Looking for opinions

[seanfingh]

I think everyone is over reacting. His book was damaged, regardless of the other submissions, the person or persons providing the services are responsible for his book.

 

No, they are not. However, despite this, they are manning up and being told that said manning up is not sufficient.

Can you actually read?

 

I sure can, tiger.

[Mr.Diggler]

OMG! Panties tight... can't breath...

what color are they? Are they lacey? Silk? Cotton? Just curious.

[Bosco685]

I think everyone is over reacting. His book was damaged, regardless of the other submissions, the person or persons providing the services are responsible for his book.

 

No, they are not. However, despite this, they are manning up and being told that said manning up is not sufficient.

Can you actually read?

Seriously? And I thought you were done with this thread and were going to leave us to our bickering.

 

[COI]

I think everyone is over reacting. His book was damaged, regardless of the other submissions, the person or persons providing the services are responsible for his book.

 

No, they are not. However, despite this, they are manning up and being told that said manning up is not sufficient.

Nuance worship serves to indulge the self in lazy shades of weak-willed gray in a corrupted form of worthy self-actualization turned contrived sophistication.

 

copyandpastearguments.com

No . It is in his sigline. Sir An of Drew.

 

Sorry. When I'm not reading my own posts, I'm looking at my reflection in the finish on my laptop.

[comix4fun]

the thread originator answered every query, page after page, EXCEPT the two times he was asked about the results of the other pressed books. i had a suspicion then, and now it is confirmed. assuming those anonymous books above are good books, looks like he made out real fine.

Are you suggesting the end justifies the means? That isn't the point.

 

What is the point, then? From where I am sitting, the OP engaged a contractor for 29 services. 28 of the 29 were at or above the specifications for acceptable-excellent service. One was not. Despite the fact the OP agreed that the limitation of his damages was a credit for the fees or a refund, the contractor has agreed to provide additional recompense.

 

Apparently, the OP has decided that he wants more than the offered additional recompense. The OP wants to be recompensed for the value of the book in the condition that it was supposedly in after the services had been provided. Without making any value judgement as to whether the OP is acting in a dirtbaggy fashion by requesting such additional recompense, there does not appear to be any theory in reality or reasonable fiction that would support such additional recompense.

 

 

I agree...what Matt offered was over and above his normal terms and conditions, and in this case it is everything the client could have fairly asked for given all the facts. Cash to get back to 8.0 is fair...beyond that is speculative (as I already said a couple of times now).

 

C

[Mr.Diggler]

I think everyone is over reacting. His book was damaged, regardless of the other submissions, the person or persons providing the services are responsible for his book.

 

No, they are not. However, despite this, they are manning up and being told that said manning up is not sufficient.

Can you actually read?

Seriously? And I thought you were done with this thread and were going to leave us to our bickering.

 

[DrWatson]

I think everyone is over reacting. His book was damaged, regardless of the other submissions, the person or persons providing the services are responsible for his book.

 

No, they are not. However, despite this, they are manning up and being told that said manning up is not sufficient.

Nuance worship serves to indulge the self in lazy shades of weak-willed gray in a corrupted form of worthy self-actualization turned contrived sophistication.

 

That is somewhat clever. It does not, however, change the fact that the OP agreed that his remedy was what was stated in Matt/CI's limitation of remedies. Matt/CI would be perfectly justified in giving him his refund and telling him to whistle Dixie while pounding sand down a rathole. Anything more that he gets is because Matt/CI wanted to keep a happy customer or not run the risk of having his reputation tarnished. Gee, look how awesomely that worked for him.

I don't think that we are entirely at cross purposes. He is due the reimbursement for the difference between the 7.5 and the 8.0, plus the service fees. He is not due the value to a 9.0. Asking for such is that one step too far and gives the impression of wanting more than he is due.

[here to lern]

Not very long ago there was a post on these Boards where the poster had a Watchmen #1 prescreened by an unnamed expert and complained that he didn't

get the desired grade. The boards trashed this guy, deservedly so. IMHO this post deserves no better. I can't believe I wasted my time reading this thread when all along Matt had offered an appropriate resolution. What was the problem that needed board input ? No way should Matt or anybody pay for a 9.0. This is a bad case of greed. Somebody close this thread, please.

 

Simple and to the point.

 

I would love to know what the other 28 books were and how much more money was to be made from them

I'll be the first to admit I don't understand the crack out game, but the "greed" comments seem severe (to say the least).

 

The OP's posts went way out his way not to disparage either fee-based service. He even refused to answer questions that might have do so. He was asking for opinions.

 

 

 

And ,unless I'm misreading, at the point when the prep service sent his book on for encapsulation (as his agent) the OP did own a raw "9.0", based on the prep service's professional opinion. So I'm not sure why it's so "greedy", but the confusion has merit until one service or the other claims responsibility, imho.

 

Just to throw this in. But, any basis I would had for a 9.0 would have been with CGC, not Matt. Again, Matt is talking for both. And, I wouldn't be trying to milk CGC either. I would a legitimate expectation that the book submitted was a 9.0.

[COI]

I think everyone is over reacting. His book was damaged, regardless of the other submissions, the person or persons providing the services are responsible for his book.

 

No, they are not. However, despite this, they are manning up and being told that said manning up is not sufficient.

Can you actually read?

 

I sure can, tiger.

 

That's it? You've smacked me much, much harder for far, far less.

[DrWatson]

OMG! Panties tight... can't breath...

what color are they? Are they lacey? Silk? Cotton? Just curious.

Plaid boxers and they are a cotton polyester blend. They tent quit well, too.

 

You know, curiosity killed the cat.

[here to lern]

I think everyone is over reacting. His book was damaged, regardless of the other submissions, the person or persons providing the services are responsible for his book.

 

No, they are not. However, despite this, they are manning up and being told that said manning up is not sufficient.

Can you actually read?

Seriously? And I thought you were done with this thread and were going to leave us to our bickering.

 

 

I would love to, but not when I'm being personally attacked. You guys can tear each other to shreds if you want to.

[DarkKnightReturns]

This thread has gone on for so long.... I would like to ask Here to Lern what he thinks he is due? So Here to Lern what do you think is a fair settlement?

[seanfingh]

I think everyone is over reacting. His book was damaged, regardless of the other submissions, the person or persons providing the services are responsible for his book.

 

No, they are not. However, despite this, they are manning up and being told that said manning up is not sufficient.

Can you actually read?

 

I sure can, tiger.

 

That's it? You've smacked me much, much harder for far, far less.

 

I don't know this guy at all. I have been trying very hard not to make value judgments, but rather analyze the situation. If he wants to come at me, that is fine. But nothing I have seen so far would indicate to me that he is worth the time or thought that I put into insulting you and Jim.

[Mr.Diggler]

OMG! Panties tight... can't breath...

what color are they? Are they lacey? Silk? Cotton? Just curious.

Plaid boxers and they are a cotton polyester blend. They tent quit well, too.

 

You know, curiosity killed the cat.

Your posting only in your underpants? Keep your pup tent to yourself. (thumbs u

[nik]

Not very long ago there was a post on these Boards where the poster had a Watchmen #1 prescreened by an unnamed expert and complained that he didn't

get the desired grade. The boards trashed this guy, deservedly so. IMHO this post deserves no better. I can't believe I wasted my time reading this thread when all along Matt had offered an appropriate resolution. What was the problem that needed board input ? No way should Matt or anybody pay for a 9.0. This is a bad case of greed. Somebody close this thread, please.

 

Simple and to the point.

 

I would love to know what the other 28 books were and how much more money was to be made from them

I'll be the first to admit I don't understand the crack out game, but the "greed" comments seem severe (to say the least).

 

The OP's posts went way out his way not to disparage either fee-based service. He even refused to answer questions that might have do so. He was asking for opinions.

 

And ,unless I'm misreading, at the point when the prep service sent his book on for encapsulation (as his agent) the OP did own a raw "9.0", based on the prep service's professional opinion. So I'm not sure why it's so "greedy", but the confusion has merit until one service or the other claims responsibility, imho.

 

How many times do we see encapsulated books that we do not agree with the grade assigned? It is simply their opinion just like it was the opinion of Matt that the book could grade at a 9.0. So the book was never a 9.0, it was an opinion from Matt.

 

Book was damaged but from whom, I have no clue, and graded at 7.5 instead of an 8.0. So that is what the OP should be entitled for is the difference between the 7.5 and 8.0 grade.

 

Now here is the kicker, seeing as he will score pretty well on the other 28 books he had service done to, and seeking monetary damage for that lone book is where I come up with the greedy part, and again this is just my opinion.

 

[DrWatson]

OMG! Panties tight... can't breath...

what color are they? Are they lacey? Silk? Cotton? Just curious.

Plaid boxers and they are a cotton polyester blend. They tent quit well, too.

 

You know, curiosity killed the cat.

Your posting only in your underpants?

I would never do that. I can't post on the computer or talk on the telephone with no clothes on . That's just weird.

[DarkKnightReturns]

After 26 pages of I'd like to hear what "Here to Lern" has to say as far as what a fair settlement would be.

[Davenport]

Not very long ago there was a post on these Boards where the poster had a Watchmen #1 prescreened by an unnamed expert and complained that he didn't

get the desired grade. The boards trashed this guy, deservedly so. IMHO this post deserves no better. I can't believe I wasted my time reading this thread when all along Matt had offered an appropriate resolution. What was the problem that needed board input ? No way should Matt or anybody pay for a 9.0. This is a bad case of greed. Somebody close this thread, please.

 

Simple and to the point.

 

I would love to know what the other 28 books were and how much more money was to be made from them

I'll be the first to admit I don't understand the crack out game, but the "greed" comments seem severe (to say the least).

 

The OP's posts went way out his way not to disparage either fee-based service. He even refused to answer questions that might have do so. He was asking for opinions.

 

 

 

And ,unless I'm misreading, at the point when the prep service sent his book on for encapsulation (as his agent) the OP did own a raw "9.0", based on the prep service's professional opinion. So I'm not sure why it's so "greedy", but the confusion has merit until one service or the other claims responsibility, imho.

 

Just to throw this in. But, any basis I would had for a 9.0 would have been with CGC, not Matt. Again, Matt is talking for both. And, I wouldn't be trying to milk CGC either. I would a legitimate expectation that the book submitted was a 9.0.

Right. At least that's how I'm reading it. To keep it simple, it's either...

(A) the prep service damaged your "8.0" in an upgrade attempt. You're out your "8.0". Or...

(B) the grading service damaged your freshly grade-tweaked "9.0" during their certification attempt. You're out your freshly grade-tweaked "9.0".

 

A or B, depending on who did the damage. An important puzzle piece that's missing.

[here to lern]

Not very long ago there was a post on these Boards where the poster had a Watchmen #1 prescreened by an unnamed expert and complained that he didn't

get the desired grade. The boards trashed this guy, deservedly so. IMHO this post deserves no better. I can't believe I wasted my time reading this thread when all along Matt had offered an appropriate resolution. What was the problem that needed board input ? No way should Matt or anybody pay for a 9.0. This is a bad case of greed. Somebody close this thread, please.

 

Simple and to the point.

 

I would love to know what the other 28 books were and how much more money was to be made from them

I'll be the first to admit I don't understand the crack out game, but the "greed" comments seem severe (to say the least).

 

The OP's posts went way out his way not to disparage either fee-based service. He even refused to answer questions that might have do so. He was asking for opinions.

 

And ,unless I'm misreading, at the point when the prep service sent his book on for encapsulation (as his agent) the OP did own a raw "9.0", based on the prep service's professional opinion. So I'm not sure why it's so "greedy", but the confusion has merit until one service or the other claims responsibility, imho.

 

How many times do we see encapsulated books that we do not agree with the grade assigned? It is simply their opinion just like it was the opinion of Matt that the book could grade at a 9.0. So the book was never a 9.0, it was an opinion from Matt.

 

Book was damaged but from whom, I have no clue, and graded at 7.5 instead of an 8.0. So that is what the OP should be entitled for is the difference between the 7.5 and 8.0 grade.

 

Now here is the kicker, seeing as he will score pretty well on the other 28 books he had service done to, and seeking monetary damage for that lone book is where I come up with the greedy part, and again this is just my opinion.

Hopefully you've some of my other posts by now, Nik. I never expected CGC had to give me Matt's grade. Second, I never expected Matt to reimburse me for a book that only could have been a 9.0. I would have liked consideration from CGC for a book that was submitted as a 9.0 and damaged. I was never trying to beat Matt out of anything.

[Davenport]

 

How many times do we see encapsulated books that we do not agree with the grade assigned? It is simply their opinion just like it was the opinion of Matt that the book could grade at a 9.0. So the book was never a 9.0, it was an opinion from Matt.

Book was damaged but from whom, I have no clue, and graded at 7.5 instead of an 8.0. So that is what the OP should be entitled for is the difference between the 7.5 and 8.0 grade.

 

Now here is the kicker, seeing as he will score pretty well on the other 28 books he had service done to, and seeking monetary damage for that lone book is where I come up with the greedy part, and again this is just my opinion.

While no one can predict a CGC "grade" the prep service's porfessional opinion should have merit with CGC. It's what they do for a living. If a prep service can't "grade" at least on par with CGC's inhouse criteria they should close shop.

 

How does CGC usually compensate for damage? How do they normally determine "raw" values? I would think a professional prep service's "grade" opinion would have some weight in the matter. Especially if the prep service was the direct submittor, knowing exactly what was submitted (and should have documentation to back it up).