CGG: Dawn of the Dead

[sterlingcomics]

The beginning of the end...

The wheels are in motion...

Resistence is futile...

 

Tick Tock

[THE_BEYONDER]

[BassGMan]

Geez, you guys are too funny. Whether they have done anything unethical, or have done anything of less than high quality I don't know. But either way, I am hoping that they make whatever improvements necessary and expand their name and services within the comics community. I realize that it is hard for new small companies to come in to the marketplace and compete with the Giant Gorilla that CGC has become but NO ONE will come out Big and Perfect from the start.

 

Good luck CGG, you'll need it. As long as you are still around you and CGC BOTH will be grading my books. If CGC was faster they would grade all of my books. But CGG is a nice alternative to the 3-months plus wait for some books.-------Sid

[sterlingcomics]

But CGG is a nice alternative to the 3-months plus wait for some books.-------Sid

 

Agreed, but I won't be using them. I like healthy competition, but there are too much doubts in my head right now for them to viewed as a serious threat---except for themselves. They are doing a good job in that regards.

 

So relax, enjoy the countdown....and enjoy life...

[THE_BEYONDER]

Have I bashed CGG at all? Although I applaud your stance in the ASM 122 thread....your sweeping generalizations about fellow board members is getting out-of-hand.

[lighthouse]

Yeah... quick show of hands...

 

Who thinks it was a bad idea for Daniel Patterson to start CGG as a sole proprietorship (putting all of his personal assets at risk) rather than setting up an LLC or S-Corp?

[uclapeterg]

That was bad. I love the "halloween" theme!

[Kevin Boyd]

Geez, you guys are too funny. Whether they have done anything unethical, or have done anything of less than high quality I don't know. But either way, I am hoping that they make whatever improvements necessary and expand their name and services within the comics community. I realize that it is hard for new small companies to come in to the marketplace and compete with the Giant Gorilla that CGC has become but NO ONE will come out Big and Perfect from the start.

 

The only way for CGG to make improvements would be to shut down their operations for at least 3-6 months so that they can completely re-write and re-design their website, come up with new and original designations for their grading tiers and labels, and come up with a new holder design that isn't a rip of CGC's.

 

Then they would have to hire a person with some experience and respect in the field when it came to restoration, and hire a "face" for the company - perhaps a respected big-name dealer.

 

Good luck CGG, you'll need it. As long as you are still around you and CGC BOTH will be grading my books. If CGC was faster they would grade all of my books. But CGG is a nice alternative to the 3-months plus wait for some books.-------Sid

 

CGG doesn't need luck, they've had plenty of luck to survive this long.

 

What CGG needs is money, lots of money.

 

They saved a ton of it by simply copying CGC's research and design to launch their service, but if they are serious about continuing operations they should step back and use whatever money they have earned from people like yourself who are desperate for a cheaper and faster alternative to CGC and reinvest it in coming up a with a service that is uniquely their own.

 

The essential problem with CGG isn't that they exist, it's that they came into existance by copying CGC to the very letter.

 

Offering a service at a lower price with a faster turnaround could be a strong selling point - but it's currently undermined by the fact that they have stolen everything from CGC in order to get to this point, and that they have had some very visible public snafus (true or not) when it has come to the issues of grading restored books.

 

Kev

[BassGMan]

Have I bashed CGG at all? Although I applaud your stance in the ASM 122 thread....your sweeping generalizations about fellow board members is getting out-of-hand.

 

Mr. Beyonder, I have made comments about the majority of some board members and how they often come to their own conclusions and "proof" too fast. But I have never said everybody at any time. I have said "many" quite a few times and I believe I was referring to many, maybe even 50+%. Often when I make a comment about "many people" then certain individuals think I am talking about them specifically. Happens all the time. How do I properly refer to "many" or "most" without offending the ones I am not talking about? I don't want to mention names unless I am referring to an individual and his specific post. And I am mostly just referring to people making bold statements about "guilty" and "proof" and not just their opinion of CGG or anybody else. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I think that is great. I just don't like people stating their opinions as facts as they often do. -----Sid

[BassGMan]

 

What CGG needs is money, lots of money.

 

They saved a ton of it by simply copying CGC's research and design to launch their service, but if they are serious about continuing operations they should step back and use whatever money they have earned from people like yourself who are desperate for a cheaper and faster alternative to CGC and reinvest it in coming up a with a service that is uniquely their own.

 

The essential problem with CGG isn't that they exist, it's that they came into existance by copying CGC to the very letter.

 

Offering a service at a lower price with a faster turnaround could be a strong selling point - but it's currently undermined by the fact that they have stolen everything from CGC in order to get to this point, and that they have had some very visible public snafus (true or not) when it has come to the issues of grading restored books.

 

Kev

 

Kev, well I'll certainly agree with you there. Although it didn't bother me, and still doesn't, I have wondered how CGG could get away with copying so much of CGC's model, but companies in all businesess do this all the time. It is certainly not uncommon in any industry. I was wondering how CGG could use so many of what I imagine are patents owned by CGC, but I am guessing that CGG had an attorney find out for them what they could get away with and what not. If they are copying CGC legally (and I don't know if they are or not) but if they ARE, then I have no problem with them doing this as I see it so often everywhere else in other businesses. Sure, that may be "cheating" in a sense but it's the American way. I'm not saying I agree to this but if we were to hold CGG to a no-copy rule then we have to hold every other business to the same rules. ------Sid

[THE_BEYONDER]

Have I bashed CGG at all? Although I applaud your stance in the ASM 122 thread....your sweeping generalizations about fellow board members is getting out-of-hand.

 

Mr. Beyonder, I have made comments about the majority of some board members and how they often come to their own conclusions and "proof" too fast. But I have never said everybody at any time. I have said "many" quite a few times and I believe I was referring to many, maybe even 50+%. Often when I make a comment about "many people" then certain individuals think I am talking about them specifically. Happens all the time. How do I properly refer to "many" or "most" without offending the ones I am not talking about? I don't want to mention names unless I am referring to an individual and his specific post. And I am mostly just referring to people making bold statements about "guilty" and "proof" and not just their opinion of CGG or anybody else. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I think that is great. I just don't like people stating their opinions as facts as they often do. -----Sid

 

I was preparing for a bitter FLAME WAR ....and you post a response that I am unable to dispute....because I agree.

[Kevin Boyd]

I was wondering how CGG could use so many of what I imagine are patents owned by CGC, but I am guessing that CGG had an attorney find out for them what they could get away with and what not. If they are copying CGC legally (and I don't know if they are or not) but if they ARE, then I have no problem with them doing this as I see it so often everywhere else in other businesses.

 

Hey, that's your choice Syd, but I certainly can't endorse them, that and the fact that Don and Daniel have absolutely no reputation in this business (except as copycats).

 

I strongly doubt that CGG had an attorney advise them on this. I don't think that they are that bright.

 

They are using the CGC patents illegally, I hope they are ready for what's coming.

 

Kev

[RS]

Kev

 

The essential problem with CGG isn't that they exist, it's that they came into existance by copying CGC to the very letter.

. The way you talk there should be only one of everything. We all drive the same car wear the same clothes and have a TV with one channel and a radio with no dial.

 

 

 

I like both CGG and CGC I send new books to both and Bronze Age to CGC. The way some people are some anti CGG you would think they own CGC or get kick backs for every anti CGG post they write. I also like the fast and friendly service I get at CGG. I think that CGG should only grade moderns there is a nice market for this because CGC is 40 + day behind.

 

RS

[lighthouse]

Kev

 

The essential problem with CGG isn't that they exist, it's that they came into existance by copying CGC to the very letter.

. The way you talk there should be only one of everything. We all drive the same car wear the same clothes and have a TV with one channel and a radio with no dial.

 

RS

 

If that channel is showing porn, count me in...

[BassGMan]

Believe me, I do not know the law at all. But from what I have "heard" patents are difficult to obtain, costly and take a long time. Does CGC actually have patents on their holder and copywrights to their system? Maybe they do. But unless someone here knows FOR SURE, I will not assume. Possibly in another industry, related or not there may be similar protection type holders that CGC copied a little or alot. I don't know. But if this is the case, maybe CGC's holder is not so unique? If there is no patent, then I imagine anybody can copy legally. Maybe there is some kind of design difference in the CGG holder that allows them to be "different enough" so that they are not in violation of CGC's patent if they DO have one. Even if there are no actual patents, sure CGG is still copying CGC big time. Do not give CGG any business if you do not endorse this. But as a consumer I will make my choice and go with CGG when I feel appropriate. I do have one concern though. Although I like CGG, most of what I have them grade for me is for the intention of selling the slab on Ebay and I do not want CGG to get such a bad rep that no one will want to buy my CGG slabs. I've got maybe 40 or so right now. Other than that, I just appreciate their quick service and shipping updates. -----Sid

[RS]

[Kevin Boyd]

 

The way you talk there should be only one of everything. We all drive the same car wear the same clothes and have a TV with one channel and a radio with no dial.

 

Thanks Daniel, or is it Don? You really drive my car and wear my clothes?

 

Each car, radio or tv station, even clothing may possess basic similarities, but if you copy something exactly then you are stealing.

 

The idea of having a grading company is not something that can be patented, and anyone is welcome to do it.

 

However, stealing text from someone else and publishing it as your own (changing merely a word here or there, eg global instead of universal) is called plagiarism and stealing someone else's patented design is still patent theft, even if you are using garbage materials. Whether it's a car, a tv or radio station, or a piece of clothing, burning a CD or a DVD it's still theft.

 

Just because you are friendly and fast doesn't make you any more justified to do what you are doing.

 

Kev

[sterlingcomics]

You will never here me arguing about competition for similar services CGC provides. You will also never here me saying how I "enjoy" waiting three lifetimes for my books to come back. All of the CGG or "open competition" advocates here are correct in these regards.

 

But, my final analysis of CGG is that they are not a serious competitor to CGC, just a cheap knockoff to fill niche modern markets. I'll reluctantly wait for my books to come back from a REPUTABLE and PROVEN grading company with INTEGRITY than risk it with CGG.

 

LH, I had no idea CGG was a sole proprietorship. That's bad. I'd never do that in a million years, let alone something like third party grading. Wow, that's brazen; that takes testicular fortitude...

[BachelorOfComix]

They are using the CGC patents illegally, I hope they are ready for what's coming.

 

Kev

It certainly sounds like you have some inside information. Can't wait to see how this turns out.

[Kevin Boyd]

Believe me, I do not know the law at all. But from what I have "heard" patents are difficult to obtain, costly and take a long time. Does CGC actually have patents on their holder and copywrights to their system? Maybe they do. But unless someone here knows FOR SURE, I will not assume.

 

YES I KNOW FOR SURE THAT THEY DO HAVE PATENTS ON THE HOLDER AND WELL DESIGN.

 

What CGG haven't copied is the material the holder is made of.

 

Kev