Unsealing PGX graded books Nov 2008: Amazing Spider-man 129 PGX 8.0

[Burco1]

I have only used PGX once and I think they overgraded the two books I sent. One came back a 5.0 (Submariner # 16). It looks more like a 4.0, maybe a 5.0. The other book, Amazing Spiderman # 11, came back a 3.0 when it appears to be a 2.0. Do you think that PGX has difficulty grading higher end books like the one you sent?

[FroComb]

@Burco1 Honestly, I don't know what to think when considering PGX grading. After my first submissions I thought I was a poor judge at comic grading. I had only used PGX at that time. Then I started scanning and comparing my books with CGC & PGX books. My grading seemed more in line with CGC. PGX was all over the map on their grading. Then I discovered that collectors seemed to pay premium prices in .favor of CGC'd books. That inspired me to reconsider every comic I had PGX'd. And so it goes....

[DipzG]

That's crazy, usually PGX grades higher than CGC.

[FroComb]

@DipzG I agree. It was CGC graded and returned in Jan 2010 a CGC 9.4. I had to call CGC for the grader notes just to confirm that they had considered all the defects I had observed. And they did! The total defects were very small and the accumulation of all was enough to warrant a NM from 3 out of 3 graders. From PGX's 8.5 I had hoped maybe a 9.0. But a 9.4 is a blessing! Now, I've got to ask, what the heck was PGX looking at?!?!??

[macoport1]

wow pgx sucks

[dakenhowlett]

wow its interesting to see the diff between pgx and cgc

[FroComb]

The difference was jaw-dropping. I submitted this in Dec 2009 to CGC. It was returned in Jan 2010 a CGC 9.4. I had to call CGC for the grader notes just to confirm that they had considered all the defects I had observed. And they did! The total defects were very small and the accumulation of all was enough to warrant a NM from 3 out of 3 graders. I had hoped maybe a 9.0. But a 9.4 is a blessing!