CGC Issue Resolved

[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?

 

Gary, with all due respect, you described a situation where a Hulk 181 flagged for trimming was "reviewed" a second time after you told Steve it was an original owner book bought off the rack, and the book later received a blue label. We don't know what influenced Steve's decision making, but the appearance of bias in the situation can't be overlooked entirely. It's also worth mentioning that yours isn't the first situation where I've heard CGC reconsidering trimming on books based on someone's word it was an off the rack purchase.

 

Using this "taking your word for it" example and comparing it to the OP's current situation, it's disappointing these types of situations are being turned into "how do we know" whether the book was doctored after cracking out especially when CGC has demonstrated a capacity to resolve situations without the need for a thorough forensic examination of where the person grew up, what car they drive, their contribution/participation in our hobby, or what the person had for breakfast for the past month.

 

Even in my own situation, my outcome was achieved absent of prejudice or bias. While I didn't agree with the final decision, especially since I had for years answered calls and provided a second opinion at "no charge" on underground comix under CGC's review to the very person who made the final decision on the outcome, I resigned to understanding CGC's need in maintaining impartiality trumped my request for fairness and my need to understand what happened to my book from the time it left my hands to the time it was returned to me with marks on it revealing it had been used as someone's food tray.

 

To now read the OP's situation being twisted in a way that questions his intent, suggesting he is a liar or someone that we shouldn't completely trust, probably serves as a good primer for the way he might expect to be treated by CGC, but is a real low point for a community that should avoid hijacking the threads awareness element, which IMO ought to be more about exposing the inconsistencies in CGC policy and practice (past to present), and the kinds of questions it raises about the inherent risks associated to having books certified.

 

In the case of my Hulk 181 it was shortly after the Ewert scandal. I pointed this out to Steve in my request and suggested that maybe they were "erring on the side of caution" and to please take another stringent look at the book. I don't believe Steve changed the book to a Universal label because he "believed" my story. I think he looked at the book again and saw that it wasn't trimmed.

 

There are more sophisticated means available today to detect restoration. That means that books graded 5 - 10 years ago could be at risk for being restored if they are re-submitted. Anyone playing this game should be aware of that. I think we all are now.

 

I don't really understand why it needs to be called a "game." Are there people out there, looking to capitalize on items they feel are undergraded? Of course. And there are also collectors and hobbyists who got tired of being cheated by people selling them books that were not what they were claimed to be, for whom this is very much not a game.

 

For the last nearly 15 years, an entire market has developed...from nothing...that is built on a foundation that a book in a Universal slab....with exceptions noted...was an unrestored book, and they let their money follow that belief.

 

Very, very few people have a problem with a number grade changing slightly over time.

 

But that the book was free from restoration....? That is the foundation upon which this house was built.

 

How many people will now get into arguments about blue labels, asking dealers...yet again..."are you sure this isn't restored?"

 

A return to the bad old days, and maybe worse...now the book can't be checked.

 

Or, maybe this is a good thing, and books will be freed from their slabs en masse, knowing that CGC's slab is just an opinion, as good as most everyone else's, and will no longer carry a premium.

 

Who knows. Interesting waters ahead...

 

Maybe a better word than "game" is "scheme." It's hard for me to understand why anyone would decide to crack a slab and resubmit it unless they thought they could benefit financially from doing it. I've done this only once in my entire career - about a year ago. I purchased an old label 4.0 AF 15 that looked better than that to me. I cracked it, pressed it and sent it back in. It game back a 5.0.

 

As simple and straightforward as that description is, I knew it was risky. What was the risk - that the book would come back a 4.0 again and I would be out the pressing/grading fees and postage (about $500)? No. I was worried it would come back restored and the book would be worth a fraction of the $9,000 I spent on it. Thankfully it came back blue.

 

I believe CGC is better today at detecting restoration than they were 10 years ago and this new level of sophistication is necessary in order to keep pace with the crooks and con men who are figuring out ways to slip restored books past CGC and into blue labels. If a previously blue label book is found to be restored, then CGC is simply doing there job to the best of their ability. 10 years ago they could not detect the restoration. Today they can.

 

 

 

[blazingbob]

I agree with this post.

 

Maybe I missed this somewhere along the way but if CGC gets past the "trust me I didn't do anything to these" issue what are you expecting Dan?

 

The Books cost you a certain amount.

 

They are now worth a certain amount restored.

 

My assumption is that if some credit is worked out it would be Dan's cost into the books less what the books would sell for restored. And that credit would be grading credits, not a check.

 

 

[VintageComics]

As I said before....

 

The real issue behind the issue is the market's reaction to purple labels.

 

Once that changes...if it changes...all these ancillary problems evaporate.

 

Bam. Been saying similar for years.

[NewWorldOrder]

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?

 

Gary, with all due respect, you described a situation where a Hulk 181 flagged for trimming was "reviewed" a second time after you told Steve it was an original owner book bought off the rack, and the book later received a blue label. We don't know what influenced Steve's decision making, but the appearance of bias in the situation can't be overlooked entirely. It's also worth mentioning that yours isn't the first situation where I've heard CGC reconsidering trimming on books based on someone's word it was an off the rack purchase.

 

Using this "taking your word for it" example and comparing it to the OP's current situation, it's disappointing these types of situations are being turned into "how do we know" whether the book was doctored after cracking out especially when CGC has demonstrated a capacity to resolve situations without the need for a thorough forensic examination of where the person grew up, what car they drive, their contribution/participation in our hobby, or what the person had for breakfast for the past month.

 

Even in my own situation, my outcome was achieved absent of prejudice or bias. While I didn't agree with the final decision, especially since I had for years answered calls and provided a second opinion at "no charge" on underground comix under CGC's review to the very person who made the final decision on the outcome, I resigned to understanding CGC's need in maintaining impartiality trumped my request for fairness and my need to understand what happened to my book from the time it left my hands to the time it was returned to me with marks on it revealing it had been used as someone's food tray.

 

To now read the OP's situation being twisted in a way that questions his intent, suggesting he is a liar or someone that we shouldn't completely trust, probably serves as a good primer for the way he might expect to be treated by CGC, but is a real low point for a community that should avoid hijacking the threads awareness element, which IMO ought to be more about exposing the inconsistencies in CGC policy and practice (past to present), and the kinds of questions it raises about the inherent risks associated to having books certified.

 

In the case of my Hulk 181 it was shortly after the Ewert scandal. I pointed this out to Steve in my request and suggested that maybe they were "erring on the side of caution" and to please take another stringent look at the book. I don't believe Steve changed the book to a Universal label because he "believed" my story. I think he looked at the book again and saw that it wasn't trimmed.

 

There are more sophisticated means available today to detect restoration. That means that books graded 5 - 10 years ago could be at risk for being restored if they are re-submitted. Anyone playing this game should be aware of that. I think we all are now.

 

I don't really understand why it needs to be called a "game." Are there people out there, looking to capitalize on items they feel are undergraded? Of course. And there are also collectors and hobbyists who got tired of being cheated by people selling them books that were not what they were claimed to be, for whom this is very much not a game.

 

For the last nearly 15 years, an entire market has developed...from nothing...that is built on a foundation that a book in a Universal slab....with exceptions noted...was an unrestored book, and they let their money follow that belief.

 

Very, very few people have a problem with a number grade changing slightly over time.

 

But that the book was free from restoration....? That is the foundation upon which this house was built.

 

How many people will now get into arguments about blue labels, asking dealers...yet again..."are you sure this isn't restored?"

 

A return to the bad old days, and maybe worse...now the book can't be checked.

 

Or, maybe this is a good thing, and books will be freed from their slabs en masse, knowing that CGC's slab is just an opinion, as good as most everyone else's, and will no longer carry a premium.

 

Who knows. Interesting waters ahead...

 

It frightens me that I agree with all your posts in this thread.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I realize their are a lot of long time friendships and communications among people that extend to those who work for CGC, but when we talk about reputation...

Which is really more damaging?

 

That CGC sets up a standard on how they handle something like this and sometimes it doesn't work out best for the customer?

Or that if you know someone, you can get it taken care of at CGC?

 

 

Exactly. If it starts getting so that the company treats certain customers better based on reputation, that plays into the whole fears that already exist about favoritism. My reputation in this part of the country is impeccable, but I only do occasional business with CGC, so I'm sure I have no "reputation" to speak of with them.

 

All they can do is double-check to make sure the mistake wasn't made "this time", and that there really isn't restoration on one or both books. If the mistake was made years ago, all they can do is continue to improve on detection.

 

If they start picking and choosing who's reliable, the whole system falls apart.

 

Again, I'll have to disagree completely.

 

If someone has a proven track record (let's use myself as an example) of submitting hundreds of moderns, and getting only 9.8s, with a handful of 9.6s, and pretty much nothing else, then all of a sudden I get a 9.0 (this is a true story) on a common modern book because it was damaged by someone during the grading process...then yes, my track record should be given more weight than the guy who has subbed 17 books and isn't happy with his grades.

 

At Wondercan last year, I subbed 39 books for Sig Series.

 

32 came back 9.8. The other 7 were 9.6.

 

At SDCC, I submitted 51 books for Sig Series. 37 came back 9.8, 13 came back 9.6...and one 9.0. The damage which dropped it to 9.0 is quite obvious, and on a book which I would never, ever submit for Sig Series in that condition.

 

And these are not brand new books. They are 1980's and early 90's books that are, in most cases, the copies I handpicked for myself and have carefully stored this entire time, until waiting to be brought out for signing.

 

In that case, since the book was pressed by me, and went from my hand to CGC itself, then it is reasonable for CGC to give me the benefit of the doubt...which benefit my track record has earned...over the average guy who has only ever subbed 17 books.

 

This is about taking someone's word that they did what they claim they did, about giving an established customer the benefit of the doubt, not giving "better grades" to preferential customers (and I'm certainly not one of those.)

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, in fact, I think the situation you're talking about should be the perfect situation for a company with hands on ownership to be able to get involved and make things right.

 

But not everyone who submits a large number of books, or even someone who is a quality consistent grader, can be assumed to be 100% honest. Even when all previous dealings with them have been honest.

Now when I say that, it's not from MY personal perspective. It's from a business perspective, that as business gets more and more faceless, it puts those decisions less in the hands of management and more in the hands of 'the way it is'.

Which from a customer service stand point blows.

 

Even beyond that, I understand to some degree, CGC being cautious about situations like this, because it opens up a window for manipulation. In a society like ours where money seems to be the driving force behind everything, even a company that allows management to make those decisions, it can make the management of those scenarios a nightmare. They probably have more requests for this kind of thing than we're aware of.

 

The other side of it is the customers who DON'T get that benefit, either through lack of submissions or just because they may be new to the hobby or new to CGC. And of course their vocal displeasure of it.

Does something like this put CGC in a liable position down the road? Can someone claim unfair practices?

It might not go anywhere, but no company wants to go through the annoyance and the bad feedback that comes with being in the legal process.

 

I have empathy for the customer service perspective of taking care of good customers. To me, it just seems like a no brainer.

But a cold business philosophy within our society and a dirty ugly back room hobby like ours can make a bad mix for good customers.

 

But it's a PR decision. It doesn't even need to come down to trust, although it should certainly be presented that way.

 

Think of any retailer. If you buy something, and it has a flaw that you didn't know about...you return it, right? And does the retailer grill you on what happened, how it happened, and then refuse the return?

 

No, of course not. They take it back, because its loss is built into the system.

 

And does that apply even if something has been damaged/broken by the customer themselves? Unless it's beyond obvious (in which case, thieves almost always move on to easier prey without much of a fight), yes. They'll take it back and refund the purchase.

 

Because, while there are certainly thieves, it is better to let the handful who want to game the system get away with it...from a purely PR perspective...than it is to have a brick wall policy that may stop the bad, but also frustrates the innocent....and nothing is worse for PR than someone with a righteous cause.

 

Call it "trust", call it anything you want, but giving the benefit of the doubt wins much, much more than it loses over time.

 

Without listing my pressing resume I can state I submit a lot of books to CGC. For my customers and myself. I am physically at their facility few times a month. Take home a ton of 9.8 books. Send in many walkthrough books. I shake their hands at shows and have even broken bread with most of them. I would consider my relationship more professional than friend, but a level of friendship exists.

 

I would still expect to be treated the same as everyone else, even though a long track record of my honesty and integrity already exists. It stinks, believe me I know. I do not expect to be treated any differently when it comes to an issue of this severity.

 

So, you would not get the benefit of the doubt if you had a problem? You would be forced to prove it, and if you could not, you're completely out of luck, with no recourse....?

 

None of your established business would mean anything, and you would be treated exactly the same (as far as TRUST, not services, goes) as the guy who just subbed his first four books under a CS coupon...?

 

You mean to say that if one of your books was damaged, and you couldn't absolutely prove it, but you know it was damaged by CGC...they wouldn't hear you out over some unknown who had never done business with them before?

 

That doesn't ring true to me....

 

 

[MrBedrock]

I don't really understand why it needs to be called a "game."

True! It is very serious bidness!

 

Alright, smartypants. You better watch it, or I'll shake this rolled up Detective Comics #73 at you!

[Spider-Dan]

I agree with this post.

 

Maybe I missed this somewhere along the way but if CGC gets past the "trust me I didn't do anything to these" issue what are you expecting Dan?

 

The Books cost you a certain amount.

 

They are now worth a certain amount restored.

 

My assumption is that if some credit is worked out it would be Dan's cost into the books less what the books would sell for restored. And that credit would be grading credits, not a check.

 

 

Surprised you missed it Bob. Ive said it numerous times

 

1 - Please re-look at the books before shipping them out - They didn't

 

2 - Please adjust the charge to my CC, because the charge was for a 10K value, but they are not even worth a 1/3 of that - They didn't

 

I didn't think that was asking for much. Once this thread got to 50 pages, they agreed to do both

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

As I said before....

 

The real issue behind the issue is the market's reaction to purple labels.

 

Once that changes...if it changes...all these ancillary problems evaporate.

 

Bam. Been saying similar for years.

 

Says the guy with the restored Marvel Comics #1.

[VintageComics]

As I said before....

 

The real issue behind the issue is the market's reaction to purple labels.

 

Once that changes...if it changes...all these ancillary problems evaporate.

 

Bam. Been saying similar for years.

 

Says the guy with the restored Marvel Comics #1.

 

I don't own a restored Marvel Comics #1 and haven't for several years.

 

When I stated the same idea years ago (when I did own a restored MC #1) people accused me of having an agenda and being selfish, wanting to change the rules to line my own pockets.

 

Now I don't own any restored keys but still feel the same way. I wonder what my agenda is now?

[slym2none]

Give someone time, Roy - they'll find one for you.

 

 

 

 

-slym

[Old Fashion PB and J]

I agree with this post.

 

Maybe I missed this somewhere along the way but if CGC gets past the "trust me I didn't do anything to these" issue what are you expecting Dan?

 

The Books cost you a certain amount.

 

They are now worth a certain amount restored.

 

My assumption is that if some credit is worked out it would be Dan's cost into the books less what the books would sell for restored. And that credit would be grading credits, not a check.

 

 

Surprised you missed it Bob. Ive said it numerous times

 

1 - Please re-look at the books before shipping them out - They didn't

 

2 - Please adjust the charge to my CC, because the charge was for a 10K value, but they are not even worth a 1/3 of that - They didn't

 

I didn't think that was asking for much. Once this thread got to 50 pages, they agreed to do both

That is WRONG! They charged FMV for blue labels on purple labels. THAT is an issue.

[techtre2003]

As I said before....

 

The real issue behind the issue is the market's reaction to purple labels.

 

Once that changes...if it changes...all these ancillary problems evaporate.

 

Bam. Been saying similar for years.

 

Says the guy with the restored Marvel Comics #1.

 

I don't own a restored Marvel Comics #1 and haven't for several years.

 

When I stated the same idea years ago (when I did own a restored MC #1) people accused me of having an agenda and being selfish, wanting to change the rules to line my own pockets.

 

Now I don't own any restored keys but still feel the same way. I wonder what my agenda is now?

 

Shhh, don't ruin it for us folks with shallow pockets who couldn't care less about a little resto and gladly buy great looking "PLOD"s for a fraction of the cost.

[VintageComics]

Give someone time, Roy - they'll find one for you.

Oh, I'm sure they're circling ideas via PM as we speak.

[slym2none]

 

 

 

-slym

[USArmyParatrooper]

As I said before....

 

The real issue behind the issue is the market's reaction to purple labels.

 

Once that changes...if it changes...all these ancillary problems evaporate.

 

Bam. Been saying similar for years.

 

Says the guy with the restored Marvel Comics #1.

 

I don't own a restored Marvel Comics #1 and haven't for several years.

 

When I stated the same idea years ago (when I did own a restored MC #1) people accused me of having an agenda and being selfish, wanting to change the rules to line my own pockets.

 

Now I don't own any restored keys but still feel the same way. I wonder what my agenda is now?

 

Relax I was just joshing with you. You had one at comic con 2011, and I figured you had sold it by now. I didn't mean anything by it. Sheesh!

[Old Fashion PB and J]

Give someone time, Roy - they'll find one for you.

Oh, I'm sure they're circling ideas via PM as we speak.

You want purple labels to be accepted so that you can buy a bunch quickly and then maximize profit.

[blazingbob]

I did see the post where you asked for them to look at them and then a 1/2 later out they went.

 

Did you fax or send them the blue labels when asking for the adjustment? I'm not sure why CGC wouldn't have done this right off the bat when they were formerly blue.

[VintageComics]

Bingo. If this was initially handled confidentially it might have gone smoother. Once CGC was backed into the corner what did you expect would happen.

 

Unfortunately, CGC's PR team (whomever they are comprised of) just hasn't got the game it currently needs to handle stuff like this head on. I don't know how or who makes the PR decisions but it really is getting to the point where it is affecting their business negatively. I know, because if it's all over the internet it's affecting mine, and if it affects mine, it's going to affect theirs.

 

CGC has always spoken to me when I've called and always made time for me whenever I need an answer or to discuss something but they do need someone to step up and cover PR effectively, efficiently and clearly. It would mean a world of difference.

 

I'm not trying to paint Borock as god's gift to grading companies. He's a friend, a decent grader and a good guy just like Litch, Haspel, Caffery and the rest of the gang are. I know all of them personally. One thing that Steve is remembered by though is that he did PR really well. He tackled the bull by the horns, laid it out for everyone to see and did it all with a friendly demeanor. I'm not even sure it was his job as head grader, it was just his personality.

 

I think it's only a matter of time that a competitor steps up. People like good customer service and loyalty is built on relationships.

 

I understand that Mark is being retained in the capacity of PR but if he's too busy to post here when topics come up then that's not going to work. CGC really needs someone to spearhead PR issues and deal with them consistently and I believe they are large enough between all the umbrella grading companies to have someone like that on staff, at least as a partial role.

[VintageComics]

Relax I was just joshing with you. You had one at comic con 2011, and I figured you had sold it by now. I didn't mean anything by it. Sheesh!

 

Oh, I know you were kidding. I was just clarifying in case someone else didn't know you and me well enough.

 

And I forgot about that one! That was a gorgeous copy. Wish I could have kept it.

[october]

Everyone knows that a 9.4 and a 9.6 can switch places on any given day.

 

This is not quite accurate. An average 9.4 and an average 9.6 CANNOT switch places on any given day. A superior 9.4, and a below average 9.6 can.

 

I don't believe this to be true.

 

There are many examples of books that have moved two grade points (or more) upon a simple straight resub.

 

What I don't believe can happen is a book that was graded yesterday at 9.4 can be graded today at anything beyond the 9.2-9.6 range.

 

However, a book that was graded in 2002 could be pretty much anything if graded today.

 

Last year I got a 9.2 back that I immediately cracked and straight resubbed. It came back 9.6. It happens. Not often, but it happens. They are only human.