A statement from CGG

[BassGMan]

Hello, many of you who have read my posts know that I have defended CGG. I have no connection to them other than submitting some of my books for grading about five times. I just defended them because I felt that they were being unfairly prosecuted on these boards by people making assumptions from too few details. I use both CGG and CGC and find each company useful for different types of submissions.

 

Anyway, on all my posts I sign off as "-----Sid" along with the fact that my e-mail address is easily accesible on my profile. So it is no secret who I am.

 

Completely unsolicited, Daniel Peterson e-mailed me last night (I just received it this morning) with a statement that he said I would be welcome to post on the boards. Please, no conspiracy theories about me. I do not know these guys and have only submitted to them through the mail like anyone else. I am sure Daniel chose me to do this as I have been one of the defenders of CGG on these boards and for no other reason. Below is his statement in full. ------Sid

 

 

The CGGROUP inner holder is made of perfectly safe material. 1st, our holder DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY PLASTICIZERS, and DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY harmful additives. The base compound of our inner holder is Polyvinyl Chloride, and it is completely safe for long term storage. I have personally studied PVC products since the beginning of the controversy in the late 80’s and am well aware of the truth behind the lies and mistruth, that this can be a perfectly safe and viable product.

 

The so-called off gassing, even in the lesser PVC’s is 2 or 3 parts per MILLION, practically non-existent. The gases that the paper of the comic book puts off is much, much more harmful than the holder could ever be, even under very poor holder conditions. Under decent conditions, our holders are absolutely safe for an very extended period of time, we are talking about decades here. If you left a book in our holder in direct sunlight the book would damage itself long before the holder could even begin to have the possibility of letting off any kind of "gas" or other substance that could, maybe, possibly have even a small effect on a book. Just going off of standard stabilized uPVC, it does not exude or degrade at temperatures below 275 degrees F (do not bake your books or throw them in a volcano).

 

Please let me reiterate, our inner holder is an absolutely safe holder and DOES NOT pose any danger, in any way, to comic books. If our customers truly cannot accept the FACT that our holder will never cause any damage to their books we would be willing to look into going with one of our alternate materials, although our feelings would be that it would be a completely unnecessary change. We certainly hope people can see past the scare tactics and lies put out over a decade ago, and understand they have absolutely nothing to fear from our holder.

 

Daniel Patterson (senior grader)

[Red Hook]

SID -

 

Thanks for posting.....but.....does CGG have any statements to make about the scan they submitted several weeks ago to prove that a book they graded was not trimmed before grading? They never answered that. As you recall, it was clear to me that the scan had major questions about it. Not trying to be cute here, but if they can't answer that one, their credibility across the board has been damaged beyond repair as far as I am concerned. I don't think my analysis of the scan was in anyway unfair. I stand by my observations. Perhaps you could ask Daniel about this.

 

Thanks, Brad

[comicmankev]

Is there any reason CGG don't come on here and answer these queries directly??? All the stuff on these boards is REALLY bad press for them. I know it's a rival company and all, but if I were them, I'd be pretty pizzed about all this trashtalking! All this 'pass the message on' sheit is madness A complete waste of time, just gets people ranting on and nothing solved.

 

Of course, if it were all true then

[joe_collector]

Once again, CGG has been asked not to post on these boards, and has followed along with the CGC edict.

 

Did you guys stunt double in Memento, or just cracking wise?

[BassGMan]

SID -

 

Thanks for posting.....but.....does CGG have any statements to make about the scan they submitted several weeks ago to prove that a book they graded was not trimmed before grading? They never answered that. As you recall, it was clear to me that the scan had major questions about it. Not trying to be cute here, but if they can't answer that one, their credibility across the board has been damaged beyond repair as far as I am concerned. I don't think my analysis of the scan was in anyway unfair. I stand by my observations. Perhaps you could ask Daniel about this.

 

Thanks, Brad

 

Brad, I have not been communicating with CGG in any way outside of regarding my own submissions and I don't really feel comfortable calling them up asking for explanations of controversial subjects, like with the "doctored" scan. However, if Daniel wants to send me any more e-mails then I will certainly post them for him. Somebody mentioned somewhere on another thread that as a competitor CGG was not allowed to post directly on this message board system. I hope it is within the rules to be a "surrogate" poster as I have done here and SmokingHawk has done before as I believe it is fair to let CGG defend themselves directly if they have the desire. -----Sid

[comicmankev]

sorry for not knowing that already JC, but once I wake up over here in the UK, and someone has started a thread on CGG, everyone jumps in and then I have to read a thousand threads! So I don't usually bother

[OldGuy]

sorry for not knowing that already JC, but once I wake up over here in the UK, and someone has started a thread on CGG, everyone jumps in and then I have to read a thousand threads! So I don't usually bother

 

That's a great idea. I think I'm going to try that.

[Red Hook]

 

Brad, I have not been communicating with CGG in any way outside of regarding my own submissions and I don't really feel comfortable calling them up asking for explanations of controversial subjects, like with the "doctored" scan. However, if Daniel wants to send me any more e-mails then I will certainly post them for him. Somebody mentioned somewhere on another thread that as a competitor CGG was not allowed to post directly on this message board system. I hope it is within the rules to be a "surrogate" poster as I have done here and SmokingHawk has done before as I believe it is fair to let CGG defend themselves directly if they have the desire. -----Sid

 

Would you feel comfortable PM-ing me Daniels email so I can ask him myself. I feel comfortable asking him. Or I can pass along my email address to you. I would also recommend that asap CGG get their own message board up and running, if it is within their means technically and financially. And please don't misunderstand, Sid. I'm not assuming you have any responsiblity for answering for CGG or explaining their actions.

 

Brad

[Ze-man]

Would you feel comfortable PM-ing me Daniels email so I can ask him myself. I feel comfortable asking him. Or I can pass along my email address to you. I would also recommend that asap CGG get their own message board up and running, if it is within their means technically and financially. And please don't misunderstand, Sid. I'm not assuming you have any responsiblity for answering for CGG or explaining their actions.

 

Brad

 

Hey, perhaps you have already tried this Brad, but did you go to the CGG website, and use the contact us form, to email them?

If you already have tried, and not heard back from them.. then dis-reguard this post.

As I am pretty sure you already did theis method of contacting them/him

Or better yet, did you call them?

1-541-341-1230

 

Z

[Kevin Boyd]

You and everyone else on their mailing list got it last night it seems.

 

>The CGGROUP inner holder is made of perfectly safe material. 1st, our holder DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY PLASTICIZERS, and DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY harmful additives. The base compound of our inner holder is Polyvinyl Chloride,

 

Thanks for confirming that lab report.

 

I'm not confident about the plasticizers and additives statement, as untreated PVC in it's basic form is quite hard, dry and brittle. Something has to be added to the basic form to make it stable, and flexible enough to be processed to form your inner well.

 

>The so-called off gassing, even in the lesser PVC’s is 2 or 3 parts per MILLION, practically non-existent. The gases that the paper of the comic book puts off is much, much more harmful than the holder could ever be, even under very poor holder conditions.

 

So the comics are harmful to the holder then?

 

>Under decent conditions, our holders are absolutely safe for an very extended period of time, we are talking about decades here.

 

So long as you don't put those harmful gassing comics in them.

 

>If you left a book in our holder in direct sunlight the book would damage itself long before the holder could even begin to have the possibility of letting off any kind of "gas" or other substance that could, maybe, possibly have even a small effect on a book.

 

OF COURSE leaving a book in direct sunlight will be harmful to the book! It would be damaged in a couple of hours FROM BEING IN THE SUN - not from the holder - as opposed to a much more slower and insipid death by being housed in PVC for long periods of time (months or years).

[Red Hook]

I have sent a detailed email to CGG concerning the ASM 68 scan, or as RS refers to it, my Moby . If they do choose to discuss what the heck happened and they are agreeable to my posting any answer I receive, you'll be the first to know.

 

Brad

[Steve_HOCP]

Brad, I have not been communicating with CGG in any way outside of regarding my own submissions and I don't really feel comfortable calling them up asking for explanations of controversial subjects, like with the "doctored" scan.

 

Honestly, that is extremely hard to believe. You know them well enough to carry their message, but you don't know them well enough to ask a question?

 

So why would CGG USE you, and I emphasize the term "USE you", to deliver their message?

[BassGMan]

 

Would you feel comfortable PM-ing me Daniels email so I can ask him myself. I feel comfortable asking him. Or I can pass along my email address to you. I would also recommend that asap CGG get their own message board up and running, if it is within their means technically and financially. And please don't misunderstand, Sid. I'm not assuming you have any responsiblity for answering for CGG or explaining their actions.

 

Brad

 

Sure, tonight I'll PM you the e-mail that I received from CGG. The only thing not included in it from above was just a statement like "Feel welcome to post this message on the boards if you like". Something like that, that's it. I have it downloaded at home on Outlook Express so I can't see it here from work right now. I was sent this e-mail out of the blue. I have not been talking to them about these issues so I have no "inside info". I know just as much as you guys. -----Sid

[Red Hook]

Thanks SID. RS sent me Daniel's email and I already sent off a query. I appreciate your efforts.

 

Brad

[BassGMan]

Brad, I have not been communicating with CGG in any way outside of regarding my own submissions and I don't really feel comfortable calling them up asking for explanations of controversial subjects, like with the "doctored" scan.

 

Honestly, that is extremely hard to believe. You know them well enough to carry their message, but you don't know them well enough to ask a question?

 

So why would CGG USE you, and I emphasize the term "USE you", to deliver their message?

 

Yeah, they are "using" me I guess. But I don't mind. Daniel probably just chose me because he recognized my name and e-mail address from my profile and matched that to my recent submissions to CGG. Plus, I have defended CGG on several different threads here, since I felt someone needed to, and since I have had great service from them and felt they were being prosecuted by board members unfairly. He most likely just trusted a "CGG defender" to post his message accurately. Something like that. I don't know. I do not have a personal relationship with CGG and have never discussed anything outside of questions regarding my own submissions, and briefly at that. No secrets here. Just a messenger is all. -----Sid

[Steve_HOCP]

fair enough

 

And as the saying goes...don't kill the messenger.

[25CentComic]

Brad, I have not been communicating with CGG in any way outside of regarding my own submissions and I don't really feel comfortable calling them up asking for explanations of controversial subjects, like with the "doctored" scan.

 

Honestly, that is extremely hard to believe. You know them well enough to carry their message, but you don't know them well enough to ask a question?

 

So why would CGG USE you, and I emphasize the term "USE you", to deliver their message?

 

Don't be an [!@#%^&^] to the messenger.

[Steve_HOCP]

it was a legitimate question...don't you think?

[uclapeterg]

69 posts!

[Steve_HOCP]

 

 

dammit!! (fixed)