Age Biased grading.. Opinions?

[Silverdream]

I have a strong opinion about grading comics and I am quite curious how all of you view this subject.

As many of you may know there has been a norm in the industry for quite some time to allow more defects during certain "ages" particularly Golden and early Silver age books.

The main argument used in this discussion is the lower quality of production during those periods. Lower quality paper, staples, inks, blades ( marvel chipping anyone ) packing and shipping standards ( string and twine ) I have heard every excuse there is to raise a grade on a book that is old simply because it is old.

Ok so maybe I am being a little rough.... The idea of near-mint/mint is as if you pulled the book right after it was printed from the press right? I get the concept, I don't entirely agree with it, but whatever.

What about the pencil marks, and date stamps. A new book today would lose grade to almost anyone if it had pencil marks, or a gigantic ink stamp on the back cover. But we let it go because " back then this was normal "

Ok , so using that same reasoning, am I allowed to call the 30+ Roy Rogers books in otherwise very nice condition that I have, VF , even though they all have book-lenth color breaking subscription creases, because " that was the norm back in the 50's ?" I think not.

Where do we draw the line? And where are these lines at??? Why are we grading a book from 1955 the same way we are grading a book from 1938:confused: Sure they are both golden age, but SURELY the production of comics changed in those 17 years.

Another way to look at it is why is a book from 1955 ( golden/atom age ) allowed to have a larger prodution flaw in the same grade, than a book from 1956 ( silver age ) :confused: was there some new Global-thermoucluar printing technique invented on December 31, 1955 I don't know about??:rolleyes:


Call me crazy , but wouldnt it just be better to have one standard without all the confusing exceptions, and the questionable lines we draw for these exceptions.

Wether you agree or disagree , I would really like to hear your viewpoints.

[fastballspecial]

The far back you go the lower the standards get. Thats across the board especially CGC and OS dealers as well. Golden Age gets a much better pass then SA and Bronze over Copper the same way. Pencil marks and date stamps are excepted because they were so prevalent back then. Past late 70s the dont even exist except an occasional library stamp due to direct market.

[grininbarrett]

Retailers want to be able to state that their books are in the highest condition possible, always have always will. The grading bump for silver and GA books has been SOP for ages. Basically a marketing gimmick tacitly agreed upon by virtually all sellers.

The interesting thing was the opportunity was there for CGC to disregard the "tradition" and standardize grading across the board. You would just have seen a degradation in the grade for the older issues, but buyers and sellers alike would understand that 8.5 books would be the standard for silver and 7.0 would be standard for GA (or whatever the average ends up).

I am not surprised that CGC decided to stick with the looser standards for older books. It may even benefit the hobby. Novices don't have to understand that a 4.0 in GA is really a quality book because it is being graded 6.0 anyway.

Note all numbers were simply for illustrative purposes only. I am in no way implying that GA are bumped 2 whole points. Well sortof .... ;)

[Silverdream]

I am not surprised that CGC decided to stick with the looser standards for older books. It may even benefit the hobby. Novices don't have to understand that a 4.0 in GA is really a quality book because it is being graded 6.0 anyway.

A very good point. New way to look at things, I appreciate your feedback.

[dannyboi1]

I can't speak for CGC with Golden age yet, but Silver Age I've found them to be difficult. I send in a Hulk # 6 and TTA # 27 that they graded both a VG 4.5 - I didn't see any favoritism towards early silver age. The Hulk was, IMO, a little better than the TTA, but both books were solid, flat, glossy with little to no wear outside of tanning/foxing.

[Khumbu]

It is not always the case. I have a Planet #29 that is otherwise in VF+, I mean a real VF +, but some boob just before I bought it dropped it and put a slight ding in the BLC, because of that the book in now graded CGC 4.5. My real problem with the CGC grading curve for older books though is when they start grading in the 9.0 and above range. That is where the big money is. The comics darn well better be NM- or better when you grade a book that high, not just rounding it up because it is old. If I am forking over thousands of dollars for a Golden Age Planet Comics #42 in 9.4 I expect that comic to be in NM, not in VF-.

[tiptophimp]

I dont believe age should hold any relavence with grading.