Get Marwood & I

If anyone was wondering how you do this, here's how. When you create the journal you'll see two options at the foot of the page in which you create the post: Everyone can read this journal Only the members I choose can read this journal When you select the second option, a box appears in which you can type the names of the members who you want to have access. Unlike the tagging system, you don't type the @ symbol, just the users name. In this example I start to type Foley and up he pops: For existing journals, you just have to edit the overarching journal page using the 'Edit Journal' function within the 'Manage Journal' button (see below, to the left of 'Add Journal Entry'): My journal was an experiment (that failed). Only Foley can see it now. Poor sod.

(Cut to the scene of an ongoing robbery) "What the - it's Ralph Rivers! How did you know we'd be robbin the bank tonight Rivers!?" "I had a hunch"

Nice socks! "Drop your weapon, or I'll show you the contents of my massive holster!" "Would you shut the window Dave! It's freezing in he-JESUS, look at the size of his holster!"

Try saying that after ten pints.

For a second there I thought she was on the toilet and Batman and Robin were looking through the window. Do all your cover stars have massive arses Kav? Nice touch with the cat.

Mildly annoyed? I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take this anymore!

Welcome indeed Oldrover. Difficult to say without some pictures and a little more info on the extent of restoration. As a rule, most would probably agree that an unrestored graded key brings more bucks in than an unrestored raw. The grading process is the rubber stamp that the book is unrestored for many. I think it's likely that a graded restored key would bring in more bucks than a raw key with resto disclosed. The buyer may not trust that the full extent has been disclosed on the raw. But I'm working on instinct, not practice. Maybe someone will look up GPA once you've provided some more details. Or you could check other online sales - ebay, Heritage etc to see how graded / raws compare. Post some pictures anyway. We like pictures

Eric's not a very good shot is he Brother J?

Hello SFS, and welcome to the forum. You have some nice books! In the 'Hey buddy can you spare a grade' forum we prefer to see one book per thread, preferably with the title being the book that you want an opinion on. So if I was you, I would edit this post and call it 'Avengers #1' and delete all but those photos. Then create 3 separate threads for the other 3 books. Here are the forum rules in case you missed them: One of them is a maximum of 3 books / threads a day by the way. Don't be put off - we're not at school, and we all learned the ropes as we joined. Cheers

That needs to change Dr Love, wouldn't you say? Good advice sitting tight and waiting / watching. Shame it has to be suggested as a course of action though. Good. A CGC only redeemable credit only would've been questionable.

OK, that worked well, and the two comics and board fit fine in the bag. Thanks. What do I do with the sandwich though?

Can someone tell Chuck that?

Thanks for sharing them! Can I add one more please (and it's nothing to do with milking teats): Don't use instantly recognisable actors in bit parts. My suspension of disbelief was severely tested by Vivian off the Young Ones standing on the Star Destroyer bridge

I'll go down the middle at 7.5. Presents really nicely - the flaws are there when you zoom in but it's a really nice fresh looking book

That's hopefully on the to do list for the future but will take time. Reverting to the previous slab may also take time, depending on who produced it for them etc. In the meantime, we could do with an official position on what the resolution is for current affected users. It can't be right that a production issue which visually destroys the look of the book can be passed off with: QC fails to spot NRs and sends book out You receive, complain, send back They re-holder with no guarantee that NRs will be eradicated You get it back, still with NRs "Then we cant help you. Here's a credit against future submissions" (subject to Pies response) That's appalling!

Is that a monetary refund or a credit you can only redeem against future CGC submissions? If you don't mind me asking.

That CGC maintains this forum suggests they're aware of the value, not to mention risk, of having a channel for direct user feedback. In both my professional and personal experience, forums like this attract some of the most diehard, opinionated, and supportive users. Speaking as a games industry professional, our forums provide us real value, not to mention a fun place for those diehards to interact with one another. More than anything, we know what our players do and don't like about our products. It's our burden to not only consume and utilize that feedback, but to respond to it. In my world, nothing chaffs players more than unresponsive, non-communicative developers and designers. On the flip side, nothing pleases players more than developers and designers who engage with the community. Through direct engagement, companies can build extraordinary trust and commitment from customers. Hence the value, and the risk, of a place like this. Wouldn't it be nice if someone just dropped in to say, "We hear you, folks. We'll be back with a proper statement as soon we can."? Very well put Davids. It really is that simple. Engage and manage your customers concerns. 'At this point'? Is there a future point at which they will be able to do something? How will we know when that is? How are we expected to respond to this? I would suggest with disdain. Did you pay for the re-holdering shipping Pie?

I know. We like CGC, we like the product. We love the forum. I don't understand why reasonable decent business people would let this rumble on to the detriment of their reputation. I can only think of two reasons for that - the first is that the issue is so bad that the companies future is at risk, and the second is that they are simply arrogant. We hope it's not the former of course, but the latter will sooner or later result in the former. Make an announcement!

Same as me - hundreds of old slabs didn't have them. Going back to the old holders might therefore be a wise interim measure, pending the resolution of the new holder / plastic issue. We'll see I guess.

Right, thanks. Encouraging, but that was three months ago mind. If anyone behind the scenes is tearing their hair out over this they must've gone bald by now. Contractual wranglings aside, I still see no reason why a holding response couldn't be made to us with an initial agreed process for managing complaints (e.g. free re holders / shipping reimbursements for NR infected books etc). If NRs are a production fault, the onus is on CGC to shoulder the financial downside. Not the paying customer.

I don't think anyone would see that as spamming. I wouldn't. There's precious little traffic lately as it is. Duplicating cool books with additional commentary is not a problem at all and sod anyone who says otherwise. Please, get the old journal reopened and carry on as you were AJD.

Good for you. Third party excuse aside, how did they take your call? What was their thinking / stance on the issue?

Do any of your slabs have NRs on the back Sharon?

It doesn't, in my humble opinion And you're probably right. I'm not an expert on the properties of different plastics and how they interact with each other under different circumstances. I suspect 99%+ of us have no technical expertise or knowledge in that field. For me, it's only important that CGC have that expertise. It's their job to leverage the right expertise to eliminate the problem. As a layman, I see old cases without NRs and new cases with. So I conclude the new cases are the problem. I just want CGC to acknowledge the problem, manage our shared concerns, and state what they intend to do about it. Joking aside, give them a ring Mr McK. You seem to know what you're talking about and may be able to help them finesse a technical solution.

Wow, I can't believe we're up to 139 votes now. I genuinely thought this poll would fizzle out so thanks to everyone who's voted and contributed - I'm humbled by the response. It's a powerful message I feel when we all get together to support a common cause I've owned about 200 CGC graded comics in my time, and at one point had an ASM 100-200 9.4 run. I can say with honesty that not one of my slabs had Newton Rings that I can recall. Being a stickler for presentation, I know I would have noted and remembered it if they had. I kept a few back after the sell off and inspected them this morning: The 126 had a cracked case so I took it out. What I find looking at these generation holders is that the comic is quite clearly firmly pressed to the front and back of the holder. There is no gap between the inner and outer holders. If we are to believe that two plastics touching creates the NR effect automatically, why do I not see them? The ASM 194 has a black cover and would show any NRs if they were present. Even if I push down on the centre to ensure the well and inner sleeve are touching, no NRs appear. So the argument that books can leave CGC after inspection NR free, and subsequent movement during shipping creates the problem doesn't ring true to me. The design of the inner heat sealed sleeve (see picture above) has the book lat flat across the front. The book sits in the recess. Could this have something to do with the problem? I don't have a new generation book to compare, but I wonder if the new design intends to stop the inner well touching the outer, and when it moves and makes intermittent contact, the rings appear? What make sense to me is that NRs did not appear on the generation of slabs that I have, and it's clear to me that the inner and outer wells are in full contact. The only thing that has changed is the new cases are 'crystal clear' and, by definition, a new type of plastic. It follows that that new plastic does create NRs when it touches the inner heat sealed sleeve. In summary, I had 200 previous generation slabs with no NRs. The 5 I kept have no NRs and I cannot create NRs on them by pressing the cases tight - the cause, we are told, of the 'natural' phenomenon of two plastics touching. The new generation slabs are covered in them. So the new generation slabs are the problem. No? I've had four responses from CGC personnel and all have advised that they have forwarded the message in this poll on to senior management. No response from them so far, unless I have missed it. Does anyone know who is actually responsible for communication at CGC and have an email address they could PM me? I want to contact them direct, and ask them kindly to come and respond here formally. I want someone to take responsibility as we, the paying customer, are receiving unsatisfactory products. Looking at the voting responses, most of you want them to make a statement too. As I noted earlier in the thread, I want to submit my keys through the new London office but this is stopping me doing so. Not only because I fear that they would come back with NRs but also because I begrudge giving my money to a business who ignores the valid concerns of its members and users. Unfortunately, CGC are our only choice as they have no comparable competition. But it's simply not on to remain silent. Someone at CGC has to decide if NRs are, as the title of the poll suggests, 'normal and acceptable'. If they are, then they should abide by that decision, make it known and not accept NR related reholder requests. Accepting reholder requests is itself an admission that the NRs are not 'normal and acceptable' is it not? Keep voting people! Nothing changes if we put up with bad service.