CGG Universal = CGC Restored

[supapimp]

i never said the ASM 122 was trimmed, i think MW1(buyer) was the first to bring it up.

[LordRahl]

Dude what's it going to take to prove them guilty? They said that they had irrefutable proof that when they slabbed the books, the books had not been trimmed. CGG said this. Problem #1, they don't have a scan of the MTU #1. They have a scan of the ASM 68, which was graded as part of the same order at the same time. But they ONLY scanned the ASM? Problem #2, the scan of the ASM 68 they sent me is really low resolution. Of a RAW book. Are you seeing any irrefutable proof yet? Problem #3, there is very strong evidence being presented in the other thread that the scan of the ASM 68 that CGG sent me is DOCTORED. It breaks down like this. CGG said they had proof that they slabbed unrestored books. This implies that either I restored the books before sending them to CGC or CGC themselves trimmed the books, knowing that they had been previously CGG graded, in an attempt to discredit CGG. CGG made some VERY strong accusations, saying that they have evidence and then the "evidence" they provide is anything but irrefutable. The "evidence" actually makes them look even worse. OPEN YOUR EYES.

[AtomicPaul-migration]

I can't stress enough how important it would be to make any proof of missing restoration in the grading process as tangible and conclusive as possible by:

 

Taking detailed, large scans of a book in a CGG holder, out of the holder, and then in the new CGC holder with a purple label.

 

Having all three of those elements would automatically eliminate 99% of the possibilities of disputing the results and margins of error due to outside factors.

 

 

This is exactly the reason why I said the above quote, 25 pages ago. It had nothing to do with intimating that you "cooked the books". It would have tied everything up into a neat little package that could not have been subject to misinterpretation by anyone having doubts of what they hear and see after the fact and saved you countless hours of frustration, having to explain it over and over again. Before, between, and after pictures are the way to go whenever possible.

[LordRahl]

Believe me, I SO wish I had thought to take scans of the books in the CGG holder. But at the time I didn't have any reason to.

[BassGMan]

Dude what's it going to take to prove them guilty? They said that they had irrefutable proof that when they slabbed the books, the books had not been trimmed. CGG said this. Problem #1, they don't have a scan of the MTU #1. They have a scan of the ASM 68, which was graded as part of the same order at the same time. But they ONLY scanned the ASM? Problem #2, the scan of the ASM 68 they sent me is really low resolution. Of a RAW book. Are you seeing any irrefutable proof yet? Problem #3, there is very strong evidence being presented in the other thread that the scan of the ASM 68 that CGG sent me is DOCTORED. It breaks down like this. CGG said they had proof that they slabbed unrestored books. This implies that either I restored the books before sending them to CGC or CGC themselves trimmed the books, knowing that they had been previously CGG graded, in an attempt to discredit CGG. CGG made some VERY strong accusations, saying that they have evidence and then the "evidence" they provide is anything but irrefutable. The "evidence" actually makes them look even worse. OPEN YOUR EYES.

 

Hey Dude, I can understand how you came to the conclusions that you did by putting the assumed puzzle pieces together. But there may be some pieces that are wrong, or some that are still missing. There is still no proof. I would suggest calling CGG and speaking to them in a professional manner without making any accusations. Ask them for more detail and for further explanation into the scans in question and express your concerns to them about this situation. I think you are jumping the gun here a bit too soon. You may be wright with some of it. But you also may be wrong. I have seen people "be sure" many times here on these boards and in other places frequently, only to be proven wrong when further details have come out. I find it funny how human nature leads so many people to convict the accused without actual proof, based purely off what they "think" happened. Actually, I find it scary. -----Sid

[drice6900]

Dude what's it going to take to prove them guilty? They said that they had irrefutable proof that when they slabbed the books, the books had not been trimmed. CGG said this. Problem #1, they don't have a scan of the MTU #1. They have a scan of the ASM 68, which was graded as part of the same order at the same time. But they ONLY scanned the ASM? Problem #2, the scan of the ASM 68 they sent me is really low resolution. Of a RAW book. Are you seeing any irrefutable proof yet? Problem #3, there is very strong evidence being presented in the other thread that the scan of the ASM 68 that CGG sent me is DOCTORED. It breaks down like this. CGG said they had proof that they slabbed unrestored books. This implies that either I restored the books before sending them to CGC or CGC themselves trimmed the books, knowing that they had been previously CGG graded, in an attempt to discredit CGG. CGG made some VERY strong accusations, saying that they have evidence and then the "evidence" they provide is anything but irrefutable. The "evidence" actually makes them look even worse. OPEN YOUR EYES.

 

[Darthdiesel]

I find it funny how human nature leads so many people to convict the accused without actual proof, based purely off what they "think" happened. Actually, I find it scary. -----Sid

 

Here's what is really SCARY in my opinion. your statement above can also be applied to when there is a supposed CGC faux pas/ press and resubmit/ caught on Heritage scans I don't see your outcry against the tide of accusers then?

[Clark Khaos-migration]

I find it funny how human nature leads so many people to convict the accused without actual proof, based purely off what they "think" happened. Actually, I find it scary. -----Sid

 

Here's what is really SCARY in my opinion. your statement above can also be applied to when there is a supposed CGC faux pas/ press and resubmit/ caught on Heritage scans I don't see your outcry against the tide of accusers then?

 

 

"supposed" "faux pas"

[BassGMan]

I find it funny how human nature leads so many people to convict the accused without actual proof, based purely off what they "think" happened. Actually, I find it scary. -----Sid

 

Here's what is really SCARY in my opinion. your statement above can also be applied to when there is a supposed CGC faux pas/ press and resubmit/ caught on Heritage scans I don't see your outcry against the tide of accusers then?

 

I'm not familiar with that thread. I don't read all of them. Recently I've only been following these two CGG controversy threads. You bet though, if I see someone coming down on anyone or any company unjustly and without proof the way it has been done here, I would feel the same way, and will write about it, and have written about it. Just ask Rocketeer who I gave a really hard time to once (sorry) when I felt he was coming down hard on another Ebayer without good reason. I have no more loyalty to CGG than to CGC. No more loyalty to Ebay than to Amazon. But I do like Coke more than Pepsi and I do prefer DiGiorno's over Freschetta. As far as donuts go, I see Krispy Kreme the same way as I do any other run of the mill fresh donuts. No difference and no preference, period. ------Sid

[drice6900]

I'm not familiar with that thread. I don't read all of them. Recently I've only been following these two CGG controversy threads. You bet though, if I see someone coming down on anyone or any company unjustly and without proof the way it has been done here, I would feel the same way, and will write about it, and have written about it. Just ask Rocketeer who I gave a really hard time to once (sorry) when I felt he was coming down hard on another Ebayer without good reason. I have no more loyalty to CGG than to CGC. No more loyalty to Ebay than to Amazon. But I do like Coke more than Pepsi and I do prefer DiGiorno's over Freschetta. As far as donuts go, I see Krispy Kreme the same way as I do any other run of the mill fresh donuts. No difference and no preference, period. ------Sid

 

Uhhhhhmmm... OK?

[Darthdiesel]

I find it funny how human nature leads so many people to convict the accused without actual proof, based purely off what they "think" happened. Actually, I find it scary. -----Sid

 

Here's what is really SCARY in my opinion. your statement above can also be applied to when there is a supposed CGC faux pas/ press and resubmit/ caught on Heritage scans I don't see your outcry against the tide of accusers then?

 

 

"supposed" "faux pas"

 

Back to Smallville with you, Clarkie...I think I hear your homie Lex callin'

[RS]

There is some discussion going on in another thread about whether there are any documented cases of CGG missing restoration and tdcomixncardz involvement in the whole situation. So far everything has been conjecture and theory. Well I thought this would be an appropriate time to post evidence and not theory. I bought the following books from Tdcomix about 3 1/2 months ago.

 

 

I just got them back from CGC on Monday. Here they are in all their glory.

 

 

 

I talked to Daniel of CGG yesterday. He said that he remembers the books and is confident that they are unrestored. He claims that the Spidey came from a sealed 3-pack. I was under the impression that 3-packs can be opened and resealed if you know what you are doing so I don't take that as evidence that a book is automatically unrestored. Daniel wanted me to send the books back to him so that they can look at them again and possibly send them to a neutral 3rd party for a resto check. The books were sent back today. Needless to say that I'm very curious how CGG handles this.

 

 

Look at this. This has nothing to do about the cgg scan. This shows that the comic was hijacked my the seller Tdcomix

 

 

[AtomicPaul-migration]

BUMP!

 

Good post! Worth talking about (the burn marks). Anyone care to comment?

[Murph]

The reflection of light makes it look like there's a bend but perhaps there's not? I would think LR could see such burn marks with books in hand.

 

Brian

[sterlingcomics]

Maybe someone spilled mustard on it?

 

The picture anamolies, although interesting, are hardly proof that the seller did anything---wish it did, but I don't speculate....much....

[supapimp]

BUMP for the newbies or lurkers

[PedigreeMan]

BUMP for the newbies or lurkers

 

Are you gonna all the negative threads about CGC also?