MatterEaterLad

There are definitely folks on here who see this as no big deal, which surprises me. But...they hearken back to the dark days of doctored books and rampant trimming, amateur color touch with sharpies, etc, and feel like CGC's mistakes are far outweighed by what they've brought to the collecting world--namely the ability to buy with confidence online and record sales. I get all that. I still like the idea of an external CGC audit to gauge what the variance is with resubs. I'm guessing it's in the 15%+ range, rather than the 1-2% range. I don't think the frequent comment of, "If you're not happy with your grade, just resub it" would be so common if the variance was only 1-2%.

I don't think we'll hear anything else unless CGC finds some sort of external fault (like a known micro trimmer). CGC said, "Hey, we screwed up." I think that's all we're gonna get. I'd feel better if they said, "Whoops, our intern graded the book last time--our bad." At least that's a plausible explanation and better in the long run than thinking that a team of experts screwed up on the same book multiple times.

Just got my vote for Boardie of The Year 2014.

Less drivel. More photos of Kelly Brook.

That's absolutely smashing. (Sorry).

They should have flipped the end scenes. I was also disappointed after the huge wait. I waited a bit longer for the 3rd post-credit scene, it was called Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Just saw it and I don't think I'm giving away any spoilers by stating... ...IT WAS AWESOME!!! Completely satisfying in every way. Great story. Great acting. Great action. Great post-credit scenes! (Two of 'em). Loved it.

There appears to be a direct correlation.... Have you ever smelled a carpet from the 70's? I'm not into older women....

I don't send in my books because I care less. I send in my books because it's really my only option when running an internet sales store. If course I care. Sorry. I stated that poorly. CGC facilitates the ability to buy with confidence online. I get that. I buy online and appreciate knowing I'm getting a graded book. As an individual collector (and not a dealer), slabbing is a personal expense, not a business expense, so I take their poor performance personally.

Using that line of reasoning, nobody really knows anything. Bingo. Which is why I'm not subbing to anyone anytime soon. And why, the "We screwed up, we'll try harder" isn't enough for me. I'd have more confidence if the answer was "We believe (insert problem) happened, and we're doing (insert solution) to make sure it doesn't happen anymore." Cool, so in the mean time make sure you use that same line of reasoning when you deal with law enforcement, government, the media and of course the wife. Don't get me wrong, I'm not mocking you at all. I'm genuinely a relativist at heart and I don't think there are many things in this life that are 100%. There's 100% effort but not 100% results. That's why I've basically accepted the fact that I am willing to move through life and bank on 98-99% assurances. I believe that anybody looking for 100% assurance is rarely going to find it. I just find it so amazing that people expect stuff like 100% performance from their entertainment (whether it's sports or comics or their stripper) but are willing to accept mediocre performances from the medical industry, the food industry, the media, their government and even their own spouses and anything else that really affects the rest of our lives. The hippie has spoken. You see CGC's resto detect as 98-99%. I see CGC's resto detect as because nobody knows. Not expecting 100%. But a book that flip-flopped four times is incompetence. What % of incompetence is but not knowing is enough for me to not send them my books. BUT, I tend to send in books for my own collection. You're sending them books to sell, so it's understandable that you would care less in the long run.

Show me a thread where a book changed four times. The JIM83 changed twice, as far as I know. Splitting hairs here. When all is said and done, the book will have been labeled four times. Graded Blue. Graded Purple. Graded Blue. Now graded Purple again. I supposed you could spin it and say they were wrong twice but RIGHT TWICE! Like I said, kinda splitting hairs there. Why is that spinning? CGC did, in fact, screw up twice - it's silly to pretend that every label this book has had has been due to a mistake. Because (wait for it) no one really knows if the book is indeed trimmed. How do we know it's trimmed? Because the person who screwed up multiple times has assured us that now this time, with 100% veracity, it's trimmed? We'll never know. The only real debate is regarding how often incidents like this occur. Oh, and Dan's carpet. The frequency here is not as important as the overall concept. These statements are pretty easy to follow and extremely hard to refute IMO. CGC missed trimming on the same book twice. Trimming is a restoration tactic used to increase the technical grade of a book. Submitters of trimmed books to CGC DO NOT disclose that a book has been trimmed when it is submitted. Un-restored copies of books are work more than restored copies in the same grade. CGC has no way of determining how many trimmed books have been submitted using the technique that CGC missed on two occasions. From these statements one could assert that CGC is not able to detect trimming (using the JIM 83 technique) unless it has prior information to know that trimming exists. The crux is that 99.99999% of the time CGC does not have the luxury of knowing that a book they have assigned a PLOD was previously in a Universal Blue label. Another interesting piece of empirical evidence concerning the PLOD - Blue situation and really the only one that I can think of that demonstrates frequency (leading me to believe that there are more examples of this out there than I am comfortable with). Have a look at GPA for Marvel Keys (IMO it is not be accident that the subject of this book was a JIM 83) - look at how many restored copies there are in GPA and the Census compared to non-Key books of the same era - the % is staggering. I would extrapolate this to mean that Marvel Keys are very susceptible to restoration tactics - this may not be new news to anyone. However, taken that in the context of the discussion in this thread, you could make a strong inference that there are significant numbers of Marvel keys in Blue Holders that are Trimmed. I say this as someone who is currently shopping for a HG 9.0 or better DD1. Do I have pause, or reduced desire to plunk down the 7,000 + it will take to get a copy, I have to say the answer to that is yes I do. 100% agree.

Using that line of reasoning, nobody really knows anything. Bingo. Which is why I'm not subbing to anyone anytime soon. And why, the "We screwed up, we'll try harder" isn't enough for me. I'd have more confidence if the answer was "We believe (insert problem) happened, and we're doing (insert solution) to make sure it doesn't happen anymore."

Show me a thread where a book changed four times. The JIM83 changed twice, as far as I know. Splitting hairs here. When all is said and done, the book will have been labeled four times. Graded Blue. Graded Purple. Graded Blue. Now graded Purple again. I supposed you could spin it and say they were wrong twice but RIGHT TWICE! Like I said, kinda splitting hairs there. Why is that spinning? CGC did, in fact, screw up twice - it's silly to pretend that every label this book has had has been due to a mistake. Because (wait for it) no one really knows if the book is indeed trimmed. How do we know it's trimmed? Because the person who screwed up multiple times has assured us that now this time, with 100% veracity, it's trimmed? We'll never know. The only real debate is regarding how often incidents like this occur. Oh, and Dan's carpet.

Show me a thread where a book changed four times. The JIM83 changed twice, as far as I know. Splitting hairs here. When all is said and done, the book will have been labeled four times. Graded Blue. Graded Purple. Graded Blue. Now graded Purple again. I supposed you could spin it and say they were wrong twice but RIGHT TWICE! Like I said, kinda splitting hairs there.

Show me a thread where a book changed four times.

I'm still disappointed that there's been no further update from CGC.

THIS JUST IN: After careful consideration by everyone in the building, CGC is 100% certain that Dan's carpet has been trimmed as well.

Never takes you long to jump on the "Anti-Dan" band wagon Rug = Dan? via Imgflip Meme Maker

Yeah, and these are the same too...

Someone mentioned that both carpets looked the same, now that I see the two shots together I can see what they meant. ...I've thought to myself, it wouldn't surprise me if Dan and the new buyer should be the same person. It doesn't matter to me who the submitters are. That's not the problem. Here's the problem: Screw up 4 books 1 time each, that's human error. I can accept that. Screw up 1 book 4 times, that's incompetence.

Maybe that's the carpet in the house of the CGC resto expert? He takes 'em home and kicks 'em around like PGX.

I didn't say you were anti CGC and I know your story of acquiring that collection well. My question is, why is the concept of resto check a joke when we are talking about a few specific incidents among 3 Million books? Because we don't really know if it's an isolated incident. I'd be less concerned if it were four different books that they missed (human error) than one book four times (lack of competence).

Nobody said it's a one-in-a-million-what's-the-big-deal kind of thing. It is isolated, relatively speaking. It's in the minority. Nobody has produced concrete numbers but there is no reason to believe it's commonplace. From my own experiences I've placed it at less than 1-2%. And LordRahl as correct, everybody benefits from CGC. Not just dealers. Making this incident look like the sky is falling (because some "people in tight with CGC" said that CGC are not perfect) is a gross misrepresentation of what is actually happening because it removes the perspective that CGC has over all done more for detecting restoration and setting some sort of a grading standard than any other single entity. How can I say that? Because even when Overstreet guidelines were in print: a) anybody buying books on eBay pre CGC or buying books leading up to CGC at shows, mail order, etc knows full well how often what you got in the mail was a crapshoot. You'd be lucky to get the correct issue number or title sometimes, let alone grade, resto, etc. b) you picked up that large collection from HE a while back if I'm not mistaken and I assume the majority came back with Blue labels. Imagine picking up the collection and not knowing if the books were restored or not and finding out 20 years later? c) for every improperly graded CGC book, we can't calculate how many times CGC has saved a buyer's bacon because the majority of books that are accurately graded and resto checked is unaccounted for. Rest assured it's a large percentage of anyone's graded collection (well more than 85% in my opinion ) Just imagine out of 3 Million comics graded how many would be sitting with unknown resto and unknown grades in people's collections. I'm not anti CGC. I own a ridiculous amount of slabs (900? I've lost count). But before I send them more books I need a better answer than the one we've been given. Because flip-flopping four times on one book is enough to keep me away. Not sending my books in to Vault or PGX. Not sending them anywhere. At this moment, the concept of resto check is a joke.

This. +1 +1 from me. This is the root of the issue. This issue flopped back and forth between blue and purple so much that any claim to having set standards in detection is absolutely unbelievable. How can one trust any universal grade that isn't a modern book now? +1 Blue. Purple. Blue. Purple. That's going to be my new screen name... I think CGC is going dark on this and will wait for it to go away. And by the vigorous defenders of CGCs grading who see this as an isolated, one-in-a-million-what's-the-big-deal kind of thing...it's obvious there are dealers who don't want change. They profit from playing the resub game. For them, CGC is purr-fect-o. Most people buy the number (eBay), while they buy the book, resub, and voila, the number changes.