CGG responds to accusations of doctored ASM 68 scan.......

[Red Hook]

Ok. If you need a refresher on this....go here....

Thread including scan analysis

 

I finally decided to write to CGG myself. I wrote the following to Daniel Patterson, ......and sent it out yesterday 4/15... and subsequently received his ok to post word for word my email and his response.

 

Hi Daniel,

 

I am writing to you in the hopes that you can shed some light on one of the more controversial topics of discussion on the CGC boards lately.

 

Before I go further, I would like to state that anything you communicate to me I will consider to be in confidence. I will not post anything you write to me on the boards unless you give permission. That is only fair. I will not post this email either.

 

I am referring to the discussion of the scan of Amazing Spiderman #68 that was provided by CGG as proof that the book was not trimmed prior to encapsulation and that whatever trimming was done, was done after it left CGG.

 

I was away at the time this discussion was initiated on the boards, but when I returned I was asked to analyze the scan that CGG provided of the AS 68. It was my un-professional opinion that the scan raised more questions than answered, and that the scan showed some serious visual anomalies. My qualifications in this matter are as an instructor of Photoshop, a working professional in the graphics arts field and I have also done some technical writing and beta testing on Adobe products.

 

When I reached my conclusions about the scan, I was trying to be as objective as possible. If the scan had been provided by CGC I would have reached the same conclusion. I do own CGC encapsulated books, and have submitted about 15 books to CGC. I don't give CGC a free pass. I have taken issue with several of their practices, including allowing dealers to use their service to resubmit and press books for higher grades. I have not yet used CGGs services.

 

As of now, the scan issue is a serious question that remains unanswered. My own theory at this point is that the book in question could very possibly have had it's holder "hacked". Thus the responsibility would lie with the seller. But despite that, the scan itself, may have been hurriedly cobbled together in defense. It kind of backfired. I am 99% sure that scan was modified.....it just doesn't jive with other scans of that issue. I happen to own one myself.

 

I personally think that competition is good. I think a viable competitor to CGC is a great idea. But, at least within the finite world of collectors found on the CGC boards, I perceive CGG to be experiencing some serious PR problems. Again, the scan remains an unanswered question. I think the submission of the scan did more damage than the original issue of the trimmed book.

I am also very well aware that the boards are a CGC enclave, and I have referred to it in the past as CGCs rolling focus group.

 

Anyway, I personally have reached the point where speculating on motivations, reasoning, etc on CGGs part is an endless loop, and I thought I would address these questions to you folks directly. I will understand if you choose not to discuss this, but I thought I would give it a try.

 

Sincerely,

 

Brad Hamann

 

Well, this morning I got the following reply. I think it'll be the last word on the matter, even if unsatisfactory to some of us, that we will get from CGG.

 

We honestly haven't taken the time to determine if that scan is the same one

we sent out. After that thread we came to the conclusion the more we

responded the worse things became so we decided to stop responding to the

boards. We were more than willing to correct the situation with the two

books that had trimming on them if we had missed them, but we don't believe

we missed that trimming.

 

We would have no reason to alter any scan we had to avoid a situation we

would readily correct if we found we had missed restoration. I saw the scan

when it was originally pulled up and I am certain it was the same book. It

was shrunk down before it was emailed, although I was unaware of it at the

time (someone got in trouble). I do not want to speculate on what may or may

not have happened, and I don't believe it would do any good to do so. I can

say I have made certain this type of problem will not happen again, although

I doubt this will make anyone feel any better. I have learned we have to

protect ourselves better against these type of instances arising.

 

Daniel

 

So there you have it. Lots of unanswered questions and loose threads. I thanked Daniel for responding to me email.

[davidking623]

They need better than that for a reply in my opinion! I mean if you cant stand the heat in the kitchen then you better get out.Looks as though they want to stay out.

 

Davidking623

[Red Hook]

Agreed. This is an issue they can't come out ahead on.

[Ze-man]

What was that Mark Twain quote again?

 

Better to remain silent...and be thought an insufficiently_thoughtful_person.. then to open your mouth and.............

[BassGMan]

Redhook, I received the exact same e-mail from them but there was no instruction as to whether I should post it or not so I didn't. The explanation seems somewhat casually written, but also sincere. Believe them or not, I guess.

 

Whether they have made some mistakes on accident and then admitted it, or purposely tried to cover up mistakes I don't know. Either way, I just give them the benefit of the doubt as coming into a market that was already dominated by a very proficient and well respected company, and then trying to compete is very tough. I think CGG has guts putting themself in this position. Their ethics are questioned by some, but that does not mean CGG is unethical, it only means that some people "question" it. Hey, I have talked to several collectors and even dealers that question the ethics of CGC as well, mostly by guys that have never used the service at all, but just don't like the idea (or see a need) for a third party grading service.

 

The way I look at it is to just give CGG some time. Let them work out their bugs, make mistakes, fix a few things, improve on a few things, etc. It is apparent that they came into this business with a much smaller financial backing that CGC so it might take them a little longer to really establish themselves.

 

Anyway, I will trust them that their inner wells are safe and will continue to ship them my pre '75 books with a FMV under $300. For that specific group I feel I am better off with CGG than with CGC. For everything else, I'll stick with CGC. I do enjoy having the choice.

 

Furthermore, whoever anyone wants to support (CGC, CGG, CXX, XCG,XXX or whoever) just vote with your dollars. The best way to drive CGG out of business (if you really are motivated to do that, like some people here seem to be) then just don't use their service and don't buy any books that are CGG graded. If enough people avoid CGG services and graded books then they will go under.

 

Voting with your dollar is the best method of making a statement. It just bugs me when I see anyone or any company being bashed unfairly. I bash people and companies too at times but I try to at least back it up with some substance. Oh well, just my opinion....... -------Sid

[supapimp]

paging lordrahl....paging lordrahl

[Joanna]

Redhook, I received the exact same e-mail from them but there was no instruction as to whether I should post it or not so I didn't. The explanation seems somewhat casually written, but also sincere. Believe them or not, I guess.

 

It appears sincerely vague to me. Not at all a satisfactory answer. I wish they had been more upfront. People tend to be very willing to forgive mistakes or errors if someone takes responsiblity and owns up. People are far less forgiving if someone refuses to be open. I didn't see any effort in that letter to either disclose the doctoring of the scan, or investigate how it happened. The only thing that feels real in all of this is that the scan was doctored. So we're left with that alone to make our opinions.

 

-- Joanna

[Kevin Boyd]

Sid, you get props for your tenacity.

 

Kev

[BassGMan]

.

 

It appears sincerely vague to me. Not at all a satisfactory answer. I wish they had been more upfront. People tend to be very willing to forgive mistakes or errors if someone takes responsiblity and owns up. People are far less forgiving if someone refuses to be open. I didn't see any effort in that letter to either disclose the doctoring of the scan, or investigate how it happened. The only thing that feels real in all of this is that the scan was doctored. So we're left with that alone to make our opinions.

 

-- Joanna

 

Yes, it was certainly vague. Sounds like even they weren't sure what happened. I would not automatically assume that the scan was purposely doctored. Maybe it was though. Possibly it was as a lower level employee (the person that got in trouble?) may have been responsible for it and messed up somehow, tried to fix it? Heck, I don't know. All I am trying to say is that I agree with Daniel in that admitting to possibly missing a trim (and I said "possibly") would be alot easier than altering a scan somehow. I just would not automatically assume foul-play. Possible maybe, but doubtful. -------Sid

[BassGMan]

Sid, you get props for your tenacity.

 

Kev

 

Kev, I am just trying to not jump to any conclusions and give these guys the benefit of the doubt. At some point (probably not too long from now) I'll just give up and keep my big mouth shut. But at least right now, I think the CGGers are getting a little bit of a raw deal from some of the CGCers. My overall gripe is just that I think we should all be happy that there is at least another option for third party grading and to give them a chance to get things right before hanging them with a noose. Oh well. No real big deal to me anyway. If CGG goes bye-bye then I am still quite happy with CGC.

 

Now, I'm off to do a gig with my band in some slimy joint in Everett (WA). Dammit, as I'm playing Gimme Three Steps for the 154th time thoughts of slabbed comics will be dancing in my head. -----Sid

[Kevin Boyd]

You are a very generous and open-minded individual. I respect your fair-mindedness when it comes to CGG, as you always seem willing to give them the benefit of the doubt...

 

On that note you know I can't agree with you, as in my mind they haven't done anything yet to deserve such loyalty and respect... I know you don't agree with me on that, but that's just my opinion...

 

Have fun tonight and good luck.

 

All of this will still be around tomorrow.

 

K

[Timely]

My overall gripe is just that I think we should all be happy that there is at least another option for third party grading and to give them a chance to get things right before hanging them with a noose.

 

Well, most of us believe that (even though CGG exists) we still only have one option, meaning that CGG isn't one.

 

Timely

[davidking623]

I am buying and getting graded Zero, 100 percent I might not be able to put them out of business , but really it is just my gut feelling with them and how they stumbled out of the gate so badly in my opinion. They obviously can grade so can a lot of people on this board.I wish them the best of luck and really was hopeful they could turn it around but just am not really seeing it in my eye.Sid you sound to be still sold on them and I can respect that as not everybody see things the same way.One question for you Sid with CGG here goes.Are you seeing the diffrence between the money that you send to CGG as gaining more money after grading fees and the cost to ship the books there as opposed to selling the books Raw yourself? As you do have great feedback and I am sure you would stand behind your grading!

 

Davidking623

[Joanna]

 

All I am trying to say is that I agree with Daniel in that admitting to possibly missing a trim (and I said "possibly") would be alot easier than altering a scan somehow. I just would not automatically assume foul-play. Possible maybe, but doubtful. -------Sid

 

And this is what bothers me. Owning up to missed trimming is a far more logical decision than doctoring a scan. Therefore, there isn't a lot of logic in the scan doctoring unless they were so set on not admitting culpability in anything, that it seemed a better choice. When things aren't logical, it raises a big red flag to me, because everyone lives by logic, even if it's just one's own brand. As for foul play, I can't make a judgment on that because I don't know what happened. I was hoping CGG would tell us. They should know whether they doctored it or not. A simple yes or no would suffice. "Yes, we made a big mistake. And we were so afraid of more adverse publicity that we did something stupid to avoid it. We promise this will never happen again." or "No, we didn't doctor the scan. It was given to us by X and without looking too closely at it, we passed it on. We had no reason not to trust X, and appologize for the confusion it caused." Or whatever the yes or no really is. Give us a logical reason for the doctored scan and you'd be surprised how willing to forgive some people are (some won't, of course, but those on the fence can go either way). But the more time passes while waiting for the truth, the less forgiving people are likely to be.

 

-- Joanna

[Timely]

I agree Joanne. I felt like his letter was a short story with no substance...but a lot of words.

 

Timely

[supapimp]

disinformation

[LordRahl]

Geez, I take a couple of weeks off from the forum and I come back to 3000+ unread posts. As for CGGs explanantion of the doctored scan, it's exactly what I expected. No straight answer, because the answer is that they doctored the scan and don't want to admit it. CGG is a FRAUD, end of story. They are no better than the scammers on ebay that don't even own the books they are selling. If RS and BassGman and the rest want to make excuses for them, that's fine. Go ahead and bury your head in the sand. They are in bed with tdcomix and they are outright lying to cover it up. The funny thing is that they look more guilty by trying to cover it up then they would have if they had just said that they missed the resto. I'll say it again, F-R-A-U-D-S!!!

[BassGMan]

Geez, I take a couple of weeks off from the forum and I come back to 3000+ unread posts. As for CGGs explanantion of the doctored scan, it's exactly what I expected. No straight answer, because the answer is that they doctored the scan and don't want to admit it. CGG is a FRAUD, end of story. They are no better than the scammers on ebay that don't even own the books they are selling. If RS and BassGman and the rest want to make excuses for them, that's fine. Go ahead and bury your head in the sand. They are in bed with tdcomix and they are outright lying to cover it up. The funny thing is that they look more guilty by trying to cover it up then they would have if they had just said that they missed the resto. I'll say it again, F-R-A-U-D-S!!!

 

Back from my gig (mentioned in a post before). Not enough nice looking chicks to make it much fun. After playing the same songs so many times the best way to pass the time is to watch the girls dancing in front of me. No girls, no fun.

 

Anyway, OK, back to "the comic thing". Sheesh. I know, I must be sounding like a broken record with my defense of CGG, especially when I have nothing to gain from it. I just felt that I had the ability to defend them and to get involved in this little controversy. I like controversies but I do not have enough personal experience to add much to most, so when one came along that I was familiar with...well, I just joined in wholeheartedly. This is my very last CGG defender post. I don't want to become known as the "CGG Fan Guy" when overall CGC is my preferred service anyway. So, with that said this is my last statement in defense of the CGG.

 

So.....After reading the post I quoted above, I don't know why LordRhal seems to have aquired so much respect around here as his statement is ridiculous and without merit. Calling CGG frauds is way out of line. Because he and some others are not satisfied with the explanation of the scan does not mean CGG's statement is false. Yes, the explanation is not that great, but that does not mean there was any wrong doing.

 

I am not making ANY excuses for CGG. I am just looking at their situation objectively and not jumping to conclusions, even when "some" evidence is pointing to some kind of (possible but not proven) tampering with a scan by some body, maybe. As far as TDComix, I doubt that too. There is NO proof that CGG and TDComix are connected. None. No proof. Only speculation based off of what looks like some dirty dealing by TDComix.

 

I could go on bringing up other points, but I have said it all before, no reason to wear out my typing fingers or bore you with more ramble . As I said earlier. I am DONE with this subject and have become bored with it. However, I'll still submit to CGG from time to time and as long as these books keep selling on Ebay I'll keep comin' back. Over n' out (at least on this subject). ------Sid

[Darthdiesel]

Sid, you get props for your tenacity.

 

Kev

 

 

head...permanently in sand...

[Darthdiesel]

My overall gripe is just that I think we should all be happy that there is at least another option for third party grading and to give them a chance to get things right before hanging them with a noose.

 

Well, most of us believe that (even though CGG exists) we still only have one option, meaning that CGG isn't one.

 

Timely

 

although 3PG is also around even though some may put them in the same category of CGG, as non-entities But the 2nd viable option that has always been around is raw books graded by someone whose opinon you respect as an authority.