Did CGC broaden their perspective when it comes to trimming???

[Sal]

We are starting to see exactly what we feared the last few weeks. With CGC falling way behind on grading we all thought that they'd scramble to get caught up and quality would be an issue.

 

All this is really a shame. I know hiccups are expected, but this is getting out of hand. I wonder how many issues we aren't hearing about.

 

Where is the competition? Somebody needs to swoop in and give CGC a run for the money. Competition is only healthy.

 

+1

 

What?

 

No.

 

 

Things are getting exactly the same amount of handedness they've been for at least as long as I've been here. Anecdotal QC issues crop up here all the time.

 

It is the same as it ever was. Again, QC isn't necessarily the problem, it's how the company handles QC problems that make the difference

[InvstmntComcSuply]

From the quote above, CGC does not consider trimming restoration. The first two sentences indicates what is considered restoration. The third enumerates some processes that are not restoration. The fourth treats trimming as a special case.

 

They do, however, feel that trimming warrants an apparent grade, and have decided to give it the PLOD. In my mind, they could have gone with the less vilified GLOD, so there could be an implication that trimming is a bit worse than, say, a clipped coupon.

 

I always thought PLOD was appropriate for trimming, given how often it was done without disclosure purely to deceive

[jaybuck43]

Well actually if you read their FAQ's on their face, restoration is only the addition and not subtraction (i.e. adding glue, tape, readhearing a cover, color touch and the like) And they do say "non-additive" procedures are not restoration. So trimming is non-additive in that it is the removal of something. CGC says "CGC defines restoration as treatments intended to return the comic book to a known or assumed state through the addition of non-original material" So the lawyer in me argues well it says restoration is only through the addition, therefore this is not restoration.

[Sal]

Considering trimming involves the actual removal of some of the book, then there's no way it could be considered something that restores a book to its "original state".

 

QED

[Speedy-D]

From the quote above, CGC does not consider trimming restoration. The first two sentences indicates what is considered restoration. The third enumerates some processes that are not restoration. The fourth treats trimming as a special case.

 

They do, however, feel that trimming warrants an apparent grade, and have decided to give it the PLOD. In my mind, they could have gone with the less vilified GLOD, so there could be an implication that trimming is a bit worse than, say, a clipped coupon.

 

I always thought PLOD was appropriate for trimming, given how often it was done without disclosure purely to deceive

Yeah, but you can't make a decision like this based on assumed intent. It's just not possible to be sure.

[VintageComics]

We are starting to see exactly what we feared the last few weeks. With CGC falling way behind on grading we all thought that they'd scramble to get caught up and quality would be an issue.

 

All this is really a shame. I know hiccups are expected, but this is getting out of hand. I wonder how many issues we aren't hearing about.

 

Where is the competition? Somebody needs to swoop in and give CGC a run for the money. Competition is only healthy.

 

+1

 

Let's reel it back in and get some perspective.

 

What percentage of error do you guys think is OK?

 

I worked in customer service for 22 years (the last 11 years for Mercedes Benz) and we made all kinds of mistakes, even if I worked for one of the best franchise locations in the entire country.

 

If it's only 0.1% of all slabbed books (which are probably in excess of 2 Million), you're going to see 1000's and 1000's of errors.

 

 

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Yeah, but you can't make a decision like this based on assumed intent. It's just not possible to be sure.

 

Trimming is done to improve the presentation of the book. No assumptions needed.

 

Coupon clipping not done to improve presentation.

[Speedy-D]

Yeah, but you can't make a decision like this based on assumed intent. It's just not possible to be sure.

 

Trimming is done to improve the presentation of the book. No assumptions needed.

 

Coupon clipping not done to improve presentation.

 

What you said before was

 

I always thought PLOD was appropriate for trimming, given how often it was done without disclosure purely to deceive

This is the assumed intent I'm referring to.

[cheetah]

We are starting to see exactly what we feared the last few weeks. With CGC falling way behind on grading we all thought that they'd scramble to get caught up and quality would be an issue.

 

All this is really a shame. I know hiccups are expected, but this is getting out of hand. I wonder how many issues we aren't hearing about.

 

Where is the competition? Somebody needs to swoop in and give CGC a run for the money. Competition is only healthy.

 

CGC's QC problems didn't just start when they tried to catch up. They've had problems for years.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Yeah, but you can't make a decision like this based on assumed intent. It's just not possible to be sure.

 

Trimming is done to improve the presentation of the book. No assumptions needed.

 

Coupon clipping not done to improve presentation.

 

What you said before was

 

I always thought PLOD was appropriate for trimming, given how often it was done without disclosure purely to deceive

This is the assumed intent I'm referring to.

 

You had wondered why they did not use the GLOD

My point was that it was given the PLOD to differentiate it from GLODs where there is no intent to improve presentation. The bolded part is a side benefit and one of my pet peeves.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

We are starting to see exactly what we feared the last few weeks. With CGC falling way behind on grading we all thought that they'd scramble to get caught up and quality would be an issue.

 

All this is really a shame. I know hiccups are expected, but this is getting out of hand. I wonder how many issues we aren't hearing about.

 

Where is the competition? Somebody needs to swoop in and give CGC a run for the money. Competition is only healthy.

 

+1

 

Let's reel it back in and get some perspective.

 

What percentage of error do you guys think is OK?

 

I worked in customer service for 22 years (the last 11 years for Mercedes Benz) and we made all kinds of mistakes, even if I worked for one of the best franchise locations in the entire country.

 

If it's only 0.1% of all slabbed books (which are probably in excess of 2 Million), you're going to see 1000's and 1000's of errors.

 

 

This is a good point. I wonder how many books they are turning out in a day. I guess mistakes are bound to happen.

 

I think the glaring issues are magnified by how far behind they are on grading. They also just hired a bunch of graders so that also makes you pause and scratch your head when you see issues like this pop up.

 

I still think competition would help a lot of these issues.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

It is the same as it ever was. Again, QC isn't necessarily the problem, it's how the company handles QC problems that make the difference

 

Good point- I agree. They can make these sort of issues right, and CGC seems to try.

[Flaming_Telepath]

FT Not sure where you heard that Cover Trim is not counted as restoration. From the CGC FAQs

"What is restoration?

Restoration is treatment intended to return a comic book to a known or assumed state by adding non-original material. Detected restoration is always disclosed on the CGC certification label. Non-additive procedures, such as pressing, dry cleaning and tape removal, are not classified as restoration by CGC. Trimmed books are given an apparent grade, and, in accordance with CGC's policy, are encapsulated with CGC's restored label. Learn more about comic book restoration."

 

So they are saying this should have been PLODed. Unless Cover Trim is different from regular trim. But from their terms it does not seem to be.

 

Yeah, looks like trimmed books should be in Purple. (thumbs u

 

But CGC don't consider it restoration.

 

Although they haven't got anywhere else to put them, so PLOD it is.

 

Where does it say that CGC doesn't consider trimming to be restoration?

 

Well, apart from in their statement, Steve Borock also confirmed their stance many moons ago.

[OldGuy]

We are starting to see exactly what we feared the last few weeks. With CGC falling way behind on grading we all thought that they'd scramble to get caught up and quality would be an issue.

 

All this is really a shame. I know hiccups are expected, but this is getting out of hand. I wonder how many issues we aren't hearing about.

 

Where is the competition? Somebody needs to swoop in and give CGC a run for the money. Competition is only healthy.

 

+1

 

Let's reel it back in and get some perspective.

 

What percentage of error do you guys think is OK?

 

I worked in customer service for 22 years (the last 11 years for Mercedes Benz) and we made all kinds of mistakes, even if I worked for one of the best franchise locations in the entire country.

 

If it's only 0.1% of all slabbed books (which are probably in excess of 2 Million), you're going to see 1000's and 1000's of errors.

 

 

Everyone should stop using CGC and start using PGX. That'll show em.

[bluechip]

Trimming isn't considered restoration by CGC, but rather damage.

 

If no restorative processes have been applied to the book, a purple Restored label is not appropriate.

 

This label could be correct.

 

If that is correct Nick, should it not be Green given the defect

 

Not necessarily, no more so than any other form of damage, like a corner bend.

 

And even if CGC did view it as one singular defect and therefore appropriate for a green label, the submitter might have gotten a choice and went for the Universal.

 

I don't think a purple label is appropriate either but I think it is the default label that CGC chose to use for trimmed books.

 

I think someone just mistakenly grabbed the wrong colour label when this was printed.

 

As far as quality control goes, and this is directed to whomever mentioned QC, they grade about 150K-200K books a year. I'm sure mistakes are going to happen.

 

Trimming is always damage.

 

It is possible that the trimmed area contained damage, which has been removed to make it look better.

 

But trimming only causes ADDITIONAL damage to the book.

 

So the grade should be LESS than it would be if the damaged area remained.

 

The same should be true when people tear away sections of a book that have specks of color touch, or glue, or put corrosive tape over damage or color touch. It shouldn't improve the value of the book. But it does.

 

It only does so because the purple label treats damage differently, based on a supposed intent to improve the book, and so a book with MORE damage gets treated better.

 

That's one reason why label colors create more problems than they resolve.

 

The category is called "restored" but too often people want it to mean "this book was touched by a person harboring impure thought."

 

 

 

[AmazingComics413]

We are starting to see exactly what we feared the last few weeks. With CGC falling way behind on grading we all thought that they'd scramble to get caught up and quality would be an issue.

 

All this is really a shame. I know hiccups are expected, but this is getting out of hand. I wonder how many issues we aren't hearing about.

 

+1

 

Again, QC isn't necessarily the problem, it's how the company handles QC problems that make the difference

 

I have no doubt that CGC handles all their QC complaints with ease and understanding.

 

 

 

 

Yes, human error is expected, especially in a QC position where one is expected to inspect thousands of products a day. In order to decrease these quality mistakes it is our job as the consumers to point out them out to CGC.

[roulette44]

I don't think a 0.020% to 0.050% error rare is unreasonable, given the process used is not overly complex (and easy flags are there to "catch" problems). Plus, remember, we're talking about errors in the slabbing process, NOT errors in the grading itself (which we could never get too).

 

Roy, 0.1% error rate would be 2 thousand errors. So when you said "thousands and thousands" you meant "thousand and thousand"

 

I think 0.1% is a bit high, but 0.020% would be pretty solid performance (2 per 10,000) in my book, given the criteria we're using. That would mean you've got about 400 errors out there somewhere

 

Just one man's opinion.

JD

[VintageComics]

Damn actuary.

 

 

[jaybuck43]

I also think there are different levels of QC slip up. Sending out a book with a mistyped label is one thing. Human error and all that. Sending out that horribly sealed (sorry Amazing comics, the book was nice before CGC Spooned it up) makes you wonder, what the hell? How did the book walk out of encapsulation, get handed to a QC checker, then go to shipping, and get packed without someone along the line (ideally 3 different people we are talking about in this process) go "huh that looks weird, maybe I should mention this to my boss" I understand that CGC has a hard job, hundreds of thousands of books and all that, but than staff up as needed. Bring in seasonal and full time help (i.e. you know NYCC is coming up and you are going to get 10,000 new books, bring in extra QC and shippers to help with that for 2 months, then release them back out to the wild, to bring back in when SDCC rolls around) I don't think anyone here would mind an increase in pricing rates if it meant an increase in QC and a decrease in screw ups like this as well as quicker turn around times. My suggestion first and foremost is an increase in the Fastrack price, that right there would have a large increase in revenue that could be used for additional staff. Just my :2cents: