All these facts seems precarious at best to me. Ron definitely has a vested
interest in Heritage Auctions--he's most likely making a tidy sum in one
way or another off of their profits. Anything can appear positive through
the lens on opportunity. I think very few collectors who have been around
for any period of time would whole heartedly accept such an endeavor. Just
my two cents....
Rick
In a message dated 7/2/2010 4:14:40 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
Grey-My facts came straight from CGC and are straight. Linear even. They
are exactly what you just posted with exception of the Modern category which
we didn’t speak about.
Thank you for straightening me out!
-Peter
Peter Contarino
From: MoPo List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Smith,
Grey - 1367
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 6:13 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [MOPO] CGC Slabbed Lobby cards
Peter,
You need to get your facts straight.
Here is what I know the price tier to be:
* Modern (1970 +) FMV ($100 or less per card) Price Range: $6.50, or
$40 for 8 piece complete sets (John, this is where the Dirty Harry set
would fall!)
* Economy FMV ($300 or less per card) Price Range: $10, or $65 for 8
piece complete sets
* Standard FMV ($1000 or less per card) Price Range: $20, or $130
for 8 piece complete sets
* Express FMV ($5000 or less per card) Price Range: $40 (or NO
Express Tier) or $250 for 8 piece complete sets
* Walk Thru FMV (over $5000 per card) Price Range (1% FMV) Min
80/Max $1000 or min $480/Max $6000 for 8 piece sets
Concerning the question Bruce has raised about who owns CGC, as I am sure
he knows something about the leading question he raises but none of the
particulars, and they are.
Jim Halperin and Steve Ivy, of Heritage, own a non-voting minority equity
interest in CGC's parent (acquired strictly as a passive investment and
grandfathered in to the company based on previous CGC ownership) and are two
of a number of shareholders and have never had any involvement in the
management of the company. The company is operated and 100% controlled by
majority owner Mark Salzberg and minority owner Steve Eichenbaum, neither of
whom
have any involvement in the movie poster business.
As a matter of fact, I know that one of the major dissenting voices in
this group actively lobbied CGC to grade lobby cards for some time and to no
avail.
I have not nor would I ever suggest that slabbing cards would be for
everyone. Nor would I ever tell a consignor that they must slab their cards to
be included in an auction, as anyone can plainly see by the current catalog
online. Only time will tell whether it will be a factor in the hobby and I
appreciate all the opinions as all are valid in their own way.
From: MoPo List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kirby
McDaniel
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 4:39 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [MOPO] CGC Slabbed Lobby cards
Peter,
Have you tried a STANBACK powder? My grandmother used to swear by them.
Excedren supposedly works on migraines, but I use ZOMIG. Though you have
to get
a prescription!
Kirby
On Jul 2, 2010, at 3:31 PM, peter contarino wrote:
I learned some time back that Grey had met with CGC to “train” their
comic book graders on grading movie material, so I knew this was coming. I
suppose we all knew this would rear its ugly head eventually. I am encouraged
by the feedback I am hearing on MOPO with regards to the balloon that
Heritage has floated with the upcoming auction. The correct and salient
questions
are being asked and, not surprisingly, are not being answered to anyone’s
satisfaction. Bruce has the firmest grasp of the reality of what CGC would
bring to the table, which is basically nothing. Nothing positive at least.
Since Ron Moore has evidently become the default spokesperson for Heritage,
let me address his post, non sequiturs and all:
Ron starts by suggesting that given the Universal Haggard debacle, many
people on MOPO are in favor of a third party grading/authentication entity. I
haven’t spoken with even one collector or dealer who is in favor of this
nor have nearly any of the posts indicated this. The vast majority of
collectors can’t even afford Universal paper.
In response to Bruce’s statement regarding the influx on investors who
have “overrun other hobbies”, Ron states:
“Sorry, but I’ve never understood this argument. Are you saying that
because someone has money (or has access to more disposable income than you)
that they couldn’t possibly love the film as much as you do? Therefore, if
they buy a lobby and are willing to pay more than you, then they are
investors and not collectors? I truly don’t understand the logic here at all.
To
me, that’s completely irrational. Here’s another take on the same argument
(that’s also just as irrational)- MAYBE they are more of a fan than you and
are willing to prove it by shelling out more money to buy the item than you’
re willing to pay. Therefore you couldn’t possibly love the lobby/film
more than the “investor”. – Hmmm… that doesn’t make much sense either. Maybe
there’s another reason people are willing to pay more for slabbed items…”
No, that is not what Bruce is saying. He is merely pointing out a reality
that has overwhelming precedent from other hobbies. Comic book collecting,
for example, is no longer as much of a hobby as it is an investment
vehicle. More on that later.
In answer to Bruce’s question #2, Ron states with respect to CGC: “this
is EXACTLY what we need”. He goes on to make the following statements: “I
can only hope that the people at CGC have enough experience in spotting fake
paper collectibles”… “They’ve been trained to look for problems so they
willhopefully spot problems”… “As long as the information is available to
CGC about reissues, etc., I’m sure they will get it right and certainly as
well as any other dealer. This is a learning curve that any collector or
dealer goes through when entering a new hobby”(emphasis all mine).
Well. That is certainly a compelling and encouraging argument. They have
had a crash course in grading movie paper and are therefore as qualified as
any dealer in the world at grading and he is sure they will get it right.
Hopefully, that is.
In response to Bruce’s succinct comment regarding whether a paid employee
who has looked at a piece for a minute is more trustworthy than a dealer
with 20-30 years of experience, Ron responds with:
“I certainly hope this isn’t a lack of faith in long-standing dealers”.
Huh? He continues: “However… just because someone’s been dealing for 20 to
30 years (myself included here) doesn’t make them “in-line” with the
current grading standards… that don’t actually exist.” Say what Ron?
Which leads me to what should be the headline of Ron’s post and the crux
of the matter: A new grading standard to be determined by CGC. CGC re-wrote
the rules of grading comic books and it is painfully obvious that they
intend to do the same with movie paper. And if they follow suit, the grading
will be based on their own set of furtive values. Inconsistent and
unreliable, with ambiguous explanations of how the grade was determined. Plan
on your
near mint, gorgeous lobby card that has a small bit of brown tape on the
reverse coming back a 5.0.
The other cheerleader for this singularly bad idea stated:
“The point of slabbing is exactly as Bruce writes - its designed to assure
people new to the hobby that the cards are real and graded properly.”
No, that’s not what Bruce said and it is disingenuous and naive to claim
that this is the purpose of slabbing.
“These new collectors don't know Bruce or Rich, don't know how to grade
lobby cards and don't know who to trust. But they still are interested in
collecting and investing. CGC has been around long enough in enough different
hobbies to maintain credibility.”
Uh huh.
By the way, the cost involved in slabbing is not only the encapsulation,
but is based on a multi-tiered system, and with regards to the more
expensive material, the cost is calculated according to what CGC determines
the
material is worth after grading. This is what’s known in the real world as
conflict of interest. I will address actual costs shortly.
“These new collectors might be speculators and might drive up prices to
amazing levels - but I am having a hard time thinking that's a bad thing. So
slabbing will bring in more customers, some of who might actually become
real collectors, drive up prices on the better material and make the dealers
more money and the worth of collections higher. What's the objection?
If it works out like it did in comics - it actually DROPPED the prices of
lesser material. Only the very top pieces maintained the huge "overguide"
prices.”
Excuse me for a second while I get a BC powder….Ok I’m back.
So…slabbing will increase the worth of collections and at the same time
drive down the value of lesser material. Well that’s great if your
collection consists of nothing but high grade, high end material(evidently,
high
grade, high-end material is the nucleus of all collections).
The majority of comments being made by detractors of this plan(that being
pretty much everyone)have two recurring themes: the cost and hassle of
slabbing, and the net effect on the hobby. These are practical questions and
are also born out of a love and concern for the hobby. The above quotes
demonstrate the real motivation behind this effort to bring a third party
grading system into play: To drive prices. Plain and simple.
This is a business decision by Heritage to interface with CGC and it is
certainly their right to do so. It may in fact be a smart business move on
their part. But let’s not fool ourselves or be fooled. This is not an
altruistic effort to help the hobby and new collectors who might(god
forbid)make
mistakes initially while paying their dues learning the hobby/market as we
all have. Learning first hand, making mistakes, gaining knowledge through
experience is part of the process, the journey, as they say.
Make no mistake, this is not for the benefit of the collector or the good
of the hobby(depending on your definition of good). This will benefit CGC
and a few interested parties. And yes, if successfully implemented, high end
material will sky-rocket and as Bruce has correctly pointed out, become
the intrinsic realm of investors, not collectors.
With the constant barrage of the same titles being offered over and over
and over(and over) every week it has become painfully obvious how plentiful
much of the material is. The net effect of this unsustainable model is that
the market is in a state of decline. So when scarcity is no longer in
play, condition will rule the day. And that is the point of this exercise: To
abate the negative effects of ceaselessly flooding the market with material
by taking the market in a new direction and putting emphasis on condition.
It has been suggested that all these pesky, gainsaying, uninformed,
contrarian philistines misunderstand this new and requisite need for a third
party grading system and are resistant to change. Their concerns are well
founded, however. I called CGC and spoke with them just now. Here is the way
the
tiered fee structure works at CGC for lobby cards:
A card with a maximum value of 300.00 is labeled “Economy” and costs $10
with a 40 business day turnaround
A card with a maximum value of 1000.00 is labeled “Standard” and costs
$20 with a 15 business day turnaround.
A card with a maximum value of 5000.00 is labeled “Express” and costs $40
with a 5 business day turnaround.
A card that is valued at more than 5000.00 is labeled “Walk through” and
costs 1% of fair market value.
“Fair market value” by the way is ultimately determined by CGC. For
example, if I send a card in that I think is worth 2000.00 and CGC looks at it
and says “no, this will grade at such and such and is worth 8000.00”, my
cost on that card just went from $40.00 to 80.00 if I decide to proceed(in
theory and maybe practice, they contact you before proceeding). If they
determine it is worth $5,500.00, it’s still $80 because for anything valued
greater than $5000.00, there is an $80 minimum. On the upside there is a
$1000.00 maximum charge per card.
How sweet is that!
At the end of the day, the most persuasive argument presented so far in
favor of slabbing is that I could eat Fruit Loops and splash milk while
enjoying my Lobbies.
-Peter
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at _www.filmfan.com_
(http://www.filmfan.com/)
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]_
(mailto:[email protected])
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________ How to
UNSUBSCRIBE from the
MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to:
[email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this
message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
