Get Marwood & I

Morning I just posted this in the double bubble zone, but it's about time this thread of mine got a bump too. As well as being a nice image replacement for my "this comic exists in pence" folder - the previous example was a bit iffy - it's a fairly uncommon early double cover UKPV: Nice Kids aren't they, Colt and Two-Gun. Rawhide must've been on holiday. See ya

I understand your frustration completely. Hopefully, CGC will too and will do a little more than just send you return labels. The books went out because they either weren't checked, or they were and the operative failed miserably. Let us know how you get on.

The irony here is that the label is largely right because they got their policy application wrong. If they'd got their policy application right, the label would be wrong, albeit potentially helpful to Gad from a resale perspective. It's quite funny really.

Oh dear, that submission hasn't worked out very well, has it! @marinecorp96, CGC staff don't tend to read this section of the boards. If I were you, I would repost your complaint in the "Ask CGC" section of the forum which you will find here: https://boards.cgccomics.com/forum/23-ask-cgc/ That section of the forum is monitored by CGC customer representatives and you should get a response accordingly. You could also post your examples in this long running thread here.... https://boards.cgccomics.com/topic/350613-where-in-the-world-was-the-quality-control-at-cgc/#comment-8132276 ....where you will find a whole host of people posting the same kinds of issues. And, of course, you can telephone or email CGC to complain: https://www.cgccomics.com/contact/ For what it's worth, if I were you, I would stop submitting to CGC. We don't know how many submissions go wrong like this from the many thousands of books they process each week. When things go well, the product is great, and it may be the case that it goes well in the overwhelming majority of cases. But when it goes wrong, as it has for you, no amount of error percentage analysis eases the blow. A good company will have a decent procedure in place to satisfy customers when things go wrong. I don't think that CGC have that procedure in place, currently. CGC advertise as follows: When you contact CGC, ask them to explain how your books have ended up in the wrong cases if the above practice is standard. Don't lose your temper - be calm, but firm, and insist on speaking to someone in authority - perhaps the Quality Assurance Manager, who CGC appointed a year or so ago but who I've yet to see say anything publicly: https://www.cgccomics.com/news/article/10227/michael-saucerman/ Act as you would in any other walk of life, if you had paid for something and received a faulty service. Your slabs also appear to have scratches and scuffs, although that may be a trick of the light: Perhaps mention that too as you have paid for a 'crystal clear' slab, and that scratch is very visible against the black cover behind it. Remember - you have paid for a service, and they have failed to deliver. Discuss compensation, and fast track remediation, and see how that goes. If you aren't satisfied, ask for a refund maybe? And then consider carefully whether to submit again. Good luck.

I'm sorry to see this happen to you Gad - I know you were hoping for the book to follow the strategy, and be labelled as Pep #22, but it has come back labelled literally. I'm not surprised by this outcome though, as the policy itself is so confusing that even CGC staff clearly struggle with it. Any policy that requires the agent to stop and think carefully each and every time time, and which likely compels them to refer to a set of counter-intuitive parameters, is doomed to fail. And it has failed here once again as it fails to follow CGC's own self appointed rules. Maybe the 'slight revision' element has something to do with it, who knows. And who should care anymore, frankly, if CGC can neither explain nor adopt their own policies consistently - in this case, even after detailed discussion? I recently tried one more time to get the architect of the 'internationals' strategy to see sense and he gave me the brush off saying I was flogging a dead horse. The position as I see it is this: CGC's position is obtuse, and there's clearly nothing any of us can do about it. So I certainly don't care to comment anymore. I still love the book though, and still find the 9d sticker divine. Enjoy your book Gad.

This one was my favourite:

The I's had it: Alas, they don't have it no more.

Marwood & Eye

Missing ink on the P copy.....

Run Reggie, run! We're being Frisco'd

Run Frisco, run! I've accidentally ruined the CGC census model

I liberated mine, from its plastic tomb: Just a lowly 9.6 but then again, being an old school 9.6, it's probably an 11.2 by today's standards

There's one missing Frisco

Well said Triple F And let's not forget everyone how much work Mike puts into this competition for us every quarter. He has to manage the personal mail responses from all 130 participants as well as all those that relate to his other duties. Imagine what that inbox of his looks like! We're dealing with just ourselves - he's dealing with all of us! Let's all try to help him by keeping our grading responses to the point, with no additional commentary - just the book grades - and all in the one email that he sent us all when the competition started. Meanwhile, in other news, I'm currently beating Yozzer and the King of Australia. Again. @AJD @Yorick

Jolly good!

Join us again next week on "The Distribution of US Published Comics in the UK (1959~1982)" for more six degrees of separation between famous people examples

The locals must've thought they were stoned!

Where do you stand on Boz Kar's Golden Keys, NoMan? Not directly on them, hopefully. That's no good for the spines.

I bet the night wasn't so silent once those two started crashing about.

Have you got something against even numbers Gad?

Yes. I only remember it for all the EEEEEEES and AIEEEEEEES and SKREEEEEES. And "LORD NO!s"