Follow Up on the “Infamous Marvel Premiere #15” CGC “Clerical Error”

So, many people came to the site last week to check out the “What Happens When CGC Mis-grades a Comic” story. Many people have followed up that it had sold. In fact, the “Infamous Marvel Premiere #15 closed at an astonishing $965. Surely Someone wouldn’t pay that amount, right?

Well yes and no. Turns out the winning bid of $965 was a 0 feedback bidder. I reached out to the seller to see if the person had paid. They hadn’t. The seller told me several people had reached out to him in reference to buying the book at that price if the winner didn’t pay.

So what was the end result?

The seller not wanting to worry about having to do an unpaid item, on a 0 feedback bidder, the book went via second chance offer to the next highest bidder. That amount, $955. The second chance offer was taken and the “Infamous Marvel Premiere #15 has been paid for an successfully sold.

Advertisements

About Anthony

Collector of comics for 30 years.
This entry was posted in Comic books. Bookmark the permalink.

57 Responses to Follow Up on the “Infamous Marvel Premiere #15” CGC “Clerical Error”

  1. Nicc T says:

    Wooooow. I am truly amazed. The amount of low grade pch books I could buy with that money. smh, a shame.

  2. xman_2 says:

    So the seller will not be able to submit their books to CGS anymore? I guess they’ll just have someone else submit their books for them lol Don’t hate the player, hate the game ha ha

    • Anthony says:

      Lol. Exactly.

      Sent from my iPhone

      >

    • Jeremy Abbott says:

      The seller said that the second the box was opened at the store, people started throwing large offers at them. When CGC wanted the book back, the seller mentioned that they didn’t want lose out on the money. Can you blame them? There was no compensation offered, just a mention of being banned because it violates their terms of service. As far as getting future slabs? It’s simple to use a different name to submit books, or you can just use CBCS.

      • agentpoyo says:

        CBCS.. forget CGC.. 🙂

      • OC_Guy says:

        Really like CBCS. Their grading is very close to mine where every book I have sent in except for two have either been right on the money or within half a grade. Their customer service is really good as well.

      • Anthony says:

        I can honestly say I have never had a problem with either see BCS grading or customer service both are top notch.

      • timber72 says:

        Compensation for what? The slab is a mistake. The book is legitimately worth about $100 in the condition it’s in. What is there to “lose”? The “sale price” isn’t based on a legitimate market value, but on self-created notoriety.

        Brittany McManus, CGC’s customer service director, said that CGC offered to pay for the cost to ship it back and forth (which they should without question), AND a “free grading” which, for a book like this, is a $35…and I don’t doubt they’d cover shipping for that book/slab, too.

        So yes, I CAN blame the seller.

        Why on earth would anyone start throwing “large offers” at the seller at whatever store they say this happened at? I doubt the veracity of that, but IF it’s true, those are people with an agenda against CGC, attempting to make CGC look bad.

      • Anthony says:

        It sold. His only agenda is he feels that CGC has no right to tell him what to do with his personal property. CGC was done with the book once they graded it. Yes, terms of service were “violated” by not sending it back, however there is no law that says he has too. CGC took the book out of the census and has banned him. So they took their steps. However, he will still use CGC just have friends submit books for him. His intention was to always sell the book, even before the book came back. The difference is the stink that was raised the price of the book from your estimate of $100 to $955 dollars which a buyer, not just one but several ended up making offers on it if it didn’t close, so people do feel there is value to the book. No agenda.

        Sent from my iPhone

        >

      • timber72 says:

        “It sold. His only agenda is he feels that CGC has no right to tell him what to do with his personal property.”

        And they don’t.

        That doesn’t mean, however, that they can’t or shouldn’t exercise THEIR rights with respect to their terms and conditions of service.

        “CGC was done with the book once they graded it.”

        No, that’s not accurate. Their terms cover contingencies of this sort, which is what happened here.

        ” Yes, terms of service were “violated” by not sending it back, ”

        No, not “violated.” Actually, no quote, violated.

        “however there is no law that says he has too. CGC took the book out of the census and has banned him. So they took their steps. However, he will still use CGC just have friends submit books for him.”

        And if he/she does (I assume this submitter is a “he”?) and CGC finds out, they can ban them, too.

        ” His intention was to always sell the book, even before the book came back. The difference is the stink that was raised the price of the book from your estimate of $100 to $955 dollars which a buyer, not just one but several ended up making offers on it if it didn’t close, so people do feel there is value to the book. No agenda.””

        You just contradicted yourself with your last two statements. Why do people feel “there is value to the book” far beyond what a book correctly labeled would sell for?

        Because they have an agenda, and that agenda is to rub CGC’s face in their mistake.

        Otherwise, there’s not a single reason why this book should sell for 7 to 10 times FMV for this book in this condition. Notoriety is the ONLY reason this book sold…or, perhaps, “sold”…for what it did.

      • Anthony says:

        They did exercise their terms and conditions. They have stricken the book from the records and he is. It allowed to submit books. They have enforced their terms and conditions. Their only other option is litigation, which would be costly, time consuming, and at this point moot as he. I longer has custody of the book.

  3. Stanley says:

    At ebay, accurately graded comics from reputable sellers can be purchased for less. Overpaying for an obviously misgraded comic is a mistake for a crazy minority of buyers.

    • JayClue says:

      I believe the appeal in this particular slab will now be that it is the infamous graded CGC error slab. The slab itself is kinda an outlaw, unique, and one of a kind. To some, that gives it value. I wonder what this does for CGC graded books, now that it has been shown that their terms of agreement doesn’t have any actual teeth. How many other books of theirs are incorrectly graded and floating around in the market? What is truly stopping people from selling error graded comics? Of CGC has removed it from their records, but it isn’t in their possession, couldn’t their possibly be more like it out there? And how can you verify it, if there is no CGC record of it? To me, with this book being sold, it has opened a Pandora’s box.

      • Cody says:

        To me it seems like anyone could take a 9.2 slab and leave it outside for a week and the book inside is gonna get water damage and whatnot. I guess rarity is in the eye of the beholder.

      • agentpoyo says:

        Yeah but Cody, how does one get all the rounded corners and stress marks that look like they’re 30 years old as well? One could submerge a CGC slab into the water but one can usually tell if it’s old water stains or new water stains.

      • Anthony says:

        Take the water stained book and put it in an old, hot, dusty, barn. Said book should age nicely quickly.

      • agentpoyo says:

        Yeah, but if it’s in a slab, not gonna age that fast..

      • Anthony says:

        So my idea now is to buy an actual Cgc 9.2 and pour coffee down the back of it and fake the Mis-graded one. Or. Start a new trend of ruining actual high grade books and calling them a “clerical error” book and reap the rewards.

      • Cody says:

        My sentiments exactly.

      • Andrew Cantrell says:

        This is an interesting point. I think their terms of agreement still have some teeth. The reason being is since it has been wiped from the system there is always the question if this is some kind of counterfeit. Nonetheless I say good job to the seller on this one (I really didn’t expect this outcome).

      • timber72 says:

        The terms of agreement doesn’t have any actual teeth…?

        Says who?

        A contract is an agreement between TWO (or more) parties, not just one.

        The terms don’t provide a mechanism for forcing a seller to return a slab…only that the submitter is OBLIGATED to do so in this circumstances. This submitted didn’t honor the terms HE AGREED TO…that’s not on CGC or their terms, that’s on this submitter. Why should he/she be rewarded for violating terms he agreed to? And yet, it’s clear he/she has, at least for now.

        And you highlight the very problem: you call this an “incorrectly graded book.”

        It’s not.

        It’s got the wrong label.

        The book itself wasn’t incorrectly graded. Someone attached the wrong label to it at some point.

        But that doesn’t stop people from…falsely…claiming this book was “incorrectly graded”, furthering the….false….impression that CGC is capable of grading a book that looks like this as a 9.2.

        CGC is a lot of things…but wholly incompetent they are not.

      • Anthony says:

        The book went through numerous quality control checks and failed at each step. Did he violate the terms of agreement, sure. However it is his personal property and they cannot legally force him to send it back. It’s his book. They took their steps, he took his. The book has a new owner. The story is over.

        Sent from my iPhone

        >

      • JayClue says:

        I understand that the TOA is an agreement between the parties involved, however, a good TOA will have real repercussions to any party that breaks said terms. Thus encouraging people not to break the TOA. If there is a need for a TOA, somebody is obviously protecting something, by including such an agreement in the first place. The terms of agreement has been shown to have no teeth because, from what Ive read, CGC asked for the book back as per the TOA. The owner didnt return the book, breaking the TOA, and from what I can see, there will be no repercussions towards the owner for breaking the TOA. Just a hefty profit from resale on a incorrectly graded, official, CGC slab. Thus, the TOA has no teeth.

        As for the slab being mislabeled or incorrectly graded, that is simply getting into semantics. The fact is, the book is in a slab with the wrong grade. How the wrong grade got there is moot. The buyer didnt buy the book because it either/or was mislabeled or incorrectly graded, he bought it because it is a CGC slab that has an obviously wrong grade on it. The fact remains that that book is in an official CGC slab that has a peversely wrong grade on it. Call it what you want. It is what it is.

        The slab is not in CGCs catalog anymore, but is out in the open market being fairly traded among the collecting community. How many other bogus CGC graded books, that arent in the CGC catalog, are out there?

        I never claimed CGC to be wholly incompetent. But, clearly, they sh!t the bed on this one.

      • timber72 says:

        “The book went through numerous quality control checks and failed at each step.”

        The quality control steps at CGC are proprietary, and not released to the public. Maybe the book went through numerous quality control checks and failed, maybe it only failed at the end…the last step.

        “Did he violate the terms of agreement, sure. However it is his personal property and they cannot legally force him to send it back. It’s his book.”

        Yes, and I don’t see anyone questioning or challenging that.

        ” They took their steps, he took his. The book has a new owner. The story is over.”

        Oh, this story isn’t over. The story’s not going to be over until and if that book is removed from the invalid slab. Until then, the story won’t ever be over, even if certain chapters are.

      • Anthony says:

        The book is in the hand of someone else. That person is anonymous. Unless that person decides to sell it or send it back, which after paying as much as they did I doubt they will, then CGC cannot force him to disclose the buyer and they no longer have any way of knowing who has it. So yes, it is pretty much dead.

      • timber72 says:

        “I understand that the TOA is an agreement between the parties involved, however, a good TOA will have real repercussions to any party that breaks said terms. Thus encouraging people not to break the TOA. If there is a need for a TOA, somebody is obviously protecting something, by including such an agreement in the first place. The terms of agreement has been shown to have no teeth because, from what Ive read, CGC asked for the book back as per the TOA. The owner didnt return the book, breaking the TOA, and from what I can see, there will be no repercussions towards the owner for breaking the TOA. Just a hefty profit from resale on a incorrectly graded, official, CGC slab. Thus, the TOA has no teeth.”

        The submitter is barred from submitting books.

        Yes, he/she can submit them through others, but if a submitter was a regular customer, this would make things quite difficult, and if CGC found out, they could likely bar that proxy, too.

        Those are the terms laid out for all to see, and to which every submitter agrees. CGC isn’t the FBI, with the power of law enforcement behind them to force a return. What sort of “teeth” would you expect from a private company? For CGC to take someone to court? They could, but it’s not at all worth it.

        Just because something isn’t expedient doesn’t mean the terms have no teeth.

      • timber72 says:

        “As for the slab being mislabeled or incorrectly graded, that is simply getting into semantics. The fact is, the book is in a slab with the wrong grade. How the wrong grade got there is moot. The buyer didnt buy the book because it either/or was mislabeled or incorrectly graded, he bought it because it is a CGC slab that has an obviously wrong grade on it. The fact remains that that book is in an official CGC slab that has a peversely wrong grade on it. Call it what you want. It is what it is.”

        That’s not true at all.

        One is a clerical error, easily understood by everyone with functioning brain cells to be a clerical error, the other is an error that could potentially misrepresent the whole concept of “certified comics books.”

        It is not only NOT moot, it’s the very heart of why this is such a problem. “How the wrong grade got there” is what is at stake.

        Was this book ACTUALLY graded 9.2 by someone at CGC, or is this just an “obvious” clerical error? There’s no way to know, based on looking JUST at that slab, and not knowing the back story. To someone unfamiliar with this story, that slab could very easily paint a very negative picture of comic book grading.

        That’s precisely why this is an issue.

        “The slab is not in CGCs catalog anymore, but is out in the open market being fairly traded among the collecting community. How many other bogus CGC graded books, that arent in the CGC catalog, are out there?

        I never claimed CGC to be wholly incompetent. But, clearly, they sh!t the bed on this one.”

        Didn’t say you did. Simply answering the implication that this situation brings up.

      • JayClue says:

        @Timber72
        Re: Me – ‘Call it what you want. It is what it is.’
        You – ‘Thats not true at all’

        Lol. So its not what it is? Please. Explain that (non) logic?

        Re. ‘…easily understood by everyone with functioning brain cells to be a clerical
        error, the other is an error…’

        You made my exact point (an obvious one at that, that your functioning? brain cells couldnt quite grasp) with that silly statement. As I simply stated previously, it is what it is. Its an error. It commanded the price it did because its an error. How the error got there, for this particular book, is moot. Its moot to the buyer, its moot to the seller and its moot to the market at large. Its moot to everyone but CGC and you, apparently. The market will determine if this impacts the CGC grading credibility. I would suspect that this one book will not have a negative impact on graded CGC books. But the precedent has been set, and widely noted among the community. At very least, CGC may be on watch, as far as its credibility, by the collecting community. And yes, no teeth. Having to submit under an alias is a small price to pay in exchange for $900+ cash money. And that is all I have to say about that.

      • Anthony says:

        If anything this may help CGC to prevent this type of error again. Who knows how many clerical errors made it out into the wild that were never caught. We have all seen books with grades we scratched our heads on.

  4. Brennan says:

    Does anyone think this will hold its value?? Jayclue brings up some good points too. How will this affect other cgc graded books?

    • Jeremy Abbott says:

      As long as people remember it exists and also if other books come to light, yes.

    • agentpoyo says:

      Depends.. demand causes value. So if the winner ever decides to sell it again, the next price it sells for will determine if it holds value, loses value or increases value. There are those that love error books (when I collected coins, there was what seemed like a bigger community that would buy error coins). As for me, I think errors are neat but I never pay premium for them.. I can’t bring myself to buy something at a premium price knowing it was all due to a mistake.. It’d be like buying a new BMW but they accidentally put the BMW emblem on the hood upside down.. 🙂

      • Brennan says:

        I enjoy collecting recalled comics and comics that get alterednin future editions (a la x men gold). You’re right though, I’d never pay more than cover for them.

      • agentpoyo says:

        The other thing to consider about this type of error is.. it’s not really an error on the book itself. It’s truly someone’s f&*k up at CGC.. so it’s a CGC error, not a Marvel error that slipped through the cracks. So someone paid a premium price for something that likely got someone fired for at CGC (or could get canned for). 😉

        Next time I’m at work and I screw up something, I’m just gonna tell my boss my screw up is valuable and I should get a raise from screwing up cause it was a “one of a kind type of screwup”.. 😉

    • Andrew Cantrell says:

      I say no way. Just because someone paid out the yin yang for this doesn’t mean that is what it’s value is. I hope that this is for the buyer’s PC.

  5. Smitty9729 says:

    I get error graded books from CGC all the time… Waaaaay lower than I wanted it to be graded at.

  6. Georges Pearson says:

    CGC bought it.

  7. Yeah there is no way on the planet CGC did not buy that book! If they didn’t someone sould not only be fired for this but for the non-purchase of on item that will ALWAYS BE HELD OVER THEM!!!!

  8. OC_Guy says:

    I wonder if this will be one of those collectibles that is showcased by high end dealers at large comic cons.

  9. Cody says:

    I once had a Spider-Man deadpool come back from grading that was at best a 9.2 that came back as a 9.8. I sold it as such maybe I should’ve marketed it as a cgc error. You live and you learn.

  10. Andrew Cantrell says:

    It is kind of humorous that there are “real” 9.2 grades of this comic on eBay going for less than this.

  11. J. Coleman says:

    Wow, somebody had money to burn. So would this be the rarest CGC – non-CGC book?

  12. David Bitterbaum says:

    And little ol’ me thought nobody would want an incorrectly graded/clerical-error book. I guess the infamy actually helped it.

  13. adamlebednikusa says:

    Id take that payout all-day every-day. Good on the Seller.

    • timber72 says:

      So, taking advantage of someone else’s mistake to make a quick buck is cool, then…?

      • JayClue says:

        If that someone who made the mistake, is a large corporate venture (or the government, lol)? Then yes, by all means. God knows they wouldnt hesitate to screw you over for a quick $. Its not like the sale of this slab has caused the apocalypse. The faceless corporation will be okay. Its a nice win for the little guy.

Comments are closed.