Looking for opinions

[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.

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.

And, I have no access to the answer. Not that I'm suggesting anyone knows the answer. What I do know is that the book was forwarded to CGC priced as a 9.0.

[nik]

After a final inspection, the book was forwarded to CGC. Both the pressing and CGC fees reflected a 9.0 book.

 

 

 

See if you left this part in your opening post, I probably would have though a little different.

[nik]

 

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).

 

Oh please. Do you honestly expect a pressing service to be 100% percent accurate?

 

The only true question remains here is who damaged the book.

[here to lern]

After a final inspection, the book was forwarded to CGC. Both the pressing and CGC fees reflected a 9.0 book.

 

 

 

See if you left this part in your opening post, I probably would have though a little different.

 

Nik, I was trying to get thoughts on a specific point. I never intended to bring Matt, CGC, or any terms of the settlement to the board. I didn't think they were pertinent, and I was doing my best to respect the other parties privacy.

[Straw-Man]

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.

 

i'm suggesting it's curious those were the two questions that went unanswered.

[DrWatson]

 

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).

 

Oh please. Do you honestly expect a pressing service to be 100% percent accurate?

 

The only true question remains here is who damaged the book.

I expect the gentleperson that presses my books to be 100% spot on all the time.

[nik]

After a final inspection, the book was forwarded to CGC. Both the pressing and CGC fees reflected a 9.0 book.

 

 

 

See if you left this part in your opening post, I probably would have though a little different.

 

Nik, I was trying to get thoughts on a specific point. I never intended to bring Matt, CGC, or any terms of the settlement to the board. I didn't think they were pertinent, and I was doing my best to respect the other parties privacy.

 

Did you honestly expect to accomplish that in a public forum such as this one?

[DrWatson]

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.

 

i'm suggesting it's curious those were the two questions that went unanswered.

That's because the information is irrelevant.

[Davenport]

And, I have no access to the answer. Not that I'm suggesting anyone knows the answer.

Someone knows and they're a professional, since only professionals handled your book after it left your possession, including the shippers.

[nik]

 

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).

 

Oh please. Do you honestly expect a pressing service to be 100% percent accurate?

 

The only true question remains here is who damaged the book.

I expect the gentleperson that presses my books to be 100% spot on all the time.

 

 

Even CGC is not 100% spot on Doc so your expectations are a leap of faith.

[DrWatson]

After a final inspection, the book was forwarded to CGC. Both the pressing and CGC fees reflected a 9.0 book.

 

 

 

See if you left this part in your opening post, I probably would have though a little different.

 

Nik, I was trying to get thoughts on a specific point. I never intended to bring Matt, CGC, or any terms of the settlement to the board. I didn't think they were pertinent, and I was doing my best to respect the other parties privacy.

 

Did you honestly expect to accomplish that in a public forum such as this one?

No, but I do have to commend Davenport for staying on topic. He has really impressed me by not pandering to the lowest common denominator unlike some of his contemporaries.

[DrWatson]

 

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).

 

Oh please. Do you honestly expect a pressing service to be 100% percent accurate?

 

The only true question remains here is who damaged the book.

I expect the gentleperson that presses my books to be 100% spot on all the time.

 

 

Even CGC is not 100% spot on Doc so your expectations are a leap of faith.

I was being a being a smartass. The person that does my work isn't perfect. They are actually harder on themselves than I could ever be. It's only comic books after all. What's a comic book compared to a friendship.

[here to lern]

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.

 

i'm suggesting it's curious those were the two questions that went unanswered.

 

Most importantly, I do not feel it has anything to do with the issue. This is a point Matt and I have discussed repeatedly. Second, the first individual who asked the question had just gotten off the phone with Matt and was privy to info the board was not. A response was not appropriate, although there were numerous more PMs. I don't recall who asked the second time, but it still wasn't pertinent, IMHO. I might point out that Matt said as much this morning. Unfortunately, this thread has become so long, that researching specific comments is next to impossible.

[Timmay]

And Joe: with 29 press jobs in your possession, I hope you'll give strong consideration to disclosing this work to prospective buyers when it comes time to sell any of these comics.

 

I didn't see any note on your Hulk 181 9.6 on CLink that it was pressed.

 

[DrWatson]

And Joe: with 29 press jobs in your possession, I hope you'll give strong consideration to disclosing this work to prospective buyers when it comes time to sell any of these comics.

 

I didn't see any note on your Hulk 181 9.6 on CLink that it was pressed.

 

Oh SNAP!

[joeypost]

And Joe: with 29 press jobs in your possession, I hope you'll give strong consideration to disclosing this work to prospective buyers when it comes time to sell any of these comics.

 

I didn't see any note on your Hulk 181 9.6 on CLink that it was pressed.

 

 

Oh snap!

[Bosco685]

And Joe: with 29 press jobs in your possession, I hope you'll give strong consideration to disclosing this work to prospective buyers when it comes time to sell any of these comics.

 

I didn't see any note on your Hulk 181 9.6 on CLink that it was pressed.

 

[here to lern]

After a final inspection, the book was forwarded to CGC. Both the pressing and CGC fees reflected a 9.0 book.

 

 

 

See if you left this part in your opening post, I probably would have though a little different.

 

Nik, I was trying to get thoughts on a specific point. I never intended to bring Matt, CGC, or any terms of the settlement to the board. I didn't think they were pertinent, and I was doing my best to respect the other parties privacy.

 

Did you honestly expect to accomplish that in a public forum such as this one?

 

Having had multiple discussions with Matt, and never having him acknowledge the legitimacy of a claim on CGC, I was left with few options. CGC appropriately said I should work thru Matt. I chose Matt's services because of this Board. It seemed appropriate to ask my question here. My other options were legal or to walk away. What would you have done?

Repeating again. The book was submitted to CGC and priced as a 9.0. No expectation that it had to come back as such. Had it been destroyed in transit, a claim would surely be for a 9.0. Had the book been returned to me in as expected condition, and I had submitted to CGC. The damage would based on a 9.0 as well. My logic may be flawed, but there it is.

[Straw-Man]

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.

 

i'm suggesting it's curious those were the two questions that went unanswered.

That's because the information is irrelevant.

 

he answered many "irrelevant" questions with "but what does that have to do with it?" he didn't even touch those two. it is because once it was spilled, he would look greedy to the point of derision. and you know it, just as i do.

[DrWatson]

And Joe: with 29 press jobs in your possession, I hope you'll give strong consideration to disclosing this work to prospective buyers when it comes time to sell any of these comics.

 

I didn't see any note on your Hulk 181 9.6 on CLink that it was pressed.

 

That smiley is just this side of vulgar.