• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CGG (not CGC) holder professionally tested PLASTIC NOT ARCHIVAL!!!

Started by Kevin Boyd,

411 posts in this topic

Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Do you think CGG would not find out what the best plastic to use.

 

It is pretty obvious they did not.

 

PVC is cheap... it is used to make pipes and other plastic containers. I imagine that they probably used it because it was available for less cost than mylar based plastics and it looked ok. (Another means for them to lower their price point to be more appealing to penny pinchers.)

 

I don't think they investigated the archival quality of PVC at all, I think they just put that text on their site about using archival materials because CGC says their holder is of archival quality, and it was just one more thing they copied.

 

And no, that analysis report was not cheap. Would you put your valuables in something without knowing what it was?

 

Kev

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

it was my understanding that CGC was in a hurry to get going in business. They had their business plan, Borock etc on deck...all they needed was a product/case. AND, as it goes, testing was taking a long time and they settled on the current materials. I had assumed that they would replace the slabs with true archival materials after a few years. I still hope so. But this is not 'news'. We have all known this...It needs to be continually talked about and CGC MUST reinvent their slabs.

 

Now that Ive actually bought a few slabbed books, I am very concerned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mitol

mitol

Posted
Posted

it was my understanding that CGC was in a hurry to get going in business. They had their business plan, Borock etc on deck...all they needed was a product/case. AND, as it goes, testing was taking a long time and they settled on the current materials. I had assumed that they would replace the slabs with true archival materials after a few years. I still hope so. But this is not 'news'. We have all known this...It needs to be continually talked about and CGC MUST reinvent their slabs.

 

Now that Ive actually bought a few slabbed books, I am very concerned!

 

You meant to say CGG as opposed to CGC. Is that correct? confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimm94

jimm94

Posted
Posted

I can't say I'm surprised to hear this. However, does anyone else think that the submitter wishing to remain anonymous somewhat damages the credibility of this analysis?

 

If the submitter won't even make their identity known, then who is to say what he/she actually sent in, or if the report is even real.

 

If a person is going to take the time, money, and effort to challenge a company regarding the materials used for their product, they should be willing to make themselves known and not clandestinely "leak" this information to the collecting community. What ulterior motive would a person have for hiding their identity? How's that for a reverse conspiracy theory?

 

Kev - Did this individual send you the entire report, or just the three pages that you posted?

 

Great job, Kev! Thanks for sharing this with all of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
  • Author
Posted

it was my understanding that CGC was in a hurry to get going in business. They had their business plan, Borock etc on deck...all they needed was a product/case. AND, as it goes, testing was taking a long time and they settled on the current materials. I had assumed that they would replace the slabs with true archival materials after a few years. I still hope so. But this is not 'news'. We have all known this...It needs to be continually talked about and CGC MUST reinvent their slabs.

 

Now that Ive actually bought a few slabbed books, I am very concerned!

 

We aren't discussing CGC's materials, but CGG's. And it is news that CGG (not CGC) is using a type of plastic that is universally discouraged for archival storage.

 

CGC's inner well is made from BAREX, which is considered archivally sound.

 

Kev

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sborock

sborock

Posted
Posted
it was my understanding that CGC was in a hurry to get going in business. They had their business plan, Borock etc on deck...all they needed was a product/case. AND, as it goes, testing was taking a long time and they settled on the current materials. I had assumed that they would replace the slabs with true archival materials after a few years. I still hope so. But this is not 'news'. We have all known this...It needs to be continually talked about and CGC MUST reinvent their slabs.

 

Now that Ive actually bought a few slabbed books, I am very concerned!

 

Our interior well has ALWAYS been made of Barex, these guys are talking about CGG 893frustrated.gif We would never use PVC! 893naughty-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasknight

texasknight

Posted
Posted
it was my understanding that CGC was in a hurry to get going in business. They had their business plan, Borock etc on deck...all they needed was a product/case. AND, as it goes, testing was taking a long time and they settled on the current materials. I had assumed that they would replace the slabs with true archival materials after a few years. I still hope so. But this is not 'news'. We have all known this...It needs to be continually talked about and CGC MUST reinvent their slabs.

 

Now that Ive actually bought a few slabbed books, I am very concerned!

 

Did you miss something in the previous posts, or did I ?

It appears to me that all the previous posts are discussing CGG NOT CGC slabs and inner wells being made of PVC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonker

Zonker

Posted
Posted
isn't this the same type of soft plastic used for 500ml, 1L and 1.5L bottles of water?

 

Pretty sure soft drink bottles are made out of Polyethylene. PVC is generally hard. Plastic water pipes you lay in the ground are PVC. To soften up certain PVC's to be flexible for wire insulation, etc. a 'plasticizer' is added in. It's the plasticizer that is notorious for leaching out over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I can't say I'm surprised to hear this. However, does anyone else think that the submitter wishing to remain anonymous somewhat damages the credibility of this analysis?

 

If the submitter won't even make their identity known, then who is to say what he/she actually sent in, or if the report is even real.

 

If a person is going to take the time, money, and effort to challenge a company regarding the materials used for their product, they should be willing to make themselves known and not clandestinely "leak" this information to the collecting community. What ulterior motive would a person have for hiding their identity? How's that for a reverse conspiracy theory?

 

Kev - Did this individual send you the entire report, or just the three pages that you posted?

 

Great job, Kev! Thanks for sharing this with all of us.

 

Thanks!

 

I was just sent the three pages, not the entire report. I can probably try to get the entire report, but the submitter felt that page 2 was the most telling and that the other pages were worthwhile to verify the legitimacy of the lab that did the testing.

 

I realize that anonymity certainly damages my source's credibility, but he/she has their reasons for keeping their identity private for now. Please take my word, whatever that is worth to you, that that this is a valid report and it has come from a very reliable source.

 

Kev

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sterlingcomics

sterlingcomics

Posted
Posted

great info Kev, but the attachments I saw don't correlate in any way shape or form back to CGG. I don't doubt that the info is probably correct, just stating what I've just seen with my own two eyes...

 

popcorn.gif Is that the sound of their destiny?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

wait.... the test was done on CGG? I was talking about CGC.

Im not worried about CGG. From all the other horror stories Ive heard I wont be buying a CGG slabbed book.

 

But CGCs well is a serious concern to most of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sborock

sborock

Posted
Posted
wait.... the test was done on CGG? I was talking about CGC.

Im not worried about CGG. From all the other horror stories Ive heard I wont be buying a CGG slabbed book.

 

But CGCs well is a serious concern to most of us.

 

What part of my post did you not understand confused-smiley-013.gifforeheadslap.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevin Boyd

Kevin Boyd

Posted
  • Author
Posted

great info Kev, but the attachments I saw don't correlate in any way shape or form back to CGG. I don't doubt that the info is probably correct, just stating what I've just seen with my own two eyes...

 

The two unidentified clear plastic samples that were received by the lab for testing (attachment entitled "page2") came from the CGG inner well.

 

The submitter cracked a CGG slab and removed the comic book, then sent the inner well plastic in for analyis.

 

How does that not tie back to CGG?

 

If you don't believe it, feel free to send a CGG inner well in for analysis. I'm sure they will confirm, as this lab did, that the plastic is PVC.

 

Kev

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing