Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2019 18:50:54 GMT -8
The book inside the slab is what it is, regardless of the slab. "but...!!" some will argue, "if you take it OUT of the slab, it loses a TON of value!" 1. That's not necessarily true (though it's generally true), and, far more importantly; 2. If you get that book back IN a slab, with the same grade designation, all that "lost value" comes right back...proving that it is the COMIC, and not the SLAB, that has value. I can't wrap my head around #2. If the lost value returns once a comic is encapsulated doesn't that imply that the slab influences the valuation of that specific book?  Because that "value" was never lost in the first place. It was always there. Hence the quotes around "lost value." The comic didn't really lose a "ton of value"; it only lost the perception that the slab carries with it. The slab only makes people more willing to pay. If I know a book is a 9.0, and it's deslabbed, and I know nothing has happened to the book subsequently...I'm going to be willing to pay the slabbed 9.0 price, minus the cost to get it re-slabbed, if necessary. If I do NOT know that the book already was a 9.0, I'm less likely to be willing to pay. It's why many dealers now can ask, and get, close to GPA prices on raw books, because people trust that they know what they're doing and are grading the book correctly. That is, the slab doesn't actually matter; it's trust that drives those prices. Anybody who was well trusted could accomplish the same sorts of prices, slab or no slab. It's the trust that has the value, not the slab. The only time you see greater gaps in price is when you get into very high grades (9.4+) Then, people really want to see the "official" number before they'll cough up the big money. But it's still the comic book inside that counts...the number isn't (or, rather, shouldn't be) influenced by the comic. In a perfect world, the comic is in the condition it is, and the number on the label only serves as a...what do we call it, a "stamp of approval"? By the way...the reverse is also true: if I see a book in a, say, 9.8 slab, but it's been overgraded, or damaged subsequent to slabbing, I'm not paying the 9.8 price for it...especially if I'm going to crack it and get it signed. I *might* be persuaded to buy if I know I can fix it and restore it to a 9.8. But a book that is damaged beyond repair, or substantially overgraded, I won't, because the value is in the book...not the label. That said, it would be dishonest to suggest that there aren't buyers out there who care only about the label, and care nothing about the book inside...a mindset I have to fight myself...and to say I have not sold a book that was in a CGC slab that I did not personally agree with the grade would not be true. Because grading IS subjective, that element of subjectivity is going to cause a certain amount of variability. It works both ways, too: nobody cares if I think a book is a 9.8, if the label says 9.4. So to the extent and depth that that happens, yes, Mr. Lucky is correct...but only to the extent that that happens, which is why it is imperative that grading companies be absolutely consistent, which they've not always been. Not "this was a 9.8 and now it's a 4.5 and now it's an 8.5" level of inconsistency, no. But "this was a 9.8 and now it's a 9.2 and now it's a 9.6" is also not as consistent as they should be. And that says nothing about the actual level of protection (or not) a slab affords, which leaves much to be desired. It's intricate, with a lot of moving parts, and I lack the capacity to explain it better (like trying to describe colors)...but when the system is operating properly, with informed parties on all sides, then Mr. Lucky's premise is not accurate. To the degree that it doesn't, Mr. Lucky's premise gains...credence, viability, acceptance?...to the same degree. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2019 18:52:46 GMT -8
Couldn't get away without the edit...damn it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jul 13, 2019 20:55:57 GMT -8
I had to check the date on this post as this guy seems to be stuck in a time warp  "...it’s difficult for me to sit back and see this all unfold without saying something." Then why he wait 20 years?  Yeah.  Slabbers refined their tribal talking points against his arguments a long time ago. If only I were allowed to talk about it here  |
|
|
|
Post by steveinthecity on Jul 13, 2019 22:34:14 GMT -8
I can't wrap my head around #2. If the lost value returns once a comic is encapsulated doesn't that imply that the slab influences the valuation of that specific book? Because that "value" was never lost in the first place. It was always there. Hence the quotes around "lost value." The comic didn't really lose a "ton of value"; it only lost the perception that the slab carries with it. The slab only makes people more willing to pay. If I know a book is a 9.0, and it's deslabbed, and I know nothing has happened to the book subsequently...I'm going to be willing to pay the slabbed 9.0 price, minus the cost to get it re-slabbed, if necessary. If I do NOT know that the book already was a 9.0, I'm less likely to be willing to pay. It's why many dealers now can ask, and get, close to GPA prices on raw books, because people trust that they know what they're doing and are grading the book correctly. That is, the slab doesn't actually matter; it's trust that drives those prices. Anybody who was well trusted could accomplish the same sorts of prices, slab or no slab. It's the trust that has the value, not the slab. The only time you see greater gaps in price is when you get into very high grades (9.4+) Then, people really want to see the "official" number before they'll cough up the big money. But it's still the comic book inside that counts...the number isn't (or, rather, shouldn't be) influenced by the comic. In a perfect world, the comic is in the condition it is, and the number on the label only serves as a...what do we call it, a "stamp of approval"? By the way...the reverse is also true: if I see a book in a, say, 9.8 slab, but it's been overgraded, or damaged subsequent to slabbing, I'm not paying the 9.8 price for it...especially if I'm going to crack it and get it signed. I *might* be persuaded to buy if I know I can fix it and restore it to a 9.8. But a book that is damaged beyond repair, or substantially overgraded, I won't, because the value is in the book...not the label. That said, it would be dishonest to suggest that there aren't buyers out there who care only about the label, and care nothing about the book inside...a mindset I have to fight myself...and to say I have not sold a book that was in a CGC slab that I did not personally agree with the grade would not be true. Because grading IS subjective, that element of subjectivity is going to cause a certain amount of variability. It works both ways, too: nobody cares if I think a book is a 9.8, if the label says 9.4. So to the extent and depth that that happens, yes, Mr. Lucky is correct...but only to the extent that that happens, which is why it is imperative that grading companies be absolutely consistent, which they've not always been. Not "this was a 9.8 and now it's a 4.5 and now it's an 8.5" level of inconsistency, no. But "this was a 9.8 and now it's a 9.2 and now it's a 9.6" is also not as consistent as they should be. And that says nothing about the actual level of protection (or not) a slab affords, which leaves much to be desired. It's intricate, with a lot of moving parts, and I lack the capacity to explain it better (like trying to describe colors)...but when the system is operating properly, with informed parties on all sides, then Mr. Lucky's premise is not accurate. To the degree that it doesn't, Mr. Lucky's premise gains...credence, viability, acceptance?...to the same degree. Thanks for the reply and further explanation. I understand what you're saying, but barring a relationship with a dealer or assessing a graded book in hand as to whether or not you're in sync with the assigned grade, I'd think any trust is a by-product of the slab and service itself. You would know better than I, but it seems "buy the grade, not the book" is the standard in the marketplace/(hobby) for Moderns in particular. Between pre-screens or using a service/dealer to cherry pick 9.8 candidates seems all the rage. Nothing wrong with wanting a 9.8, but the "all or nothing" approach belies the idea of value resting solely with the book and not the importance of having 9.8 on the label. Admittedly, I'm basing all this on personal observation and opinion. And to the original question of the thread, I don't believe speculators are "ruining" the hobby, but affecting it by buying up copies of what *might* become a hot book, slabbing it, then playing "Hot Potato" passing the comic around with other speculators hoping to squeeze out another buck before interest wanes and realized prices stagnate or decline. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2019 22:53:36 GMT -8
But...again, this is in a perfect world, granted...the 9.8 on the label reflects the condition of the book in the slab.
If the book in the slab isn't actually in nearly perfect condition, it's not going to be a 9.8, at least in theory.
With the very important caveat being that yes, there are obviously many books in 9.8 that no one would reasonably grade 9.8...whether overgraded (fairly rare) or damaged subsequent to slabbing (far more common), but that doesn't alter the principle.
I trust CGC...to the extent that I trust them, and that trust is most certainly not anywhere near absolute...because they have demonstrated, through personal experience, to be the most consistent in terms of grading out of everyone in the hobby of back issue comic books. In principle, the third party status removes the tremendous pressure applied by potential buyers and sellers in their favor. That's very important.
If I buy a 9.8 CGC graded book, there's a...what, 80-95% chance that I will agree with their assessment, and the book inside the slab will be absolutely gorgeous...which is my goal.
When I buy a "NM/M" comic book from a random eBay seller, there's maybe a 1-5% chance that it's actually NM/M. There is only a single seller...in the literally hundreds of thousands of dollars I've spent on eBay in the last 20 years...whose "NM/M" matched mine: Lange's Sports, and its owner, Todd Lange.
When he listed a book as NM/M, it was a virtual lock that the book would be nearly flawless...and in doing so, he established a reputation on eBay whereby he could sell books he graded NM/M...and people (many people who later became regulars on the CGC board, by the way) would pay $30-$40 or more for those copies...copies of books no one wanted, and other sellers couldn't give away for a dollar or two.
Did Lange's Sports "ruin the hobby by driving up prices"? No. Multiple people simply knew exactly what they were getting, and were willing to pay for it.
One of Mr. Lucky's major errors in his article...and I do hope he comes here to discuss it...is that he bemoans "new comics" being sold for substantial premiums because they are 9.8+. What he doesn't realize is that 9.8+ IS NOT TYPICAL. The typical book, straight out of the Diamond box, is 9.4/9.6...and it only gets worse from there. People pay those premiums because they want PERFECT copies, not TYPICAL copies. Who cares that the typical copies sell for cover price? I have tons of typical copies. I also have tons of perfect copies, and both make me happy.
And to be sure, there are tons of people who scorn and dismiss those who want perfect copies. Let them. It's no skin off my nose if I enjoy collecting the way I'd like, and they can enjoy whatever it is that makes them happy.
Anyhoo...I've rambled on long enough, I would enjoy discussing this with Mr. Lucky, but I don't imagine he'd allow that on his own blog, and I doubt he'll show up here. We'll see.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jul 14, 2019 6:03:54 GMT -8
Yeah. Slabbers refined their tribal talking points against his arguments a long time ago. If only I were allowed to talk about it here The simple answer has already been posted here Steve: Q: is it true that if you take a book out of a slab it loses a ton of value? A: It's not necessarily true though it's generally true. So it seems that we all agree that this is usually the case  /End |
|
|
|
Post by Siggy's Tar Dust® on Jul 14, 2019 11:04:29 GMT -8
If only I were allowed to talk about it here The simple answer has already been posted here Steve: Q: is it true that if you take a book out of a slab it loses a ton of value? A: It's not necessarily true though it's generally true. So it seems that we all agree that this is usually the case /End Speaking for myself, I understand the point. I crack most slabs I buy, but I dislike the process (only because sharp tools are required). So let's say I see an SS slab at a LCS from a dealer I know very well; Lee's, Buscema's, and Sinnott's sigs are on the inside, and he scored it at $600 below the 12 month, 25 sales GPA- He isn't sure if he is going to sell it, and decides he wants to see the sigs- I'm there to watch. He expertly takes it out, and everything looks great. I suddenly offer him $100 over that same GPA because I really want it, and he agrees. My trust in its authenticity, and in the preservation of the grade gave me the confidence to do this. It's the same book that it was the second before the first crack of the seal. If I were a flipper, I'd try to talk him down (for obvious reasons). As a collector, I already placed a value on the item when I made my offer- For me, the slab served no more purpose than to pass along info, and to protect it until it found me. And to be perfectly honest, with the sigs on the inside, I see the slab diminishing the value. I'm sure there isn't a lot of this (specifically) going on out there, but it illustrates the mindset behind what I believe Squishee is saying. It shows that losing a ton of value isn't necessarily true, BUT since there are a lot of people who collect Comic $ instead of Comics, it's generally true. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2022 1:36:22 GMT -8
Bump. I never get tired of this subject. |
|
