UKG80 Death Star Droid

Just saw this up on FB - what do people think has happened here - mistake at grading or the case been tampered with ?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Vintage-Star-Wars-Death-Star-Droid-Hong-Kong-UKG-80-/231657176599?hash=item35efd7fe17

And before I get accused (again) of being anti- UKG, this is the first one of these I have seen (plenty of AFA errors out there)

I don't know Iain but I really cant see why you would even bother getting that graded. It doesn't exactly look in good condition.

As loose DSD go, this is probably an 80.

From the stomach down u mean :lol:

Wow that's horrible. If an 80 is around a c8 in old money, I don't think it gets much past a c6 even for a DSD.

Would be good to hear UKG's thoughts.

Probably is about an 80 for DSD, but this is the thing for me with graded stuff you can still decide for yourself what condition it's in. It's possible that the case has been opened and resealed though. :?

I always think a 80 grade for a loose is the equivalent of 70/75 for a packaged item.

Ye I agree that is a terrible 80 grade - I can't see how it could possibly have got 80 for paint though the limbs may be stiff but perhaps unlikely.

I think these cases are tamper-able - I once sent a Luke Stormie afa coin to UKG to be cased up with a figure and the empty AFA case came back perfectly opened - no cracks.

Such a low feedback score for the seller isn't exactly confidence inspiring either lol

I've always assumed figures are graded in the same way without reference to what figure it is, so identical quality Luke FB, DSD or Romba would all get an identical grade (assuming the grader is doing his job properly). So if they all have a paint chip they'd all be penalised in the same way.

A couple of people have said that's an 80 for that DSD, implying different figures would be treated differently so a DSD would be treated more leniently than something else.

Is this right?

The graders can't start differentiating on quality based on the fact its a DSD or Romba or whatever can they? There would just be more Romba 80s out there than DSD 80s wouldn't there?

Surely they grade what's in front of them, rather than adjusting the grades because a minty DSD is hard to find?

jedisearcher said:

I've always assumed figures are graded in the same way without reference to what figure it is, so identical quality Luke FB, DSD or Romba would all get an identical grade (assuming the grader is doing his job properly). So if they all have a paint chip they'd all be penalised in the same way.

A couple of people have said that's an 80 for that DSD, implying different figures would be treated differently so a DSD would be treated more leniently than something else.

Is this right?

The graders can't start differentiating on quality based on the fact its a DSD or Romba or whatever can they? There would just be more Romba 80s out there than DSD 80s wouldn't there?

Surely they grade what's in front of them, rather than adjusting the grades because a minty DSD is hard to find?

Click to expand...

I would like to think your right but who knows. Looks like someone wants it anyway. :roll:

jedisearcher said:

I've always assumed figures are graded in the same way without reference to what figure it is, so identical quality Luke FB, DSD or Romba would all get an identical grade (assuming the grader is doing his job properly). So if they all have a paint chip they'd all be penalised in the same way.

A couple of people have said that's an 80 for that DSD, implying different figures would be treated differently so a DSD would be treated more leniently than something else.

Is this right?

The graders can't start differentiating on quality based on the fact its a DSD or Romba or whatever can they? There would just be more Romba 80s out there than DSD 80s wouldn't there?

Surely they grade what's in front of them, rather than adjusting the grades because a minty DSD is hard to find?

Click to expand...

Grading works on percentage, it stands to reason that when grading a figure that has paint all over it (3po,dsd) as opposed to next to none that this will be taken into account, if you sent a sealed falcon and an endor forest ranger with the same amount of damage to be graded the falcon would have a higher grade as its bigger in size and that would be taken in to account.....like i said its all percentage and volume

That said that looks to be bad 80 grade :? If thats the only damage in the Picture i could see it scraping an 80

momike said:

Grading works on percentage

Click to expand...

It doesn't though - if that was the case, a card with 5% of it torn off would grade 95. I've seen plenty of MOCs that are case fresh apart from one tiny vein or tear that have got 70 or even lower. The score is apparently based on the overall visual appeal. This DSD should have got a 40 with those eyes! I'm especially surprised to see this as UKG are generally harsher than AFA, I've seen practically mint UKG graded MOCs and loose figures get 80 for no real reason.

£37 for a label! :shock: :lol:

It's got to be somthing to do with percentage Edd it says 80% :lol: I don't know how the graders tick when grading carded as it's not really my bag....I'm just saying if I was grading a loose figure it stands to reason that you are going to take in to account the amount of paint applied to the figure when making a decision on a grade

momike said:

It's got to be somthing to do with percentage Edd it says 80% :lol: I don't know how the graders tick when grading carded as it's not really my bag....I'm just saying if I was grading a loose figure it stands to reason that you are going to take in to account the amount of paint applied to the figure when making a decision on a grade

Click to expand...

Yeah I know what you're saying and agree with you, unfortunately grading has little logic applied to it :lol:

Isn't the UKG guy a member on this board? maybe he could give us an explanation, anyone know his name?

i opened up a case recently without any damage as when i put my scissors in the gap to crack the case open, the case started to seperate at the joins and then as i move the scissors slowly around i managed to lift it more and more until it separated it.

it actually made me wonder if thats how they recase things now instead of cracking case open at the bottom

Do UKG take a pic of everything they grade? If not I think it maybe an idea to do this going forward.

jedisearcher said:

I've always assumed figures are graded in the same way without reference to what figure it is, so identical quality Luke FB, DSD or Romba would all get an identical grade (assuming the grader is doing his job properly). So if they all have a paint chip they'd all be penalised in the same way.

A couple of people have said that's an 80 for that DSD, implying different figures would be treated differently so a DSD would be treated more leniently than something else.

Is this right?

The graders can't start differentiating on quality based on the fact its a DSD or Romba or whatever can they? There would just be more Romba 80s out there than DSD 80s wouldn't there?

Surely they grade what's in front of them, rather than adjusting the grades because a minty DSD is hard to find?

Click to expand...

Well I don't think they do differentiate between items in my experience anyway. Look how hard it is to get an R2 that would make 85 or 90 compared to an ewok for instance. I've got an 80 R2 pop up and its pretty much mint to look at to be fair but fair enough .

I don't know the methods by which graders operate but the afa description on their site is more of an overall description of how the item appears and functions on a sliding scale downwards from the items condition when first produced without flaws - not so much a mathematical surface paint percentage and torque readings in the joints - you could almost build an automated grading scanner in that case lol

That's what I have allway's thought anyway and it seems logical to me - I like DSD's a lot and but that one doesn't really seem worth having its value enhanced by the grade from the pic tbh - but who knows if its right or not for certainty? only the seller probably. Ask him

In my experience UKG are generally more consistent across figures/distributors etc, where as AFA are definitely more lenient on trilogos and Uzay/Ledi's etc than they are on Kenner and Palitoy MOCs. But there are always exceptions, like this example. Inconsistency is another reason why I'm not keen on grading, human error and subjectiveness are of course unavoidable when a person is making the decision, so they can't begin to claim grading is fair and consistent.

I'd be much more keen on grading if it was somehow electronic and based 100% on facts rather than opinion, eg as mentioned before a 95% grade if 95% of the card was perfect. But we've all seen mint MOCs with the POP removed score anything from 40 to 60, when in reality the other 95% of the card is flawless.

edd_jedi said:

In my experience UKG are generally more consistent across figures/distributors etc, where as AFA are definitely more lenient on trilogos and Uzay/Ledi's etc than they are on Kenner and Palitoy MOCs. But there are always exceptions, like this example. Inconsistency is another reason why I'm not keen on grading, human error and subjectiveness are of course unavoidable when a person is making the decision, so they can't begin to claim grading is fair and consistent.

I'd be much more keen on grading if it was somehow electronic and based 100% on facts rather than opinion, eg as mentioned before a 95% grade if 95% of the card was perfect. But we've all seen mint MOCs with the POP removed score anything from 40 to 60, when in reality the other 95% of the card is flawless.

Click to expand...

interesting to learn that. I guess if you bought an item new and there was a little tear in the surface of the packaging it wouldn't bother you but if a part of of the same size had been cut out you'd think whats going on here and the item probably would be removed from the shop display. But ye a small hole in a perfect card is far better than one that is yellowed/crushed /creased and would get the same low grade.

What gets me with grading at the mo is refusal to grade palitoy toni affected cards. If you had a peice of art that you were unsure was fake or not the relevant authority would give a verdict on it based on the evidence presented - it would cost a lot but it can be done. Just cos someone has faked paintings - like that guy who used bakerlite to reproduce age on oils doesn't mean all new finds of the affected artist are disregarded.Disregarding such a large proportion of UK produced cards seems a big hit if steps are not being made to resolve the situation and verify some real ones imo. anyway im distracting from the thread topic i'll stop moaning :lol: