC, be prepared to wait while they deal with their growth spurt. (Full disclosure - I have two submissions at CGC as we speak, but will likely send a batch to CBCS this summer.) |
||
| Post 42 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| While I agree the data isnt organized well enough to establish any solid contention , I find it entirely and completely amusing that some will grab any sale or recent transaction as a case that CGC sells for more on the open market, but when given a wealth of data like this claim "it does not prove anything and requires many more examples" You literally cannot make this stuff up folks | ||
| Post 43 • IP flag post | ||
|
I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by HotKeyComics Use something like Marvel's Star Wars #1 from 2015. A ton of submissions and not old enough to be hanging around for two decades. |
||
| Post 44 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by HotKeyComics @HotKeyComics If you used three hot books printed after 2014. And you compared 9.8 to 9.6 ratios. And all 3 showed a pattern...I think that would be about as close as you could get to making a legitimate case. I also think it would be helpful if they are books that don't have much value below 9.6 and aren't likely to be submitted unless the owner thinks they are possible 9.8 candidates. |
||
| Post 45 • IP flag post | ||
|
I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by esaravo Some certainly did. A couple of them meant for flips might be keeps now. |
||
| Post 46 • IP flag post | ||
|
I'm waiting.... (tapping fingers). Splotches is gettin old! |
Nuffsaid111 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I encourage any and everyone that uses both companies to keep your own data when you receive books and perform an exercise. Keep personal data per company on: 1. How many damaged/broken slabs 2. How many mistakes on label 3. Any debris or significant scratches on slab 4.How close were grades to ones own grade before submission 5.Any other criteria you deem important Ensure your data is statistically significant (example: 30 each). Then make an informed data driven decision. Data should drive decisions; not emotion or phrases like both companies make mistakes. Yes, they both make mistakes; but we should be concerned with probabilities of mistakes/errors/poor accuracy. My data as I mentioned in a similar thread is: 1% issues with cbcs (100+ subs) 16% issues with Cgc (100+ subs) Wanna guess my choice based on my data even though both make mistakes? |
||
| Post 47 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by EbayMafia Graders notes: bend bottom edge back cover, spine stress Neither of those should be fixable with a press. And they definitely shouldn't have gone from 9.4 to 9.8. And it should NEVER have gone Red Label to Yellow, which was supposed to be impossible. That's a lot of screwups on one book. |
||
| Post 48 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Not sure your point here. Do you mean the OPs original data? It proves nothing really, just anecdotal evidence but nowhere near enough to form a conclusive statement. The sales are impossible to refute. On every platform, CBCS ALMOST always sells for less, sometimes considerably so. I have no idea how anyone can argue this. It's not every book true, but the vast majority for sure. ***lol PGX Its just a fact.  |
||
| Post 49 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by mediaslave I'm still confused. Why did you ask for a press and regrade if you thought the flaws were unfixable? I thought lot's of people were sending in Red labels for Yellow labels? |
||
| Post 50 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by mediaslaveMy point is precisely what I said it was. The data that the OP above used is missing many factors and potential outcomes and cannot be used to determine a realistic trend........ Much like people who grab only sales examples that support their argument, or simply do not understand that to determine a result you have to compare apples to apples, in the SAME setting, or oranges to oranges again IN THE SAME SETTING. This was all explained to you at least twice, once by Iron man and the second time by myself previously. Konk also illustrated the problem with your argument quite well previously. Just emphatically claiming something isnt a factual basis for a result. For example in your chosen list of sales examples do you know for a fact ALL of your examples have the precise same page quality, ended at the same time of day, and were being sold up against the exact same other comics to keep the results factual? There is simply no way you could or will know that, meaning you are arguing from a chosen bias rather than being able to provide confirmable verifiable data. Consider your argument both refuted and also tossed into the logical fallacy trash can. A fact is something that is supported by verifiable, transparent evidence, rather than innuendo, allegation and bias. Attempting to argue in all cases at all times across all lines CGC clearly outsells CBCS is simply browbeating without supporting evidence. |
||
| Post 51 • IP flag post | ||
 COLLECTOR
|
dielinfinite private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by mediaslave Going from a VERIFIED signature to a WITNESSED signature is impossible. Previously, a book with ONLY witnessed signatures was on a yellow label. Any book with a verified signature was a red label, even if the book had a mixture of both verified and witnessed signatures, but the distinction between the two has always been made on the label. When CBCS introduced the current slab a few months ago (a year now?) they did away with the red labels and just had verified and witnessed signatures share the yellow label. If a book is re-holdered or reslabbed they get the most current labels. This means all red labels will get a new yellow label but witnessed/verified distinction is still made for each signature, just like it always has. Also, aren't bends typically pressable defects? |
||
| Post 52 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Darkseid_of_town here's a tip I learned from playing Poker: When someone is convinced that Poker is best played irrationally, you don't make efforts to convince them otherwise. You complement them on their short-term wins, you encourage them...and eventually you gut them. They may be right in the short-term, they are never right in the long-term. Lose the battle, win the war. It doesn't really matter over the long-term if the market currently values a CGC 9.8 over a CBCS 9.8. And those who argue that it does matter create opportunity for those of us who know otherwise. Any desire that I feel to argue with them is purely emotional, not rational. | ||
| Post 53 • IP flag post | ||
|
You can't get good wood on the ball every time.
|
HotKeyComics private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Heres a comparison on 4 hot titles from the last few years, including one very hard to get in 9.8s (Canto) EDIT: forgot DOT %'s for CBCS: 9.8s = 92% / 9.6'S = 4% / 9.4'S = 2%   |
||
| Post 54 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by EbayMafiaI think thats perhaps the smartest thing I have ever seen you post Lebron, thanks . |
||
| Post 55 • IP flag post | ||
Thread locked. No more posts permitted. Return home.