Peter,
Well said, well-organized and you covered it. I understand that Grey is
under pressure to "do something" about preventing any possible future
repeat of the Haggard Affair, but handing our hobby over to CGC is just
not the way to do it. A more sensible approach would have been
Grey/Heritage getting together with some other people in the movie paper
hobby/business and starting their own version of CGC -- one which would
be movie-paper specific -- and one which did not involve slabbing but
did involve registration serial numbers which could be tiny, stamped on
the back of the poster in the border area in indelible ink. That would
not harm the poster in any way. The registration number would be kept on
file with the issuing authentication (and possibly grading)
organization, and any time a registered poster was sold, it would be
required that the new owner apply for a "title in their name" if they
wanted to keep the registration current (and its associated
authentication/grading opinion valid in the issuing organizations database).
It could work just like the title/VIN number for a motor vehicle does.
It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be far better than the CGC slab
approach and the idea of minimum wage employees authenticating and
grading collectibles. Oh yeah, the service should have a fixed fee,
based on the size of the poster. None of this conflict of interest stuff
where the higher the grade given the item the higher the final service
fee the grading service charges. That's the kind of rating service
baloney that got Wall Street and the banks in big trouble. A flat rate
service fee would mean no money-back guarantees -- which is fine by me
-- just an honest appraisal-opinion of authenticity and a tracking
serial number issued by known, reputable and highly-experienced people
who really know movie paper.
-- JR
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 will /hopefully/ 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
___________________________________________________________________
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.
