A response from a CGC IT! ebay seller!

[Doohickamabob]

then I just started reporting them under the Report>Listing Practices>Search & Browse Manipulation>Misusing a Brand Name sub-catagory since they are using CGC's name w/o paying for their service.

Imagine how more fulfilling your life might be if you directed this expended energy towards something substantial and/or positive.

Hey, look, it's a freshly minted troll.

Not fresh.

You're right, now that I look, he's been around a while and posted normal types of messages. I do find the whole "Imagine if you used your time more wisely" slam to be pretty ironic on a message board about reading and collecting comic books. That said, I agree it's a waste of time to report everybody who violates rules on eBay -- primarily because eBay is so unresponsive to those reports.

[Barbarian]

I really don´t see what the problem is with "CGC it".

 

And no, I don´t do it either, I actually never sold anything on Ebay in my life.

 

Not the intention of the seller I´m sure, but "CGC IT" is actually promoting the company in a way no? Free publicity and all, reinforcing the brand?

 

A noob buyer that never heard from CGC can actually be convinced to investigate what CGC is and does, and might decide to actually CGC it. I´m sure PGX would have no problems with having listings with "PGX it" and neither should CGC as a company.

 

If it bothers some people searching on eBay, then a very simple solution was given here:

 

you'd have to search using the following terms:

 

-"cgc it" -"cgc worthy" -"cgc ready" -"cgc them" -"not cgc"

 

 

Going around listing peoples auctions and reporting them seems wrong because there is no "Misusing a Brand Name". The reasoning behind the seller is not that, but technically, they are appealing someone to use a company´s service, not misusing a brand name.

 

If people really want to use the Misusing a Brand card, then go after the listings that use CGC numerical grading without being CGC grade. THAT is Misusing a Brand.

 

If they post 9.8 or 9.6 or 9.2 or 3.0, etc on a listing without it being CGC, then that´s where people should have a problem. Overstreet grading standards are public so that´s acceptable. CGC grading standards are private, so no one but CGC should be able to use them.

 

Which makes you think (and these is a question for the legal experts)... should a numeric grading system be patented by a grading company, no other company could use it as their own?

 

[MojoComics]

I'm pretty sure the "...out of 10" scale has been around for a lot longer than CGC. :thumbsup:

[etanick]

I'm pretty sure the "...out of 10" scale has been around for a lot longer than CGC. :thumbsup:

 

yes, CGC didn't "invent" the scale of 1 to 10...they invented their own grading standards that fit the scale.

 

[hockey&comicsguy]

Although sometimes irritating, I don't see anything wrong with people using the phrase "cgc it" in their listing.

 

It's a suggestion, just like "mint", "rare", "hot" etc..... are suggestions used to generate views.

 

I understand why people don't like it and I myself wouldn't mind if it stopped. But I don't think any rules are being broken or such. A noble effort although perhaps misguided in its allegations of misuse.

[miraclemet]

Going around listing peoples auctions and reporting them seems wrong because there is no "Misusing a Brand Name". The reasoning behind the seller is not that, but technically, they are appealing someone to use a company´s service, not misusing a brand name.

 

 

I guess my problem with the use of "CGC" in non-CGC sales is it clutters the market.

 

And there are also a slew of listers who just throw "CGC" in the subject... and dont even attempt to hide their attempt at search manipulation.

 

And do we really think all those "CGC IT!" sales REALLY think the books are CGC worthwhile? I mean most is mid-grade bronze, lower tier silver stuff thats worth $20 raw. Is it worth CGCing it?

 

I'll give you that putting CGC IT in a hot mint book listing is more valid (though it still reeks of search manipulation) but mid grade stuff? I doubt it.

 

anyway just so people dont think I spend all day doing this. I've probably "reported" (yes for all the good it does) 5-6 large volume sellers who use the CGC IT/CGC WORTHY/or just CGC (for a raw book) in their listings...

 

As a CGC buyer and seller I'd like to see less clutter and no raws when I search for CGC.

[Doohickamabob]

I really don´t see what the problem is with "CGC it".

The problem with "CGC it" is that it's keyword spamming. eBay has rules against keyword spamming. Basically keyword spamming is an abuse of the search function -- causing people to get search results for things they aren't searching for.

 

The seller who adds "CGC it" to his title has the intention of getting his listing viewed by people who are searching for the exact opposite of what he is selling. Instead of writing "CGC it," one could just as easily write "high grade" or "very fine" without keyword spamming.

 

From this eBay 'selling resources' page: "Avoid Keyword Spamming: Do not overuse keywords in an item description as it can reduce the effectiveness of content. Moreover, keyword spamming is a violation of eBay policy as well as an irritation to prospective buyers."

 

Here is eBay's search and browsing manipulation policy: "Don't engage in tactics like keyword spamming, because they make it hard for people to find what they're looking for."

 

...And here's eBay's definitive explanation of keyword spamming and why it is wrong: "Keyword spamming is when people use words or details (such as brands, item condition, model names, pop culture terms, product names, style, and type) that have nothing to do with their items so that their listings will show up in search results. Since this clutters eBay and makes buying and selling more difficult, we don't allow keyword spamming (see also brand names)."

 

Details (from the above link):

 

Allowed --

-- All the words in your listing have to be accurate and refer only to the item for sale. (!!!!!)

-- For lot listings, you can specify all the different items in the lot. For example, "This lot includes 2 pairs of shoes, 2 shirts, 1 pair of pants, 3 pairs of shorts, and a jacket."

-- You can use synonyms to describe an item. For example, you can call a handbag a purse.

 

Not allowed --

-- Calling out similarities—for example, when selling a DVD, don't talk about Blu-ray discs.

-- Comparisons between products aren't allowed. For example, you can't say things like "shirt not pants" or "video not Nano."

-- Descriptions that promote items in other listings. For example, a listing for shoes can't say things like, "Check out my other listings for hats, shirts, pants, coats, gloves, and underwear."

-- Hiding unrelated keywords in a listing by using white-on-white text, tiny fonts, or HTML or JavaScript code.

-- Keywords in any part of a listing that aren't related to the item you're selling. Here are some examples:

- If you're selling a shirt, the title can't say "Nike shirt size M – shoes, hat, shorts."

- If you're selling an MP3 player, the listing description can't have keywords like "purse, shoes, baseball hat, DVD, toys, cell phone," etc.

- Words with question marks (such as "carved wood dresser – antique?"). If you're not sure about a detail, don't call it out at all because doing so can be misleading.

 

---------------

 

eBay also has clear guidelines about the use of brand names in listings.

 

From the above link:

 

"You can describe an item by its brand, designer, model, product, style name, or its celebrity endorsement in a listing, as long as the information accurately describes what you're selling. Don’t make a comparison or reference a brand that isn’t the same brand you're selling. This can confuse buyers and make it hard for them to find what they’re looking for. See keyword spamming for more information."

 

"A brand name can be mentioned in a listing, as long as the item is authentically branded with that brand name."

 

"Brand names, celebrities, or other product details can't be specified in a listing if you're not selling an item by those brands."

 

-----

 

After reading the above, do you see why "CGC it" is a problem?

[MojoComics]

I'm pretty sure the "...out of 10" scale has been around for a lot longer than CGC. :thumbsup:

 

yes, CGC didn't "invent" the scale of 1 to 10...they invented their own grading standards that fit the scale.

 

Then they can patent the grading system, but the original point I was referring to was that they should patent the scale itself, which if attempted would seem a bit egotistical for them to believe they'd 'invented' a 0-10 scale when it came to ANYTHING.

[Barbarian]

I said my piece and stand by it.

 

“CGC it” is not misrepresenting a company´s name.

"-- All the words in your listing have to be accurate and refer only to the item for sale. (!!!!!)"

Is it accurate to refer that a particular comic can be sent to CGC? Yes it is.

Is the comic book listed worthy of sending to CGC? That’s another issue.

Comparisons between products aren't allowed. For example, you can't say things like "shirt not pants" or "video not Nano."

I can see how “PGX not CGC” can fall into this category, I am not talking about this.

 

Is it accurate to refer a raw book as 9.8? No it is not. That book is not a 9.8 until it gets graded.

I don’t see people getting upset with that, maybe because it strikes closer to home?

 

As for the ebay guidelines, since not everything is black and white, there is a section between the Allowed and the Not allowed sections called "Restricted" where this situation might fall and is probably the reason why Ebay won´t do anything if these get reported.

 

For accessories that are functionally compatible with certain brand-name products, be sure to:

• Verify the compatibility is for function, rather than appearance. If you're not sure of this, fully explain the functionality compatibility. The Not allowed section below provides more detail.

• Use the words "compatible with," "fits," or "for" before the brand name of the compatible product.

• Spell out the word "for." Using the number "4" isn't allowed. Here's an example: "This battery is for Motorola Razr phones.".

The accessory in this case being the comic.

 

Is a comic book compatible with CGC? Yes it is. (thumbs u

 

I don´t even have a problem with listings of raw books with numerical grades used by CGC, but that is more of a miss representation of a brand that "CGC it"

 

As for patenting this particular numeric grading system, if possible,its an easy way to prevent other grading companies of using it.

 

 

 

[etanick]

hmm....I was agreeing with you. I know English isn't my first language but often I question my ability to communicate.

 

by saying they "invented" their own grading system to fit the 1 to 10 scale, I think I pretty much cover that their grading standard is proprietary and most likely a trade secret that COULD have been patented.

 

as far as the other poster believing that those selling raw books with numerical grades are misusing CGC brand, sue me because I have done it and will do it until I sell every last book I have...how dare Overstreet using numerical numbers in their guides? silly.

[KEY ISSUES Comics]

It's frustrating for sure, but we're not going to change their ways.

[Doohickamabob]

I said my piece and stand by it. “CGC it” is not misrepresenting a company´s name.

Putting "CGC" in the title of a raw comic absolutely misrepresents the item being listed on eBay.

 

"-- All the words in your listing have to be accurate and refer only to the item for sale. (!!!!!)"

Is it accurate to refer that a particular comic can be sent to CGC? Yes it is.

You failed to apply the entire quote to the situation. You forgot the "...and refer only to the item for sale" part. The intent of this sentence is clear: Do not keyword spam.

 

Using your logic, you could put nearly anything in a listing's title and then justify it by claiming a vague potential future relationship between the item and the spammed word.

 

Comparisons between products aren't allowed. For example, you can't say things like "shirt not pants" or "video not Nano."

I can see how “PGX not CGC” can fall into this category, I am not talking about this.

This is very similar to "CGC it" because it's a similar approach to spamming a keyword.

 

Is it accurate to refer a raw book as 9.8? No it is not. That book is not a 9.8 until it gets graded.

I don’t see people getting upset with that, maybe because it strikes closer to home?

Apples/oranges. The question of whether it's right or wrong to use a 1-to-10 scale system for grading has no impact on the completely separate and unrelated question of whether it's right or wrong to keyword spam.

 

You suggest that this topic might strike "close to home" with some people. Why do you think that? Couldn't people equally well suggest that the topic of "CGC it" keyword spamming strikes "close to home" to you?

 

As for the ebay guidelines, since not everything is black and white, there is a section between the Allowed and the Not allowed sections called "Restricted" where this situation might fall and is probably the reason why Ebay won´t do anything if these get reported.

The eBay guidelines and rules are quite clear on the subject of keyword spamming. The "not allowed" guidelines apply directly to the use of terms like "CGC it."

 

For accessories that are functionally compatible with certain brand-name products, be sure to:

• Verify the compatibility is for function, rather than appearance. If you're not sure of this, fully explain the functionality compatibility. The Not allowed section below provides more detail.

• Use the words "compatible with," "fits," or "for" before the brand name of the compatible product.

• Spell out the word "for." Using the number "4" isn't allowed. Here's an example: "This battery is for Motorola Razr phones.".

The accessory in this case being the comic.

 

A comic book is not an "accessory" to CGC, it's the primary product being sold. You are really stretching things beyond credulity here. (If anything, you have it backwards: CGC would be an "accessory" to a comic book, and only in the most elective sense. But ultimately CGC is a service more than a good, so to call it an "accessory" is a failure of analogy.)

 

Is a comic book compatible with CGC? Yes it is. (thumbs u

The term "accessory" or "compatible with" does not apply to comics/CGC in any reasonable way, EXCEPT for those who are struggling for a way to bend the rules in order to continue a sleazy listing practice.

[Barbarian]

We´ll just have to agree to disagree

 

[DiceX]

If someone types "cgc" in the search they are looking for something graded by CGC. They are not looking for raw books.

It's not different than someone searching for "amazing spiderman 1" and coming up with some guy's auction titled "Cerebus 37 Gokart 1976 Power Rangers Teletubbies Amazing Spiderman 1"

Although the guy's auction might be an Amazing Spiderman 1, you really can't tell without wasting time sifting through this in the results and possibly clicking on it.

 

It's keyword spamming. Adding words that don't have anything to do with the auction for the purpose of that word adding to a hit in someone's search. There's no other reason to add the word than to pick up false hits. Candy coat it as you want but you're lying if you say that is not the reason. Spam is spam.

 

 

[Doohickamabob]

We´ll just have to agree to disagree

Yes, as the disagreement is between those with a rational basis for their position and those with no interest in such.

[hockey&comicsguy]

We´ll just have to agree to disagree

Yes, as the disagreement is between those with a rational basis for their position and those with no interest in such.

 

I know this wasn't directed at me but I disagree with you as well even though I do see some merit to your argument. However, I also have no interest in about it until we're blue in the face. And just b/c somebody doesn't want to do that doesn't mean you have to be a bleep about it.

[Barbarian]

Oh boy… I´m getting some forum heavy weights involved in this and even giving flowers is not cutting it

 

I´ll try to explain it again and will even throw some very rough stats at the end so It could even (hopefully ) sound rational.

 

@Dice X

“t's keyword spamming. Adding words that don't have anything to do with the auction...”

 

Sorry but I just don´t see it that way.

“CGC it” has something to do with a listing of a comic book. That is the reason why I don´t see it as spam.

 

It’s a comic book listing, CGC grades comic books. The book is ungraded, one´s saying to get it graded.

 

If it´s from serious dealer + good grader it might actually be of interest to people who collect CGC books to get that particular one and get it graded.

 

Who am I to decide that a particular listing or book is not CGC worthy or should not be graded?

And who am I to decide what is of interest to people searching on Ebay?

 

Apparently it bothers some people while looking for only CGC graded books.

A very simple solution was given here by Doohickamabob before to avoid it.

 

I´m not saying that it’s the rationale from all sellers, but apparently, the one that responded the OP, had something like that in mind.

 

Is it true that its CGC worthy? It´s irrelevant for the point I am trying to make.

Is the “CGC it” put there for hits? Yes, but It´s irrelevant for the point I am trying to make.

 

Which is: It is not misusing the brand and if you look at it the way I do, its not spamming.

 

 

@ Doohickamabob

I thought I made a very rational analysis of why I think the way I do.

 

In fact, since I have no invested interests in either case, my answer was as unemotional and rational as it comes.

 

You don´t agree with my reasoning and I don´t agree with yours.

 

I did not want to elaborate further because that was the end of the conversation for me but since I´m being called again:

 

A comic book is not an "accessory" to CGC, it's the primary product being sold.

 

This is incorrect.

CGC does not sell books, they sell grades (and graders notes).

“Buy the book, then the grade” is the moto

 

Which brings me to second point, the one with the juice: numerical grades grades in raw books.

 

At the time I searched, there were:

 

15.993 comics had “9.8” in its description

14.304 had “CGC 9.8” in its description

156 had “PGX 9.8” in its description

 

So roughly there were over 1500 comics that were graded 9.8 by neither CGC or PGX

 

Is it true that it’s a 9.8? No, it is not. At that moment its not a 9.8

Is the “9.8 ” put there for hits? Yes.

 

And in just 1 grade (and one of the rarest ones) , I found more books listed than all the combined “CGC it” examples mentioned before by the OP.

 

Is this more concerning? Maybe

Does this clutters a lot more listings than all “CGC it” combined? Yes, just the 9.8 is enough.

 

I am not saying people should go around in these raw 9..8 listings and report them for misuse of a brand standard.

 

But if what happened to the coin market on Ebay, happens also to comics, people here will have a lot more to worry about.

 

Here´s the link or you can "Google it"

http://news.coinupdate.com/ebay-announces-changes-to-listings-policy-for-coins-1322/

 

I´m tired now, I need a nap

 

[miraclemet]

and for the slightly less serious:

 

 

guess no one feels the need to suggest to people to PGX IT!

[revat]

I think the key issue is the use of the term 'CGC', as it is a company name of a service that could be applied to this product.

 

Yes it is true, there may be people who buy a raw comic and want to have it GRADED by CGC.

 

I think we would all be more comfortable if the seller just put 'Get it pro graded!!' (although that's long and unwieldy)

 

take it out of the comic book realm for a minute.

 

 

"XXXXX Screenplay for Sale!!! Submit it to Time Warner!!! Sony!!!! Disney!!!"

 

"White T-shirt for sale!!!! Could have it altered by Vera Wang!!! Isaac Mizrahi!!!! Michael Kors!!! (famous fashion folks) "

 

 

 

Basically you can do anything with an item after you buy it. But to name a specific person or company in your listing on the basis of some hypothetical future premise that thus far has no association to the item being sold, well I think that's what ebay is trying to avoid.

 

and people/companies who have those names would start to become unhappy with low quality advertisements and sales who misrepresent them in searches, which could lead to bad ebay / ebay retailer relationships with those entities and potentially liability down the road. Same with potential customers.

For example, at some point the 'CGC' thing becomes out of control and some CGC buyers stop searching ebay all together and buy elsewhere. [EBAY wouldn't want that, you'd think]

[DiceX]

Oh boy… I´m getting some forum heavy weights involved in this and even giving flowers is not cutting it

 

I´ll try to explain it again and will even throw some very rough stats at the end so It could even (hopefully ) sound rational.

 

@Dice X

“t's keyword spamming. Adding words that don't have anything to do with the auction...”

 

Sorry but I just don´t see it that way.

“CGC it” has something to do with a listing of a comic book. That is the reason why I don´t see it as spam.

 

It’s a comic book listing, CGC grades comic books. The book is ungraded, one´s saying to get it graded.

 

If it´s from serious dealer + good grader it might actually be of interest to people who collect CGC books to get that particular one and get it graded.

 

Who am I to decide that a particular listing or book is not CGC worthy or should not be graded?

And who am I to decide what is of interest to people searching on Ebay?

 

Apparently it bothers some people while looking for only CGC graded books.

A very simple solution was given here by Doohickamabob before to avoid it.

 

I´m not saying that it’s the rationale from all sellers, but apparently, the one that responded the OP, had something like that in mind.

 

Is it true that its CGC worthy? It´s irrelevant for the point I am trying to make.

Is the “CGC it” put there for hits? Yes, but It´s irrelevant for the point I am trying to make.

 

Which is: It is not misusing the brand and if you look at it the way I do, its not spamming.

 

 

@ Doohickamabob

I thought I made a very rational analysis of why I think the way I do.

 

In fact, since I have no invested interests in either case, my answer was as unemotional and rational as it comes.

 

You don´t agree with my reasoning and I don´t agree with yours.

 

I did not want to elaborate further because that was the end of the conversation for me but since I´m being called again:

 

A comic book is not an "accessory" to CGC, it's the primary product being sold.

 

This is incorrect.

CGC does not sell books, they sell grades (and graders notes).

“Buy the book, then the grade” is the moto

 

Which brings me to second point, the one with the juice: numerical grades grades in raw books.

 

At the time I searched, there were:

 

15.993 comics had “9.8” in its description

14.304 had “CGC 9.8” in its description

156 had “PGX 9.8” in its description

 

So roughly there were over 1500 comics that were graded 9.8 by neither CGC or PGX

 

Is it true that it’s a 9.8? No, it is not. At that moment its not a 9.8

Is the “9.8 ” put there for hits? Yes.

 

And in just 1 grade (and one of the rarest ones) , I found more books listed than all the combined “CGC it” examples mentioned before by the OP.

 

Is this more concerning? Maybe

Does this clutters a lot more listings than all “CGC it” combined? Yes, just the 9.8 is enough.

 

I am not saying people should go around in these raw 9..8 listings and report them for misuse of a brand standard.

 

But if what happened to the coin market on Ebay, happens also to comics, people here will have a lot more to worry about.

 

Here´s the link or you can "Google it"

http://news.coinupdate.com/ebay-announces-changes-to-listings-policy-for-coins-1322/

 

I´m tired now, I need a nap

 

It's obvious that you are an assnugget and your brain cannot process reason, so I'll let you carry on looking like the tool that you are.