NintendoAge

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T23:12:35 -05.00

Originally posted by: 1upped

Fair enough - I do have thousands of CIB's covering most systems so I thought I would just offer another view or opinion on things - as I stated above, I like the discussion from one end of the spectrum to the other so that's why I posted

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T19:31:57 -05.00

Originally posted by: qixmaster

To me, VGA should only be grading CIBs or certified news by removing the contents for display inside a special large case for CIBs that have spots for Carts/Manuals/Inserts/Etc. It would take up a lot of space, but what doesn't in this hobby

They'll do it right now by request. It'd cost close to $40-50 a game though.

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T19:21:38 -05.00

Thanks to MoeDown I am, for my first time, trying VGA out. I am grading two sealed Madden Championship Editions - one for me and one that I just sold. After holding and seeing the games in VGA cases I must say I was pretty impressed. I really don't have much of an opinion on this, but I tend to agree with what T-Bird stated that grading should be started with perfection (a 10) in mind and worked down accordingly with the smallest of flaws.

Personally I have had thousands and thousands of games (CIB, cart, Sealed, whatever) pass through my hands. I don't pretend to be an expert grader or work on a scale with what I've seen, ever. There are flaws on any conditioned game and if you are selling it as Mint or Near Mint, these flaws should be listed - nothing, in my opinion, should grade a 10. Maybe uncirculated stuff, but even then, someones grimy hands have touched the plastic or the machine gouged a crunch in the side before being placed in the case.

To me, VGA should only be grading CIBs or certified news by removing the contents for display inside a special large case for CIBs that have spots for Carts/Manuals/Inserts/Etc. It would take up a lot of space, but what doesn't in this hobby

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T18:56:56 -05.00

I would have to agree w/Dan and Moedown - if you are talking specifically VGA, they really don't vary much at all with the exception of some of the very first peices they graded which "may" be a half a grade too high - for instance an 85 might get an 80+ - And as nice as the Ninja Kid is, I have A LOT of games that are very close to that example that are CIB, hence, the reason for my grading scale for CIB being a little bit tough And last but not least, I can say for sure that some of the last games that were sold in cardboard boxes (N64/GBA/etc.) are almost all in a high grade in my collection because if I did open them, I took out the game and placed the box somewhere where it wouldn't get ruined - I guess that what makes the original NES/SNES games in Gem mint so desirable...most players didn't really care about the box back then.

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T18:08:13 -05.00

Originally posted by: arch_8ngel

Originally posted by: MoeDown

I've submitted 3000+ toys to AFA and 800+ games to VGA

You've spent upwards of $80,000 having things graded?

Probably closer to 60 over the last 6 years. You get the hook-up when you start doing volume.

Originally posted by: tuxedocivic

^ Well I haven't seen 3000 toys AFAed, but I have seen them in my hands, not pictures. I'm not talking about every single grade is all messed up. It's just sometimes varied and hard to understand. Could even be just the individual graders grade differently. I'm not sure.

A percentage of surface area way of grading maybe makes more sense to what I've experienced. You're right, I grade based on itemized damage. A crease 1" long and moderately deep, down to a 9, a quartre inch tear on the front corner near the flap, down to an 8.5, etc.

The benefit and downfall of graded action figures is the sub-grade system. A vein along the back of the card, a tiny crack or dent on the bottom of the blister or a figure with a frosty leg or sloppy paint will affect the overall grade while APPEARING identical to a higher grade figure. With a game, whether it's sealed or CIB as stated before, the box is pretty much the meat & potatos of the grade.

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T17:31:15 -05.00

^ You can just imagine how crazy his grading scheme is

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T17:28:48 -05.00

Originally posted by: MoeDown

I've submitted 3000+ toys to AFA and 800+ games to VGA

You've spent upwards of $80,000 having things graded?

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T17:22:42 -05.00

^ Well I haven't seen 3000 toys AFAed, but I have seen them in my hands, not pictures. I'm not talking about every single grade is all messed up. It's just sometimes varied and hard to understand. Could even be just the individual graders grade differently. I'm not sure.

A percentage of surface area way of grading maybe makes more sense to what I've experienced. You're right, I grade based on itemized damage. A crease 1" long and moderately deep, down to a 9, a quartre inch tear on the front corner near the flap, down to an 8.5, etc.

How do other CIB collectors establish their grade, percentage of surface area, or flaws?

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T16:45:44 -05.00

Originally posted by: Bronty

Originally posted by: tuxedocivic

Originally posted by: nullending

It's similar to coin collecting. You have a special grading scale for uncirculated based upon workmanship. If a coin is circulated, then you have a grading not heavily based on workmanship, but overall condition from use. I would consider all sealed games to be uncirculated in this respect. Then it gets graded based upon the cellophane condition, corner wear from packaging, print defects, printing color, etc. Whereas CIBs are circulated and are graded on overall condition from use.

The reason why I think VGA automatically marks a CIB down to a 9 is to avoid using two grading scales. Two grading scales would be confusing. What needs to happen is VGA needs to clearly explain their criteria and grading scale publicly and fully so that when people see a grade 90 CIB, it is understood that realistically it is a 100 based upon the criteria for CIBs. However due to a single grading scale for both CIBs and sealed games, they are ranked down and below sealed games.

I'd agree with this mostly. I also see a good point in there. I think VGA gets a lot of flak (and AFA for that matter) because their grading isn't defined or understood. I've seen AFA 90 and 80s that almost look identical. In fact I've seen AFA 85s that look better than some 90s and I think, well why did this get that and that get this grade. I haven't seen many VGAs, but I'd guess it would be a similar problem.

AFA and VGA are co-companies in case someone is like WTF.

not from what I've seen... 80s and 90s are a world apart...

I've submitted 3000+ toys to AFA and 800+ games to VGA and I can fully say Dan is 100% correct. Pictures aside, if you've seen them in hand, there is no comparison between 80s and 90s.

I think the two systems work fine together as long as there's a little understanding. VGA grades based strictly on percentages. CIB collectors grade based on perceptions and givens. A flap crease, or crease along the hinge of the top flap caused by opening the box, is a given to most any collector. Unless it's severe, it isn't a determining factor in the overall grade in most cases to the seller OR the buyer. Both understand that the crease is inevitable. But when grading percentages, it is important as the crease represents a significant percent of the box's overall surface area. Thus the "automatic" downgrade on any CIB submitted. It isn't difficult to draw a parallel between the two systems once you understand the difference.

Grading scale for CIB

1upped — 2010-07-23T16:25:02 -05.00

^ Ok maybe in VGA world. Unfortunately my experience is AFA based. Sometimes they're not to different. And there are flaws to see on the AFA90, then you look at the AFA80 and go, hmm, I could almost take the 80 over this 90 haha. And then another 80 you'll say, geez that's ugly.

Point is, VGA should be more clear on how they're grading these things. I don't think they're scale is wrong. Finding an AFA 100 should be a once in a blue moon event. And it is. Same with VGA. But some clarification would help I think.