Looks like CGC is giving out 9.9's like candy!21240
 I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Rbolton There used to be a noticeable difference between most 9.8s and the 9.9s &10s. I could never tell the difference between a 9.9 and a 10, but that delved into nitpicky things like registration, cut, and staple placement, as it should. However, things that used to not be allowed in 9.9 and 10 grade ranges are now being allowed. I guess when you write the rule book you can change them to suit your needs. Why pay 9.9 and 10 prices when they're are no longer the rare (manufactured scarcity) commodity they once were? Again, anyone paying multiple thousands for 9.9 Copper and Modern (and maybe even some Bronze) books are not spending wisely. |
||
| Post 26 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Silversorrow private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by RboltonThe way I had heard it explained was that a CBCS 9.8 is an exceptional book but may have 1 or 2 very small non colour breaking ticks and or soft corners and such. A CBCS 9.9 can have literally zero handling defects (not even a single minor non colour breaking tick or soft corner, ect.) but can still have minor manufacturing defects like a miswrap or staples that are not perfectly centered on the spine. A CBCS 10 will have absolutely zero handling defects and manufacturing defects. That is my general understanding of how CBCS grades them. |
||
| Post 27 • IP flag post | ||
 " . "
|
Davethebrave private msg quote post Address this user | |
| It is funny to see folks be shocked that a brand new book could get a 9.9 when you consider books from the 70s and earlier getting 9.8s… Hard to say which is more amusing - that outrage over the 9.9s or those willing to pay a premium for a 9.9 of a modern book… |
||
| Post 28 • IP flag post | ||
 I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Nah...you need context..the outrage is not just about the 9.9s.....the outrage is about the frequency of 9.9s now vs yesteryear....9.9s used to be pretty much unicorns....now they're far more common...effectively killing previous 9.9s and 9.8s....so what happened? CGC's answer to keeping books in their pipeline.....submit, re-submit and play the 9.9 slots. | ||
| Post 29 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Silversorrow private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DavethebraveThe issue in the video is a single submission where 12/23 of the comics got 9.9 grades and they were all late 70's/early 80's books. The odds of that are beyond astronomical without lowering their previous standards. These were no where near "New" books. |
||
| Post 30 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Jgwalters100 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| They shouldn't even have 9.9 or 10. That or 9.8 should have been 10. It's a dumb system that is arbitrary. 9.9 looks like 9.8 and it's nonsense. | ||
| Post 31 • IP flag post | ||
|
I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Jgwalters100 Agreed....the minutiae between 9.8/9.9/10 is ridiculously small....inconsequentially small...virtually nonexistent. | ||
| Post 32 • IP flag post | ||
 You think I'm joking, I'm not.
|
earthshaker01 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Here's a group shot.  |
||
| Post 33 • IP flag post | ||
|
You think I'm joking, I'm not.
|
earthshaker01 private msg quote post Address this user | |
This pic isn't going to make anyone feel any better, lol. Keep in mind I didn't just buy copies and send in. After they were signed I personally pressed and cleaned the crap out of them. Meaning , Imade sure there were no visible bends, archs, finger waves. Then I cleaned them to make sure there were no fingerprints etc...triple boarded them, sent in. This what I do to all my books. I would never send a book in brand new off the "rack" and expect a 9.9 or 10, let alone a 9.8, without pressing and cleaning it.  |
||
| Post 34 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Jgwalters100 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| At least modern books it makes sense. I never understood how a bunch of new books weren't 9.9 10. That's what I never understood about it. | ||
| Post 35 • IP flag post | ||
 I wish I had a title.
|
ComicNinja0215 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Jgwalters100 Thay makes rhe most sense to me. Older booksnwirh 9.9's is a little suspicious. |
||
| Post 36 • IP flag post | ||
 would be nice to have a snugger fit.
|
Sigur_Ros private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by GAC Correct. Found elsewhere:   |
||
| Post 37 • IP flag post | ||
 I'm not a plagiarist. I'm also not illiterate.
|
drmccoy74 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by GACand totally based on human judgement |
||
| Post 38 • IP flag post | ||
|
I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by GAC I think there's a little more to it than that. I do think 9.9 and 10 are dangerously close to being made up grades. That being said, just because the former distribution of those grades didn't fit the bell curve, doesn't mean there should a shit ton of them hitting the market. It's a marketing |
||
| Post 39 • IP flag post | ||
|
" . "
|
Davethebrave private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Silversorrow How many books did the person sub as a pre-screen? These are incredibly common modern books printed in the hundreds of thousands in the early 80s where people were already hoarding and keeping copies untouched for speculative purposes. If a pre-screen how do we say 12 / 23 received 9.9? Could it be someone with 1,000 copies that selected the top 10% of those books for a 9.8 pre screen? So a sub-set of a sub-set? The lack of 9.9s is the odd thing about the hobby… or perhaps the existence of a 9.9 rather than just jumping to a 10.0… and in turn expecting more 10.0 copies for moderns given the number of 9.6 and 9.8 copies in existence for pre-70s books… Is the “correction” by CGC motivated by greed? Sure! Wouldn’t surprise me. Is the lack of consistency problematic? Absolutely! Should the incorrect approach be sustained forever… making 9.9 and 10.0 copies artificially scarce? I cannot answer that… At the end of the day, those willing to pay premiums for 9.9 and 10.0 modern books (and the insane premiums for 9.8 too) are making a choice. Paying those premiums for 9.8 copies was always fraught with risk - maybe not exactly this type of risk but does it matter? |
||
| Post 40 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
VinceVellCustoms private msg quote post Address this user | |
| But are all these 9,9s bent wells? Seems like this was just a means to get people to crack open their 9.8s to get 9,9s since it seems every damn book has been graded already in the hobby. Least key books. guess the new 9.8 is 9,9 now? |
||
| Post 41 • IP flag post | ||
|
" . "
|
Davethebrave private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by VinceVellCustoms CGC submissions overall were on the decline - of course this is to prompt more submissions. Temporary solution but may be enough to tide them over until the next speculative frenzy. |
||
| Post 42 • IP flag post | ||
 Keep your $6.87 bro... not even saving tax with that.
|
Cli4dR3D0g private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Election season lol. Quote: Originally Posted by Sigur_Ros |
||
| Post 43 • IP flag post | ||
 It's like the Roach Motel for comic collectors.
|
chester15 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Davethebrave It's possible it was the result of a prescreen. But don't forget that CGC charges $9 for every book that fails to meet the threshold. If you're submitting hundreds to get a few, it can get quite expensive. But if you are getting 9.9's, that cost could get covered by one "lucky" result. Or 12. |
||
| Post 44 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Jgwalters100 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| When you look this year is non stop 9.9. 2021 has way less and I'd imagine the volume of subs is 5x the amount at least probably more. | ||
| Post 45 • IP flag post | ||
|
I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
| You can try and spin it any way you want... fact is 9.9s/10s are way way way up in 2024 and (I don't know for sure but I feel confident in saying this....) compared to the comic boom era, submissions are way way way down. So what happened? Are collectors just now going through their collections with fine tooth combs pulling out the cream of their collections? or....is CGC feeling the pinch of reduced submissions and changed their grading standard to allow for more 9.9s/10s to attract more business? Come on....it's as plain as the nose on your face to what's happening here. Remember,..CGC graded non-existant books. |
||
| Post 46 • IP flag post | ||
|
I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Matt Nelson publicly stated that he thought there should be more 9.9s and 10s on the census based on a standard bell curve distribution. So, the cgc lowered the standards for 9.9s and 10s. It wasn't long after that the cgc experienced the above 9.8 explosion. | ||
| Post 47 • IP flag post | ||
|
" . "
|
Davethebrave private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I don’t think anyone is disputing that 9.9 / 10.0 grades are now more attainable. It was covered several times - but it makes sense to have more 9.9 and 10.0 grades, when considering the existence of 9.8 books (and the distribution) in BA, SA and even GA. In terms of “how” attainable, this is important to understand. If people are submitting very high grade books through pre-screens (and of course there is a pre-screen in people’s own collections to even bother with the submission, considering costs), then the census numbers as shown in the video mean nothing. We will ultimately see in the total census numbers how distributions end up… Of course some major data limitations if people are cracking 9.8 books and not turning labels in. We will have some general sense - and the market can then (again) adjust. So, is it better to adhere to the artificial 9.8 ceiling and have “lottery winners” with 9.9+… or adjust? Well, CGC is motivated now to adjust. Those playing the 9.8 game may be getting screwed over (maybe) but the market will settle whether a 9.9 or 10.0 distinction is real or fake. If someone wants to participate in that game… that is their choice and quite honestly, the massive 9.8 premiums in some moderns already demonstrated who plays those games. Quote: Originally Posted by GAC |
||
| Post 48 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Jgwalters100 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Now what does cbcs do. Just stick to their guns. As a business that is a losing strategy. If i had high grade books that i was selling i feel you are forced to submit to cgc. A 9.9 or 10 is 4x more valuable at least. | ||
| Post 49 • IP flag post | ||
|
I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DrWatson OK, I wasn't aware of the public statement by Matt that CGC was lowering their grading standards to allow for more 9.9s/10s. @Davethebrave They only way it makes sense to have more 9.9s/10s is to change how CGC is grading and it seems that was publicly stated. Is it better to adhere to the current grading system or change? I'm not sure. But it is suspicious. Why after 25 years is there now a need to change? Was this need not apparent 5,10 or even 15 years ago? It seems CGC is in a position again in 5,10,15 years from now (or whenever it is financially strategic to do so) to change the grading standards again to allow for 10s. If they can change the grading standards from the top....maybe they can change it from the bottom....or even the scale itself. What if CGC eliminated the bottom .5 grade altogether and adjusted their grading standards from that grade on up? ...inviting people to resubmit to get a little grade bump on all grades? The point is CGC just opened the door to changing their grading standards to allow for more of a certain grade....if it happened once...you don't think it'll happen again when it suits them? |
||
| Post 50 • IP flag post | ||
|
would be nice to have a snugger fit.
|
Sigur_Ros private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Jgwalters100 I my experience, and one of the reasons I like them, CBCS hasn't "held back" on 9.9 or 10s if a book deserved it. If those are the guns, then yes..stick to them. |
||
| Post 51 • IP flag post | ||
|
I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Jgwalters100 I don't know. A grade is only as good as the reputation of the company behind it. Plus, Batman Damned has a slew of 9.9s and 10s. So many so that supply far outweighs the demand. When 9.9s are as common as dirt, then they will be dirt cheap and possibly not worth the resub fees to get one. |
||
| Post 52 • IP flag post | ||
 Apparently, I am easily annoyed.
|
Rbolton private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I look at it from two different perspectives, a true collector that has respect and integrity for the hobby imo would always want the more accurate grade, however, from a business perspective, I doubt many people that are just in this to turn a profit are worried about accuracy over a higher grade and potentially a lot more profit. CGC will continue to overgrade books( especially for certain large submitters) and grade chasers will continue to buy these over graded books with no care about what the book actually looks like. Yes I think CBCS should definitely retain its integrity, I just hope they can do enough business to stay competitive with the other grading companies. | ||
| Post 53 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
SidTheSquid private msg quote post Address this user | |
| CGC wasn't holding back 9.9s and hasn't adjusted their standards (except in the whole banana 9.8 area)- they weren't taking the time to LOOK for 9.9s among books they graded at at least 9.8... and now they are, for special customers or large orders of already graded 9.8s with a note attached asking to look for 9.9s. Or that's what it seems like, anyhow. |
||
| Post 54 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
poka private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Davethebrave submitted less than 25 books 4491019001 - Dazzler 1 - 9.9 4491019002 - Dazzler 1 - 9.9 4491019003 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.8 4491019004 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.8 4491019005 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.8 4491019006 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.8 4491019007 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.9 (Listed in Census as 9.8) 4491019008 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.9 4491019009 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.8 4491019010 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.9 4491019011 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.9 (Listed in Census as 9.8) 4491019012 - Marvel Super Heroes Secret Wars 8 - 9.9 4491019013 - New Mutants 1 - 9.8 4491019014 - New Mutants 1 - 9.9 4491019015 - Thor 130 - 9.8 4491019016 - Wolverine Limited Series 4 - 9.9 4491019017 - X-Men 62 - 9.8 Restored A-1 4491019018 - Uncanny X-Men 145 - 9.9 4491019019 - Uncanny X-Men 174 - 9.9 4491019020 - Uncanny X-Men Ann 3 - 9.9 4491019021 - Uncanny X-Men Ann 3 - 9.8 ..and pretty sure submitter is VIP |
||
| Post 55 • IP flag post | ||