Stuk

Remember the awesome anticipation and rush of not knowing your CGC grades, getting that CGC box in the mail, and then unboxing them for the big reveal(s)? What a rush! Now . . . it's more like dread anticipation. First, you'll see your grade and either be elated or disappointed or "whatever," and then immediately, the dread . . . as you inspect the spine side for stress and ticks and slowly turn the book on its side to see if it is bowed in the inner well. (Not to mention the added dread of going back and looking at all your earlier 43 and 44 books over the past two years. You already know the "grades"; but now you have to check the reality.)

I cannot tell from the search string, but those numbers, ideally, should exclude 1) vintage (for the most part), 2) books that are below 9.4 (maybe? because the look or grade is barely if at all affected?), 3) books that are "newly" slabbed but still before mid 2023 (?), and 4) any books, modern or otherwise, that simply are not bowed (there apparently are some). Not knocking the point, just suggesting a refinement.

This is great info to see. Thanks so much. Can anyone take a crack at explaining why almost every month there is either a massive (like 50k) dip or rise? The drop from 2/2024 to 3/2024 makes obvious sense (reholder-gate) but what explains 8/2023 to 9/2023 and 10/2023 to 11/2023 etc.? As for as the impact of bend-gate, I think we have to wait a month. Remember that this data doesn't track submissions, it tracks census addition, so the census data in any month is for submissions from a month or two earlier. The numbers for September to October 2024 -- showing submissions in July and August when bend-gate started to really become known-- should be interesting.

Well, they also admitted to changing the materials they were using, so you could try that argument--"I want the proper sized inner wells that don't cause the bowing." Of course, I am still waiting until we know for sure that this was in fact the problem and that it is now corrected by the larger wells.

I hate to say it, but precisely! If there is a change in materials then surely there was a problem (a reason for the change), and if there was a problem, then can I send back all my bowed ones, gratis, for the correct sized well (with a free press thrown in)? It's about 50 books for me. How many for you all?

Precisely. This is the inverse (or not?) of having one's cake and eating it, too.

Precisely.

Doesn't the view that "if it was human error then they would have fixed it" depend on CGC actually seeing it as something that needs fixing? (Or is that what you are saying?) DaveFSU just posted about getting back 40+ books from a bowing ME re-submission and said the books were returned unchanged because, per CS, the bowing was normal. CGC's only statement (?) didn't refer to this as a "problem," did it? But if they really don't (even privately) see this as a problem then that would be the ultimate hubris. And this is what brings me to Iconic1s 's post about all of this fitting snugly within CGC's new business model—the "CGC" label is what is valuable, not the book. This may be true, but could it really be intentional or has CGC just wound up here by happenstance, inertia, etc.? It's hard to believe, but if it is intentional then the idea that they don't see bowing as a problem would be consistent with it.

Two vintage (GA) back today--flat as they should be! I don't have any pending, but if -- IF -- the moderns start coming back like this, then half the problem would be solved (the other half being the thousands of books already slabbed with bowing).

I am just asking (or has this already been asked?), because, well, this is a discussion forum: If someone recently paid a few hundred $$ for a Premium or Elite Membership with the expectation of submitting enough books for grading to make those fees worthwhile, but now is holding off on submitting because the books are coming back bent and seemingly damaged by the CGC slab/process, well, then what? The easier answers seem to be: (i) you're out of luck, chump, and you just lost some money, or (ii) when CGC finally addresses this issue in a fair and forthright manner including, above all, fixing the problem (!), it will honorably give everyone a, say, 6-month or 9-month or 1-year membership add-on/benefits (as opposed to making us re-up with more cash for no fault of our own). Are there other possible answers? Is this issue too small to matter? I suppose in the grand scheme of things, getting all my already bent 43 and 44 slabs fixed would be more important than the membership issue, but the membership issue is a real thing, right? It is paid for with a certain reasonable expectation, which expectation is being denied shattered by no fault of the customer. Just asking.

I'm guessing that they will simply regrade it blind and give it whatever that grader thinks it should be as it is presented at that time (which is what they are supposed to do, by the way), and that means without regard to how or when those flaws came to be (including how or whether CGC's slabs are the cause). Minthunter did a video on resubmission grade drops and how common grade dops now are. I think he links at least partially to stricter grading after reholder-gate, but I cannot recall if he also links it to bend-gate (so many "gates" in so little time), but the timing cannot be ignored, can it? One thing you can consider is having CGC/CCS press it after the new signature. If the book is handled safely, then this might clean up the new bends (but not color breaks) and give the book its best chance at holding its original grade (at least until/if the new holder does it in, again).

Regarding COMICLINK (and maybe ComicConnect too?), unless I am mistaken, they have stopped showing back cover images (what the h--? So we are expected to bid $$$ without being able to see the back cover, but that's a different topic) and their zoom function has always been very substandard. So that combination coupled with a strict no returns policy is bad news given bend-gate. At least Heritage and MCS and even Ebay have useful zoom capabilities. For example, because of this, I recently passed on a modern 9.8 SigSeries on Ebay because, when I zoomed in, I clearly saw a bend worthy of a post in these pages. I do think MCS is generally quite reputable. I'd not be surprised to see them start to deal with this in one way or another.

A bit off topic, but it is true. "Recessed staples," according to CGC's own grading guidelines, max out at 9.6.

LOL. I just posted my person theory again, and then saw your post and yeah, you may be right. Except, maybe, maybe, it is multiple people, not one person, multiple people who are trained poorly and are haphazardly doing this? The tedium. Ever work on an assembly line or in a factor? "I worked there for a week once. I luckily got the boot." Of course, I agree that if CGC is aware of the problem -- whether person, process or product -- then why are books still coming back bowed? Either they (i) don't know the source of the problem, (ii) can't figure out how to fix it (this would be very bad, to keep taking money and providing broken results) or (iii) don't care to fix it for any reason (so short sighted and harmful to them, that I find this hard to believe).

Yes, I've been saying the same. I wrote earlier (a few times) that it may, may, be human error, some person who runs the machine who is not doing it right so most of the books slabbed when that person is working and not paying attention or doing it right are coming out poorly encased, while others are not. Might explain why there is no clear pattern.