CGC Issue Resolved

[joe_collector]

Roy, please clarify, if they are being more cautious, are you saying this is a good thing or bad thing ?

 

It's a bad thing, as it's a total change in CGC's stance on resto.

 

When Steve started up, back in the day, he stated many times that CGC doesn't want to give out Purple labels, and if there is any question as whether it's resto or not (a small ink or pen mark which doesn't cover any damage and may have been inadvertent) they they would not give it a Purple label.

 

If they are doing a 180 on that previous stance, and hammering down on anything with even the hint of a scent of resto, then I see this house of cards falling down over the longer term.

[jbud73]

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

 

 

Given what we know about CGC missing trimming on books and indicating trimming on off the rack submissions, I think I'd submit the book again.

[jimjum12]

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

 

 

Given what we know about CGC missing trimming on books and indicating trimming on off the rack submissions, I think I'd submit the book again.

 

...... Dan, have you posted any pictures of these books for us to see ? I'd especially like to see the trimmed one. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[easyt63]

Ok, I honestly can't believe those of you who are siding with CGC on this. I'm not sure if you have drank too much Kool-Aid or can't get your mouth of CGC's nip.

 

Analogies have been thrown around like crazy on here trying to persuade those of you stuck on the Sarasota side of the fence. So here is another:

 

What if a company...a milk company...no wait...a company that inspects milk to make sure it's safe for consumer consumption, lets a carton go by that has some nasty bacteria.

 

Then someone buys the tainted milk, but lets their kid drink it instead of them. The kid gets deathly sick, goes to the hospital, and the family then suffers financial hardships from being stuck with the hospital bill.

 

Who's fault is it?

 

Is it the parent"s fault for giving their kids milk that has been deemed safe by the most respected and trusted inspection agency in the industry?

 

On another note, why crucify PGX (I don't care for them, either) and not CGC when they make the same mistake?

 

I'm sure Dan doesn't cry over spilt milk often, but in this case, he has every right to do just that.

 

I think you're missing a step here - perhaps the parents poured the milk into a filthy, unwashed glass before giving it to their kid to drink? This, of course, symbolizes the fact that the slabs were cracked before the books were sent in to CGC.

 

Considering I do not really collect older books at this point in time, I have very little skin in this game, but honestly... I can not really figure what the problem is. If anyone is worried about this happening, then send the books in still in their slab. It seems like an easy enough solution for resubs...

 

If you're worried more about the central idea behind this entire thread - whether or not you can trust the color of your existing labels - I think the answer doesn't change much; you can trust your blue label as long as you don't open or damage the slab. This obviously isn't ideal, but what more can you really want? What else is feasible? Can perfection really be expected in something as subjective as whether or not a decades old collection of paper and ink have somehow been modified with an eye towards improving the overall state of the comic?

 

I think that is a lot to ask, but maybe that is what CGC has promised to deliver... at least until you read the back of a label.

 

Either you're just grasping or your 10 posts mean you really are new here and haven't lurked for awhile.

 

Dan is a stand up dude. I've bought from him and sold to him. I've had plenty of talks with him, seen plenty of talks to him, and have heard nothing but good things to know he doesn't even dabble in restoration.

 

That means, when I set up a scenario, I am taking in to account Dan has done nothing but crack and resub.

 

Why is anyone bringing up the argument that Dan should resub a book currently on holder? What person in their rightful mind would change a grade that's already been graded by the company they work for if the grade is sitting there starring them in the face? That's why you crack, then resub.

 

Yes it's a gamble. A gamble on grade, NOT on restoration! Grading is subjective. There is no definitive law that states what a 7.0 is. But there is law about resto. If a book has been altered from its original state, meaning if anything has been added, then it has been restored. Period!

 

How is that hard to grasp, people! That is what this debate is about! I whole heartedly agree Dan took a chance in cracking and resubbing. He took a chance for it to come back a lower or higher grade. Either way, CGC got paid for it. They got paid for their opinion, again. But instead, Dan got the misfortune of having a book already certified, CERTIFIED, to be unrestored, come back as a restored book.

 

Unacceptable!!

 

It's subjective versus cold hard fact.

 

Blame him for gambling with the grade, but you are a fool to blame him for getting a universal book returned as restored.

 

If this niche of our hobby were more mainstream, CGC would be ripped apart via social media and other outlets. They would have a PR nightmare on their hands. But lucky for them, this fraction of our hobby doesn't reach further than right here on these CGC boards.

 

 

[jaeldubyoo]

 

Given what we know about CGC missing trimming on books and indicating trimming on off the rack submissions, I think I'd submit the book again.

 

Throwing good money after bad.

[SquareChaos]

Ok, I honestly can't believe those of you who are siding with CGC on this. I'm not sure if you have drank too much Kool-Aid or can't get your mouth of CGC's nip.

 

Analogies have been thrown around like crazy on here trying to persuade those of you stuck on the Sarasota side of the fence. So here is another:

 

What if a company...a milk company...no wait...a company that inspects milk to make sure it's safe for consumer consumption, lets a carton go by that has some nasty bacteria.

 

Then someone buys the tainted milk, but lets their kid drink it instead of them. The kid gets deathly sick, goes to the hospital, and the family then suffers financial hardships from being stuck with the hospital bill.

 

Who's fault is it?

 

Is it the parent"s fault for giving their kids milk that has been deemed safe by the most respected and trusted inspection agency in the industry?

 

On another note, why crucify PGX (I don't care for them, either) and not CGC when they make the same mistake?

 

I'm sure Dan doesn't cry over spilt milk often, but in this case, he has every right to do just that.

 

I think you're missing a step here - perhaps the parents poured the milk into a filthy, unwashed glass before giving it to their kid to drink? This, of course, symbolizes the fact that the slabs were cracked before the books were sent in to CGC.

 

Considering I do not really collect older books at this point in time, I have very little skin in this game, but honestly... I can not really figure what the problem is. If anyone is worried about this happening, then send the books in still in their slab. It seems like an easy enough solution for resubs...

 

If you're worried more about the central idea behind this entire thread - whether or not you can trust the color of your existing labels - I think the answer doesn't change much; you can trust your blue label as long as you don't open or damage the slab. This obviously isn't ideal, but what more can you really want? What else is feasible? Can perfection really be expected in something as subjective as whether or not a decades old collection of paper and ink have somehow been modified with an eye towards improving the overall state of the comic?

 

I think that is a lot to ask, but maybe that is what CGC has promised to deliver... at least until you read the back of a label.

 

Either you're just grasping or your 10 posts mean you really are new here and haven't lurked for awhile.

 

Dan is a stand up dude. I've bought from him and sold to him. I've had plenty of talks with him, seen plenty of talks to him, and have heard nothing but good things to know he doesn't even dabble in restoration.

 

That means, when I set up a scenario, I am taking in to account Dan has done nothing but crack and resub.

 

Why is anyone bringing up the argument that Dan should resub a book currently on holder? What person in their rightful mind would change a grade that's already been graded by the company they work for if the grade is sitting there starring them in the face? That's why you crack, then resub.

 

Yes it's a gamble. A gamble on grade, NOT on restoration! Grading is subjective. There is no definitive law that states what a 7.0 is. But there is law about resto. If a book has been altered from its original state, meaning if anything has been added, then it has been restored. Period!

 

How is that hard to grasp, people! That is what this debate is about! I whole heartedly agree Dan took a chance in cracking and resubbing. He took a chance for it to come back a lower or higher grade. Either way, CGC got paid for it. They got paid for their opinion, again. But instead, Dan got the misfortune of having a book already certified, CERTIFIED, to be unrestored, come back as a restored book.

 

Unacceptable!!

 

It's subjective versus cold hard fact.

 

Blame him for gambling with the grade, but you are a fool to blame him for getting a universal book returned as restored.

 

If this niche of our hobby were more mainstream, CGC would be ripped apart via social media and other outlets. They would have a PR nightmare on their hands. But lucky for them, this fraction of our hobby doesn't reach further than right here on these CGC boards.

 

 

I'm uncertain why you think I'm casting any doubt or blame on OP - I am not; I have no reason to believe or disbelieve him when he says he did nothing to the books that he had removed from the slabs.

 

It is my understanding from reading this entire thread that, had he left the books in their slabs, the people doing the grading would never know that these books had come in already slabbed. The CGC system apparently accounts for this sort of bias so that someone further up the line knows that the book was slabbed when it arrived, but the actual graders have no knowledge of such.

 

If the books arrive slabbed and the new examination revels restoration, then from the sounds of things CGC would have provided restitution. If this is not the case, if restitution would not be provided in such a case, I can not imagine why everyone wouldn't run away from CGC as fast as they could. However, it is insanity from the other direction to expect them to uphold such a warranty on a slab that has been compromised.

[Moondog]

The trimmed one could be a false positive. I had a copy of Iron Man Sub Mariner 1 that I bought from the original owner several years ago. It came back 9.6 Trimmed. Now I knew for a fact that the book was not trimmed but it did have a funky cut. So I sent it back and it came back a 9.6 Blue. Especially with trimming, it can be tricky and no one can catch it 100% of the time. Other times, you can jump at shadows.

 

The CT baffles me though. That should have been caught the first time.

 

Either way, sorry that happened, expensive books to have it happen to. And 2 at the same time

 

I had the same situation with a 9.4 Hulk 181. The owner who I was selling it for bought it off the rack. It was in a box with no bag. All the other books in the box (about 20) were from the same time period.

 

It came back purple trimmed on the top edge. When I explained the situation to Steve, he asked me to send it back. When they took another look it came back blue.

 

It was nice that CGC did the right thing.

 

Catching trimming can be very difficult, but missing color-touch should never happen.

[easyt63]

Ok, I honestly can't believe those of you who are siding with CGC on this. I'm not sure if you have drank too much Kool-Aid or can't get your mouth of CGC's nip.

 

Analogies have been thrown around like crazy on here trying to persuade those of you stuck on the Sarasota side of the fence. So here is another:

 

What if a company...a milk company...no wait...a company that inspects milk to make sure it's safe for consumer consumption, lets a carton go by that has some nasty bacteria.

 

Then someone buys the tainted milk, but lets their kid drink it instead of them. The kid gets deathly sick, goes to the hospital, and the family then suffers financial hardships from being stuck with the hospital bill.

 

Who's fault is it?

 

Is it the parent"s fault for giving their kids milk that has been deemed safe by the most respected and trusted inspection agency in the industry?

 

On another note, why crucify PGX (I don't care for them, either) and not CGC when they make the same mistake?

 

I'm sure Dan doesn't cry over spilt milk often, but in this case, he has every right to do just that.

 

I think you're missing a step here - perhaps the parents poured the milk into a filthy, unwashed glass before giving it to their kid to drink? This, of course, symbolizes the fact that the slabs were cracked before the books were sent in to CGC.

 

Considering I do not really collect older books at this point in time, I have very little skin in this game, but honestly... I can not really figure what the problem is. If anyone is worried about this happening, then send the books in still in their slab. It seems like an easy enough solution for resubs...

 

If you're worried more about the central idea behind this entire thread - whether or not you can trust the color of your existing labels - I think the answer doesn't change much; you can trust your blue label as long as you don't open or damage the slab. This obviously isn't ideal, but what more can you really want? What else is feasible? Can perfection really be expected in something as subjective as whether or not a decades old collection of paper and ink have somehow been modified with an eye towards improving the overall state of the comic?

 

I think that is a lot to ask, but maybe that is what CGC has promised to deliver... at least until you read the back of a label.

 

Either you're just grasping or your 10 posts mean you really are new here and haven't lurked for awhile.

 

Dan is a stand up dude. I've bought from him and sold to him. I've had plenty of talks with him, seen plenty of talks to him, and have heard nothing but good things to know he doesn't even dabble in restoration.

 

That means, when I set up a scenario, I am taking in to account Dan has done nothing but crack and resub.

 

Why is anyone bringing up the argument that Dan should resub a book currently on holder? What person in their rightful mind would change a grade that's already been graded by the company they work for if the grade is sitting there starring them in the face? That's why you crack, then resub.

 

Yes it's a gamble. A gamble on grade, NOT on restoration! Grading is subjective. There is no definitive law that states what a 7.0 is. But there is law about resto. If a book has been altered from its original state, meaning if anything has been added, then it has been restored. Period!

 

How is that hard to grasp, people! That is what this debate is about! I whole heartedly agree Dan took a chance in cracking and resubbing. He took a chance for it to come back a lower or higher grade. Either way, CGC got paid for it. They got paid for their opinion, again. But instead, Dan got the misfortune of having a book already certified, CERTIFIED, to be unrestored, come back as a restored book.

 

Unacceptable!!

 

It's subjective versus cold hard fact.

 

Blame him for gambling with the grade, but you are a fool to blame him for getting a universal book returned as restored.

 

If this niche of our hobby were more mainstream, CGC would be ripped apart via social media and other outlets. They would have a PR nightmare on their hands. But lucky for them, this fraction of our hobby doesn't reach further than right here on these CGC boards.

 

 

I'm uncertain why you think I'm casting any doubt or blame on OP - I am not; I have no reason to believe or disbelieve him when he says he did nothing to the books that he had removed from the slabs.

 

It is my understanding from reading this entire thread that, had he left the books in their slabs, the people doing the grading would never know that these books had come in already slabbed. The CGC system apparently accounts for this sort of bias so that someone further up the line knows that the book was slabbed when it arrived, but the actual graders have no knowledge of such.

 

If the books arrive slabbed and the new examination revels restoration, then from the sounds of things CGC would have provided restitution. If this is not the case, if restitution would not be provided in such a case, I can not imagine why everyone wouldn't run away from CGC as fast as they could. However, it is insanity from the other direction to expect them to uphold such a warranty on a slab that has been compromised.

 

I 100% agree that CGC cannot do anything here because there is no proof the comic has not been altered. No proof.

 

But...

 

With us long time boardies knowing Dan for Dan, we can open this situation to the fact that CGC is inconsistent in determining fact. Their entire business is based on trust. That is now being debated.

 

Now, if you believe everything you read on the internet, then go ahead and eat the spoonful of B.S. you just had shoved in your face about CGC's processes. Do you honestly believe a company would implement processes that open the company up to outside scrutiny? You really think that Receiving is not going to divulge the fact that the book has already been graded?

 

If I were CGC, I would take measures to make use that a book that has already been graded never receives a different grade. I would make sure meticulous notes were kept. Measurements of defects. anything that could be logged would be. That's just smart covering-your-as.s

 

 

 

[Moondog]

I'm really sorry this happened to you. I'm a bit disappointed in CGC, not because the books came back restored, but because the books came back restored AFTER CGC already "verified" that the books weren't restored in the first place. You can analyze, and over analyze CGC's grading capabilities all day, but the fact is that they are proven flip floppers when it comes to their restoration check. Even If this only happens 1% of the time, It still happens, and CGC should take responsibility for not catching the restoration the first time around. I would call CGC and try to work something out with them. Any company with good business ethics should listen to their customers and strive for their satisfaction, especially If the customer is right.

 

Unless the books are cracked in CGC's possession, how do they know they weren't doctored after cracking?

[slym2none]

(Do you) really think that receiving is going to not divulge the fact that the book has already been graded?

 

If we are to put our trust in the company, then yes, yes I do believe that receiving doesn't tell the graders it has already been graded. If one can't believe that, then the entire company is useless in that person's eyes. Why trust the grade at all? Why not believe they swap out books for later prints? Why not just "lose" books and sell them raw to line their pockets?

 

 

 

-slym

[easyt63]

I'm just going to keep stating this until people get it:

 

GRADING IS SUBJECTIVE. RESTORATION ISN'T.

 

Dan cracks and resubs a ton of books. Wouldn't you think that if he were in the practice of cracking, restoring, then resubbing, he would have a ton of purple labels on his hands??? And this thread wouldn't exist.

 

Or, CGC could just be really bad at catching restoration. But u know that's not the case. So could you stop talking about whether or not Dan altered the book. This argument isn't about CGC being able to rectify the situation. They can't. It cannot be irrefutably proven the books were not altered. It's about CGC not being consistent on detecting restoration and the damage it can have on whomever gets stuck holding the hot potato.

[easyt63]

(Do you) really think that receiving is going to not divulge the fact that the book has already been graded?

 

If we are to put our trust in the company, then yes, yes I do believe that receiving doesn't tell the graders it has already been graded. If one can't believe that, then the entire company is useless in that person's eyes. Why trust the grade at all? Why not believe they swap out books for later prints? Why not just "lose" books and sell them raw to line their pockets?

 

 

 

-slym

 

You just took a simple hypothetical scenario of inter-organization communication to perhaps criminal fraud activity. Your point is moot.

 

 

[easyt63]

(Do you) really think that receiving is going to not divulge the fact that the book has already been graded?

 

If we are to put our trust in the company, then yes, yes I do believe that receiving doesn't tell the graders it has already been graded. If one can't believe that, then the entire company is useless in that person's eyes. Why trust the grade at all? Why not believe they swap out books for later prints? Why not just "lose" books and sell them raw to line their pockets?

 

 

 

-slym

 

And Slym, isn't everything that transpired in order for this thread to come to life reason to question the trust you have in this company?

 

 

[slym2none]

I responded with a nice, well-thought out post, but I went back & deleted it. It's just a moot point to you, so therefore you aren't worth it.

 

 

 

-slym

[easyt63]

I responded with a nice, well-thought out post, but I went back & deleted it. It's just a moot point to you, so therefore you aren't worth it.

 

 

 

-slym

 

If you can't think logically, I'm glad you deleted it.

[slym2none]

::

 

You'll never know how logical it was. My point is moot, so why bother explaining it to you?

 

Nice insult, BTW.

 

(thumbs u

 

 

 

-slym

[SquareChaos]

Ok, I honestly can't believe those of you who are siding with CGC on this. I'm not sure if you have drank too much Kool-Aid or can't get your mouth of CGC's nip.

 

Analogies have been thrown around like crazy on here trying to persuade those of you stuck on the Sarasota side of the fence. So here is another:

 

What if a company...a milk company...no wait...a company that inspects milk to make sure it's safe for consumer consumption, lets a carton go by that has some nasty bacteria.

 

Then someone buys the tainted milk, but lets their kid drink it instead of them. The kid gets deathly sick, goes to the hospital, and the family then suffers financial hardships from being stuck with the hospital bill.

 

Who's fault is it?

 

Is it the parent"s fault for giving their kids milk that has been deemed safe by the most respected and trusted inspection agency in the industry?

 

On another note, why crucify PGX (I don't care for them, either) and not CGC when they make the same mistake?

 

I'm sure Dan doesn't cry over spilt milk often, but in this case, he has every right to do just that.

 

I think you're missing a step here - perhaps the parents poured the milk into a filthy, unwashed glass before giving it to their kid to drink? This, of course, symbolizes the fact that the slabs were cracked before the books were sent in to CGC.

 

Considering I do not really collect older books at this point in time, I have very little skin in this game, but honestly... I can not really figure what the problem is. If anyone is worried about this happening, then send the books in still in their slab. It seems like an easy enough solution for resubs...

 

If you're worried more about the central idea behind this entire thread - whether or not you can trust the color of your existing labels - I think the answer doesn't change much; you can trust your blue label as long as you don't open or damage the slab. This obviously isn't ideal, but what more can you really want? What else is feasible? Can perfection really be expected in something as subjective as whether or not a decades old collection of paper and ink have somehow been modified with an eye towards improving the overall state of the comic?

 

I think that is a lot to ask, but maybe that is what CGC has promised to deliver... at least until you read the back of a label.

 

Either you're just grasping or your 10 posts mean you really are new here and haven't lurked for awhile.

 

Dan is a stand up dude. I've bought from him and sold to him. I've had plenty of talks with him, seen plenty of talks to him, and have heard nothing but good things to know he doesn't even dabble in restoration.

 

That means, when I set up a scenario, I am taking in to account Dan has done nothing but crack and resub.

 

Why is anyone bringing up the argument that Dan should resub a book currently on holder? What person in their rightful mind would change a grade that's already been graded by the company they work for if the grade is sitting there starring them in the face? That's why you crack, then resub.

 

Yes it's a gamble. A gamble on grade, NOT on restoration! Grading is subjective. There is no definitive law that states what a 7.0 is. But there is law about resto. If a book has been altered from its original state, meaning if anything has been added, then it has been restored. Period!

 

How is that hard to grasp, people! That is what this debate is about! I whole heartedly agree Dan took a chance in cracking and resubbing. He took a chance for it to come back a lower or higher grade. Either way, CGC got paid for it. They got paid for their opinion, again. But instead, Dan got the misfortune of having a book already certified, CERTIFIED, to be unrestored, come back as a restored book.

 

Unacceptable!!

 

It's subjective versus cold hard fact.

 

Blame him for gambling with the grade, but you are a fool to blame him for getting a universal book returned as restored.

 

If this niche of our hobby were more mainstream, CGC would be ripped apart via social media and other outlets. They would have a PR nightmare on their hands. But lucky for them, this fraction of our hobby doesn't reach further than right here on these CGC boards.

 

 

I'm uncertain why you think I'm casting any doubt or blame on OP - I am not; I have no reason to believe or disbelieve him when he says he did nothing to the books that he had removed from the slabs.

 

It is my understanding from reading this entire thread that, had he left the books in their slabs, the people doing the grading would never know that these books had come in already slabbed. The CGC system apparently accounts for this sort of bias so that someone further up the line knows that the book was slabbed when it arrived, but the actual graders have no knowledge of such.

 

If the books arrive slabbed and the new examination revels restoration, then from the sounds of things CGC would have provided restitution. If this is not the case, if restitution would not be provided in such a case, I can not imagine why everyone wouldn't run away from CGC as fast as they could. However, it is insanity from the other direction to expect them to uphold such a warranty on a slab that has been compromised.

 

I 100% agree that CGC cannot do anything here because there is no proof the comic has not been altered. No proof.

 

But...

 

CGC, with us long time boardies knowing Dan for Dan, we can open this situation to the fact that CGC is inconsistent in fact. Their entire business is based on trust. That is now being debated.

 

Now, if you believe everything you read on the internet, the go ahead and eat the spoonful of B.S. you just had shoved in your face about CGC processes. Do you honestly believe a company would implement processes that open the company up to outside scrutiny? If really think that receiving is going to not divulge the fact that the book has already been graded?

 

If I were CGC, I would take measures to make use that a book that has already been graded never receives a different grade. I would make sure meticulous notes were kept. Measurements of defects. anything that could be logged would be. That's just smart covering-your-as.s

 

 

 

Please provide an actual argument with some basis to stand upon instead of just

 

 

I think my argument is logically sound and I honestly question why you appear to be so insulting in attacking it?

 

Anyway... I don't believe OP's reputation on these boards matters in any way in this situation. If you submit raw books, there is nothing to fall back on if A) CGC mistakenly marks a non-restored book as restored, or, B) CGC correctly marks a restored book as restored when they had previously screwed it up. I'm not sure how you can argue with this since it is clear that CGC would be out of business in a month if they capitulated solely on the word of individuals who received grades that they found unjust or incorrect.

 

Do I feel bad for OP? Absolutely. I think the people that have repeatedly said 'those are the breaks' are being callous, regardless of whether or not he was 'gambling' in an attempt to get a higher grade.

 

Could this event have been prevented while still sending the books in for a resub? I personally think so, but it is just an opinion based on information that I have no basis to disbelieve.

 

I have no factual reason to think that CGC does not practice a blind grading process such as has been described elsewhere in this thread. I've personally never sent in a book for a resub, but I've read plenty of stories on this forum from people who have, and some of them have sent the books in still slabbed and still received different grades. So, again, I have no reason to doubt that a blind grading occurs, other than perhaps a malicious suspicion such as the one you appear to bear.

 

Frankly, I have no idea how one may go about proving that such a system doesn't exist without an inside, non-biased verified source showing up and giving a 'tell-all.'

 

[LordRahl]

(Do you) really think that receiving is going to not divulge the fact that the book has already been graded?

 

If we are to put our trust in the company, then yes, yes I do believe that receiving doesn't tell the graders it has already been graded. If one can't believe that, then the entire company is useless in that person's eyes. Why trust the grade at all? Why not believe they swap out books for later prints? Why not just "lose" books and sell them raw to line their pockets?

 

 

 

-slym

 

You just took a simple hypothetical scenario of inter-organization communication to perhaps criminal fraud activity. Your point is moot.

 

 

Clearly you think that this communication happens and the graders aren't grading blindly. So tell me, what would the advantage to this be for CGC?

[slym2none]

 

 

 

-slym

[easyt63]

Ok, I honestly can't believe those of you who are siding with CGC on this. I'm not sure if you have drank too much Kool-Aid or can't get your mouth of CGC's nip.

 

Analogies have been thrown around like crazy on here trying to persuade those of you stuck on the Sarasota side of the fence. So here is another:

 

What if a company...a milk company...no wait...a company that inspects milk to make sure it's safe for consumer consumption, lets a carton go by that has some nasty bacteria.

 

Then someone buys the tainted milk, but lets their kid drink it instead of them. The kid gets deathly sick, goes to the hospital, and the family then suffers financial hardships from being stuck with the hospital bill.

 

Who's fault is it?

 

Is it the parent"s fault for giving their kids milk that has been deemed safe by the most respected and trusted inspection agency in the industry?

 

On another note, why crucify PGX (I don't care for them, either) and not CGC when they make the same mistake?

 

I'm sure Dan doesn't cry over spilt milk often, but in this case, he has every right to do just that.

 

I think you're missing a step here - perhaps the parents poured the milk into a filthy, unwashed glass before giving it to their kid to drink? This, of course, symbolizes the fact that the slabs were cracked before the books were sent in to CGC.

 

Considering I do not really collect older books at this point in time, I have very little skin in this game, but honestly... I can not really figure what the problem is. If anyone is worried about this happening, then send the books in still in their slab. It seems like an easy enough solution for resubs...

 

If you're worried more about the central idea behind this entire thread - whether or not you can trust the color of your existing labels - I think the answer doesn't change much; you can trust your blue label as long as you don't open or damage the slab. This obviously isn't ideal, but what more can you really want? What else is feasible? Can perfection really be expected in something as subjective as whether or not a decades old collection of paper and ink have somehow been modified with an eye towards improving the overall state of the comic?

 

I think that is a lot to ask, but maybe that is what CGC has promised to deliver... at least until you read the back of a label.

 

Either you're just grasping or your 10 posts mean you really are new here and haven't lurked for awhile.

 

Dan is a stand up dude. I've bought from him and sold to him. I've had plenty of talks with him, seen plenty of talks to him, and have heard nothing but good things to know he doesn't even dabble in restoration.

 

That means, when I set up a scenario, I am taking in to account Dan has done nothing but crack and resub.

 

Why is anyone bringing up the argument that Dan should resub a book currently on holder? What person in their rightful mind would change a grade that's already been graded by the company they work for if the grade is sitting there starring them in the face? That's why you crack, then resub.

 

Yes it's a gamble. A gamble on grade, NOT on restoration! Grading is subjective. There is no definitive law that states what a 7.0 is. But there is law about resto. If a book has been altered from its original state, meaning if anything has been added, then it has been restored. Period!

 

How is that hard to grasp, people! That is what this debate is about! I whole heartedly agree Dan took a chance in cracking and resubbing. He took a chance for it to come back a lower or higher grade. Either way, CGC got paid for it. They got paid for their opinion, again. But instead, Dan got the misfortune of having a book already certified, CERTIFIED, to be unrestored, come back as a restored book.

 

Unacceptable!!

 

It's subjective versus cold hard fact.

 

Blame him for gambling with the grade, but you are a fool to blame him for getting a universal book returned as restored.

 

If this niche of our hobby were more mainstream, CGC would be ripped apart via social media and other outlets. They would have a PR nightmare on their hands. But lucky for them, this fraction of our hobby doesn't reach further than right here on these CGC boards.

 

 

I'm uncertain why you think I'm casting any doubt or blame on OP - I am not; I have no reason to believe or disbelieve him when he says he did nothing to the books that he had removed from the slabs.

 

It is my understanding from reading this entire thread that, had he left the books in their slabs, the people doing the grading would never know that these books had come in already slabbed. The CGC system apparently accounts for this sort of bias so that someone further up the line knows that the book was slabbed when it arrived, but the actual graders have no knowledge of such.

 

If the books arrive slabbed and the new examination revels restoration, then from the sounds of things CGC would have provided restitution. If this is not the case, if restitution would not be provided in such a case, I can not imagine why everyone wouldn't run away from CGC as fast as they could. However, it is insanity from the other direction to expect them to uphold such a warranty on a slab that has been compromised.

 

I 100% agree that CGC cannot do anything here because there is no proof the comic has not been altered. No proof.

 

But...

 

CGC, with us long time boardies knowing Dan for Dan, we can open this situation to the fact that CGC is inconsistent in fact. Their entire business is based on trust. That is now being debated.

 

Now, if you believe everything you read on the internet, the go ahead and eat the spoonful of B.S. you just had shoved in your face about CGC processes. Do you honestly believe a company would implement processes that open the company up to outside scrutiny? If really think that receiving is going to not divulge the fact that the book has already been graded?

 

If I were CGC, I would take measures to make use that a book that has already been graded never receives a different grade. I would make sure meticulous notes were kept. Measurements of defects. anything that could be logged would be. That's just smart covering-your-as.s

 

 

 

Please provide an actual argument with some basis to stand upon instead of just

 

 

I think my argument is logically sound and I honestly question why you appear to be so insulting in attacking it?

 

Anyway... I don't believe OP's reputation on these boards matters in any way in this situation. If you submit raw books, there is nothing to fall back on if A) CGC mistakenly marks a non-restored book as restored, or, B) CGC correctly marks a restored book as restored when they had previously screwed it up. I'm not sure how you can argue with this since it is clear that CGC would be out of business in a month if they capitulated solely on the word of individuals who received grades that they found unjust or incorrect.

 

Do I feel bad for OP? Absolutely. I think the people that have repeatedly said 'those are the breaks' are being callous, regardless of whether or not he was 'gambling' in an attempt to get a higher grade.

 

Could this event have been prevented while still sending the books in for a resub? I personally think so, but it is just an opinion based on information that I have no basis to disbelieve.

 

I have no factual reason to think that CGC does not practice a blind grading process such as has been described elsewhere in this thread. I've personally never sent in a book for a resub, but I've read plenty of stories on this forum from people who have, and some of them have sent the books in still slabbed and still received different grades. So, again, I have no reason to doubt that a blind grading occurs, other than perhaps a malicious suspicion such as the one you appear to bear.

 

Frankly, I have no idea how one may go about proving that such a system doesn't exist without an inside, non-biased verified source showing up and giving a 'tell-all.'

 

Thank you so much for a well-thought out response!! I in no way meant to come off as insulting you.

 

I agree with your points. If CGC had more negative press like this in the past, they wouldn't be around long. PGX had more criminal/shady wrongdoings, so CGC isn't in that category.

 

Except Slym tried using examples already executed by PGX in the past to support his weak argument.

 

Here is my problem...I am seeing this from the point of view of someone who submitted a comic that had been previously deemed as universal and recurred it back as restored.

 

I am basing my argument on the resubber's integrity. That he did not doctor the book.

 

If he did, my argument is in shambles.

 

With that said, the OP has uncovered a scenario that discredited the reliability in CGC to be a fact leader. A leader in identifying restoration. A practice based in fact, not opinion.

 

If CGC cannot be trusted to identify restoration, they should stop that service. That statement is probably to far to the extreme, but you get my gist. Hopefully.

 

Opinion will always be opinion. And people will pay for the opinions they value, either with money or their time. They will actively seek then out.

 

But in this case, a case of fact, CGC has been proven to be fallible, which should lead any intelligent consumer to question the ability of the company to provide a reliable service..