CGC Issue Resolved

[comicwiz]

But they (CGC) did "fix" it. They gave the books the proper grade now, catching a quality control error for the betterment of all collectors.

 

No.

 

Again, if it was missed from the link I provided earlier, below is the quoted text which includes a hypothetical scenario (which this thread demonstrates has been an ongoing reality with CGC), questioning how CGC might respond in situations where books previously sitting in blue labels turned purple on resubmission. Pay particular attention to Mark's response, where he mentions "good faith negotiations.... to ensure the submitter is made financially whole."

 

This is a question I'd like answered by Mark or Matt, and/or CCG.

 

Hypothetical scenario: a blue label book is submitted through Matt/CCS to be pressed. The book is cracked out, pressed and submitted to CGC.

 

When CGC examines the book, they discover the book is restored.

 

Now before the skeptics start lining-up to post Sasquatch and Nessy memes, I know of several instances where this predicament occurred, and in each situation, CGC barely wanted to own up to any responsibility for the mishap.

 

Is there any "buy back" or "buy out" scenario to help collectors in such situations, where they may have purchased a blue label book using CGC's blue universal label as their assurance and in complete confidence of CGC's ability to detect restoration, only to later discover their certified comics are actually restored?

 

As a follow-up to this question, what notes are logged on the CCS end so if such a situation occurred, the customer could have CCS back-up their claims the book was originally submitted in a blue holder?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Great question.

 

Although fortunately this is a very rare situation, I discussed the fact pattern with Harshen and the short answer is, yes, based on the guarantee CGC provides (as well as simply being a good business practice) there would be good-faith negotiations, as there has in the past when certain situations arose, to ensure the submitter is made financially whole.

 

Now, certain facts would need to exist. For example, the book would have to be submitted intact in its blue holder and no tampering present. So that means a cracked-out book submitted along with a blue label would not be eligible.

 

As far as your follow-up question, when a book is submitted to CCS intact in its holder a CCS employee will log that book into the system and verify the serial number listed by the customer. It will be noted that the book was in its holder. The book will be de-slabbed by a CCS employee and then proceed through the normal process. In the rare chance that previously undetected restoration is later identified by a CGC grader of a book that can be traced back through CCS there should be no issue regarding the proper chain-of-possession and verification of the information.

 

Let me know if my response does not satisfactorily address your questions.

 

This is the only fix we should expect, and if CGC believes they can undercut competitors by making this scenario only possible when books come through Matt, they need to ready themselves for the onslaught of posts comparing before scans of blue labels turning to purple. PGX's reputation has been torn to shreds on these boards for their inability to catch restoration, and misery loves company.

 

How this turned into a thread that targets the submitter rather than the hobby grading netminders who clearly can't stop the restoration beach ball is beyond me. I can't emphasize this point enough, because when they decided to employ the CPR angle as part of their business, they advertently produced a condition for books to be replayed in a resub game that rewards them as much as the submitter. If they can't keep up with the restoration shot count, it's time to pull the netminder.

 

If you're a customer, you should either let your wallets do the talking by avoiding CGC, or let CGC know this simply isn't satisfactory, as with each post and thread like this, the confidence in their "assurance" will continue to erode, and so too will the value of the slabs you own.

[chrisco37]

And for those playing the "nobody's perfect" card, let me bring up this point:

 

If you ordered a car from a dealership, and paid the market price for it, and it was missing, say, the GPS system, which you had paid for...would you say "oh well, no one's perfect, mistakes are made"...?

 

Of course not. You would expect them to fix it, on their dime. And they would, or you simply wouldn't pay for it, because it's not what you ordered (or you would get a discount for the missing item.)

 

Or, say you're putting a new roof on your house, and the contractor was short a pack of shingles because they didn't order enough, leaving a small 2'x4' area exposed. Would you say "oh well, no one's perfect, mistakes are made"....?

 

Of course not. You might wait patiently for them to GET the extra pack of shingles, but you wouldn't be satisfied until the job was 100% done to your specifications.

 

Or, say you're ordering 500 new uniforms for a large contract with Hilton, and your manufacturer sends you 497 perfect uniforms, but three that were manufactured without the left sleeve. Would you say "oh, well, no one's perfect", and then look for 3 one armed maids:.....? Hilton certainly wouldn't! They paid for 500 uniforms, they expect 500 PERFECT uniforms...and that's what they'll get, or they won't pay you, and that's for sure what you'll expect your manufacturer to deliver, or you won't pay them.

 

Nobody is, indeed, perfect...but the world operates on fixing errors UNTIL it's perfect (read: to the customer's satisfaction.)

 

Sadly, this doesn't apply to Spider-Dan's particular case, but those claiming the "too bad, you played the game and lost, no one's perfect" line...this is not how it is supposed to work. This is not subjective grading we're talking about here. This is quantitative, objective restoration. Either it's there, or it's not. And if it is MISSED...fine, no one's perfect, but then it's CGC's job to fix it, not have people buy the "oh well, no one's perfect, mistakes are made, move along" line.

 

Well said sir, and your 100% correct

 

Yep. RMA nailed it.

[chrisco37]

Color touch on Mile Highs doesn't count.

 

That's in the label on the back, just written in invisible ink.

 

[Boba]

And for those playing the "nobody's perfect" card, let me bring up this point:

 

If you ordered a car from a dealership, and paid the market price for it, and it was missing, say, the GPS system, which you had paid for...would you say "oh well, no one's perfect, mistakes are made"...?

 

Of course not. You would expect them to fix it, on their dime. And they would, or you simply wouldn't pay for it, because it's not what you ordered (or you would get a discount for the missing item.)

 

Or, say you're putting a new roof on your house, and the contractor was short a pack of shingles because they didn't order enough, leaving a small 2'x4' area exposed. Would you say "oh well, no one's perfect, mistakes are made"....?

 

Of course not. You might wait patiently for them to GET the extra pack of shingles, but you wouldn't be satisfied until the job was 100% done to your specifications.

 

Or, say you're ordering 500 new uniforms for a large contract with Hilton, and your manufacturer sends you 497 perfect uniforms, but three that were manufactured without the left sleeve. Would you say "oh, well, no one's perfect", and then look for 3 one armed maids:.....? Hilton certainly wouldn't! They paid for 500 uniforms, they expect 500 PERFECT uniforms...and that's what they'll get, or they won't pay you, and that's for sure what you'll expect your manufacturer to deliver, or you won't pay them.

 

Nobody is, indeed, perfect...but the world operates on fixing errors UNTIL it's perfect (read: to the customer's satisfaction.)

 

Sadly, this doesn't apply to Spider-Dan's particular case, but those claiming the "too bad, you played the game and lost, no one's perfect" line...this is not how it is supposed to work. This is not subjective grading we're talking about here. This is quantitative, objective restoration. Either it's there, or it's not. And if it is MISSED...fine, no one's perfect, but then it's CGC's job to fix it, not have people buy the "oh well, no one's perfect, mistakes are made, move along" line.

 

CGC's got some 'splainin' to do

[Old Fashion PB and J]

So CGC got better at resto (trimming) detection ... how is that bad ?

 

How would you feel if one of your hi grade books you paid top dollar for turned out to have resto on it??

I would feel like I lost a gamble. Did you check the old labels numbers against the lists that CGC has supplied of books that have possibly been trimmed? This is crucial. And I do feel bad about you getting the hose, but I also believe you have had these threads before. You already know the CPR game is dangerous.

 

I didn't know this information was available.

 

Lets clear a few things up...

As I stated earlier in this thread, I did have this happen once before, a Batman went from Blue to Purple. It was implied that GA are held to different grading standard. So Ive only had 1 thread, not thread"s". Ive had quite a few books drop in grade without complaining here on the Boards, because I do know the risks involved.

 

I DONT press. You wont be able to find anyone who has ever pressed a book for me, other than the 2 books I explained in this thread! (which I disclosed at the time of sale) So I play the CR game - NOT CPR

 

I've never tried to hide the fact from anyone that I try and find books that look undergraded, and re-sub them in hopes of a grade bump to make money. But that's NOT what this thread is about. Its about the consistency of CGC's grading. Which is quite disappointing in these books.

 

If I buy an F-150 and it says 4X4 on the side, I expect it to be a 4X4. Would your attitude be "That's what you get for buying a FORD"?

 

For whatever reason, most of your posts in this thread seem to have a little bit of attitude toward me. How about we just stick to the subject?

I think I just did. Bolded and highlighted. I have no attitude towards you, just trying to understand how you can get mad when the game fails? CGC is not infallible, even professionals make mistakes. I am suggesting that you should really become more aware of the possible risks before throwing money on the table. Perhaps I could have worded it nicer, but that is not who I am. There should be nothing lost in translation when I speak. So please do not take this personal, when I discuss I do not consider the face.

[Spiderphill]

Wow cgc missed color touch? That's insane. I can't see cgc missing ct unless it was an inside job.

 

 

I'd understand trimming on a book because it's the toughest.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

I am sorry but 1st

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1058881#Post1058881

 

Then there are the original ewert threads, and I believe there is a list of serial numbers as well.

 

This is all public knowledge and CGC has indeed offered a free resto check on the books. The fact that many people concealed the books and kept them out of the spotlight until it was safe to unload them.

 

There have been countless threads where CGC has addressed that they are working harder to try and detect micro trimming.

 

Is there a possibility that the CT was so minor that the old graders considered it negligible, but the new regime has tightened up on this?

 

THe reason I say all of this is NOT because I side with CGC, but maybe all those boring "this thread again, why are we still talking about this" should have kept going. Now we have members who are not in the know and getting hosed.

 

Also if it is just a crack and resub, send the book in the slab. This way they have to cover if the book goes from blue to purple.

[Spider-Dan]

The CT on the Avengers is SP, so maybe that's why it was missed the 1st time

 

As far as the trimming, the JIM was graded in 07, so I don't think this is one of the Ewert books

[Old Fashion PB and J]

The CT on the Avengers is SP, so maybe that's why it was missed the 1st time

 

As far as the trimming, the JIM was graded in 07, so I don't think this is one of the Ewert books

Wow.. Then they still have not gotten much better, but it has also been said that Ewert is still very active in the hobby. FT knows better on this topic than myself.

 

And I think the CT probably has to do with what I said, or they just missed it.

 

Either way it sucks, but please check the old threads and get the master list if you plan to target old labels. This way you will know not to buy a book and can alert others so the book can at least be more public as to what the possible risk is.

[comicwiz]

It also sounds like the books were cracked out of the slabs past their "best before" dates. Not sure how much weight is put on CGC's early claims that the microchamber paper has a lifespan of approximately 7 years, and to have books regraded for optimal storage/conservation. I skimmed through some of the pages but remember seeing 03' and 07' dates on the serial numbers of the two books, so I see this more as an inherent risk of certification than any risk from gaming grades.

[passion4comics]

Can you imagine sending one in for a reholder and getting it back purple....

 

NOTE: All Reholder submissions are subject to review for tampering and accuracy of grade.

 

I'm not sure of the language, but "and" if it's tampered with or is that "and/or" ?

 

I've have one book with that top thin sticker I wrecked in a frame that I keep pushing it back on with my finger. It's driving me crazy because it curls.

 

[quicksilver]

Surely if the market didn't put quite so much stock (and therefore, value) in the word of one company's service, then the financial implications wouldn't be so detrimental anyway ?

 

Everyone wants accurate grading, but why does the inherent value have to be so attributable to any one company's (or individual's, for that matter) opinion ?

 

Whatever happened to having our own opinions on our own books ?

[Boba]

Can you imagine sending one in for a reholder and getting it back purple....

 

NOTE: All Reholder submissions are subject to review for tampering and accuracy of grade.

 

I'm not sure of the language, but "and" if it's tampered with or is that "and/or" ?

 

I've have one book with that top thin sticker I wrecked in a frame that I keep pushing it back on with my finger. It's driving me crazy because it curls.

 

Put a little scotch-tape on it and put it back in the box.

[Jaydogrules]

Dan (may I call you Dan?):

 

If you are not pressing these books, why not send them in to CGC still inside the case?

 

-J.

[blazingbob]

Because CGC would then look at the label and grade them the same.

 

Which is not what happens but hey that is what the rumor is.

[DrWatson]

Surely if the market didn't put quite so much stock (and therefore, value) in the word of one company's service, then the financial implications wouldn't be so detrimental anyway ?

 

Everyone wants accurate grading, but why does the inherent value have to be so attributable to any one company's (or individual's, for that matter) opinion ?

 

Whatever happened to having our own opinions on our own books ?

People are too lazy to learn how to grade. They'd rather someone else do it for them and then complain about the results.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

Because CGC would then look at the label and grade them the same.

 

Which is not what happens but hey that is what the rumor is.

[Jaydogrules]

Because CGC would then look at the label and grade them the same.

 

Which is not what happens but hey that is what the rumor is.

 

What if you walk them through, let them crack them out in the front lobby, as another poster has said they do, and then take the labels with you for "your records"? It is your slab after all, if you want to take the labels with you, you can, there would be no reason for CGC to keep them. And if they say, "We want them so we can adjust the census", you can just say you'll give them to them when you come back for your books. But at least then there is a "chain of custody" within CGC.

 

-J.

[Spider-Dan]

Dan (may I call you Dan?):

 

If you are not pressing these books, why not send them in to CGC still inside the case?

 

-J.

 

I didn't know I had that option. I'm sure there's a charge attached to it. Plus if I get the book out and I feel it's not as nice, most of the time I don't bother sending it in.

[comicwiz]

Surely if the market didn't put quite so much stock (and therefore, value) in the word of one company's service, then the financial implications wouldn't be so detrimental anyway ?

 

Everyone wants accurate grading, but why does the inherent value have to be so attributable to any one company's (or individual's, for that matter) opinion ?

 

Whatever happened to having our own opinions on our own books ?

 

The better off than we were before certification is a perpetual see-saw debate - every once in a while the white elephant takes a rest on the worse off side.

 

The take-away from these situations is how matters are resolved, and for me the redeeming aspects of a virtual community of like-minded collectors is watching how we've evolved as a hobby to the point where most people, most of the time, are financially made whole when mistakes are made and publicly aired, and situations where a dealer or collector missed restoration are no exception.

 

CGC should not think they are beyond reproach in such situations, and playing the hard head or trying their hand at stonewalling customers (which is the "usual" play when these matters are handled privately or "off the boards") is so badly lagging behind that they might as well paint a bullseye on their backs.

 

Only time will tell, but if they try to hold firm on the need for a book to be submitted in the holder to make the submitter financially whole, the court of public opinion will surely rip them to shreds when before/after scans are posted. Not a fan of the "different strokes for different folks" motto, but I can't imagine we would ever get anywhere in terms of determining the incompetence of PGX if the "must submit in the slab" condition needed to be met.