Gaard

I'm not to thrilled with this. I don't really dabble with Moderns too much, but this just seems wrong. Oh well, I guess it's all about the Benjamins these days

What a cluster. I feel bad for ya.

If the NRs are excessive. And from what I understand, CGC decides what is and isn't excessive.

road trip

Let us know, please.

With all this talk about wages and generation mentality, I'm inclined to ask if there are any similarities of wages/flaws between CGC and the other grading companies.

From what I've read, the incident occurred before the move.

"Problem is that the modern grading for each shipment is quite inconsistent." It's become obvious, to me anyway, that there is a very real problem here with these 'phantom flaws'. I use the term 'phantom flaws' to describe 2 things ... flaws that weren't there when CGC received the comics, and flaws that aren't there at all - it seems that, in some cases, graders are simply putting down flaws in the notes that do not exist. Do to the fact that these 'phantom flaws' are in the notes, we can rule out any steps after the grading when trying to determine where they came from. Lots of questions (areas for CGC to look at) ... - I don't recall hearing these concerns about other tiers. Does this mean that we can rule out mishandling by the receivers? - The graders themselves. I've heard over and over again that certain graders do certain tiered books. This makes me think that one (or more) of their rookie Modern graders is the culprit. Could a particular grader(s) not be handling the comics with the necessary care that is needed? (especially when counting pages) - Should we take the word 'particular' out of the above sentence? Although this would be highly unacceptable for them, could each grader be prone to having days where they show up to work with a cavalier attitude? - What about between the receiver and grader ... is there another step/employee who brings the books to the grader? I honestly don't know. - This is a question that could be easy to answer or could be difficult to answer ... are all (most) of these 'phantom flaws' on books that have been pressed? By who? Another mishandling possibility. - This would be the very worst possibility. Is it possible that grader(s) are trying to make themselves look like very good graders by listing flaws that aren't there? - I've asked this before without receiving an answer. Is it at all possible to tell which grader graded which comic? (by possibly using the certification number) This would help immensely. Since the start of 3rd party grading, there's been customers who've been unhappy with the grades they've received. In the past few months however, it seems to have grown into a very big issue that CGC shouldn't just shrug off. Another thought that might have bearing ... I'm assuming CGC employees get evaluated...monthly, quarterly, annually, I don't know - the frequency doesn't matter. When a grader is evaluated, does their supervisor know how many of each grade he/she has given for that period of time? Or a list detailing what notes, and how many, have been given?

I figure the reason CGC doesn't design a new slab that doesn't have NR (or greatly reduces them), like every other grading service, is financial. Come to think of it, I can't think of any other reason.

There's been a lot of talk by members who are wondering if the original universal copies will somehow be eliminated from the census or even somehow tracked down and taken out of circulation...not sure how that one would work, seeing as how they aren't CGC's property. But anyways, I don't see anything at all done about those blue label books. Let's be honest, CGC was paid buku bucks to do this spoon. Does anyone really believe that they're going to renege on the deal they had with BF? The way this company has operated in the last few years, I don't see them doing anything that'll cost them a dime. Taking a backwards step on these ill-conceived blue labeled comics will probably cost them a few dimes. They won't address them and they definitely won't do anything about them that'll cost them

While I agree that what was said is good news, I wholeheartedly disagree that this was a "proper response" by CGC. Far from complete. Only focusing on the future... "will assign" "will take into consideration" "going forward" "will only certify" ...and not addressing any of the past decisions/doings. And there are many questions about these past decisions/doings that CGC seems to have decided to never respond to. Oh well, it's not like we don't know what happened or why. We didn't get the full story, but what we got is positive. So there's that. I'll give them a head nod for the response they gave, but not an applause.

If CGC took the time to address a single post in this long thread with many, many concerns ... I would like this to be that post.

Just a thought.. If an email address is no longer any good, maybe it should not be on CGC's website. * This is the 2nd thread I've seen where a customer's emails have been bounced when sending it to this address.

CGC - "Instead of admitting to all this BS (and then lying about it), let's just keep quiet, never admitting to any wrongdoing, and eventually it'll become old news."

I just want to say that procrastination is bad. I just opened a package of two comics that was delivered early May. (Yes, I hold the title of world's biggest procrastinator) One of the comics was missing. I immediately emailed the guy just to let him know. He said he vaguely remembers refunding me for it (which was false - I checked). I just told him no biggie, but to keep me in mind if he ever gets another copy. I wasn't going to push it for three reasons... 1) It's been about 3 months since it was delivered. 2) It was only $8 3) I'm a really great guy. I just wanted to let it be known, we should open all packages upon their arrival.

Not sure how, but you can try to 'edit' your listing. The option might be in there somewhere. You can also ask the guy to 'add to cart' the books instead of outright buying them. Then, there's a 'request total' option after he's all done adding them to his cart.

I'll give 'em a pass on that one. After all, it's so difficult to notice. - yes that was sarcasm

If there was ever a reason for them to put aside that stupid 'no holds' rule for a single instance, this would be it.

...our high standards.

When CGC makes their next BS statement concerning this fiasco (maybe I should've said 'if'), I wonder if they'll address their prolonged silence.