Ive lost ALL confidence in CGC - UPDATE on page 221 2 2

[RockMyAmadeus]

All of which is moot if none of those people look at the books.

 

There's a reason the wording was changed. It used to be "grader"...now it is "comic professional."

 

I'm not suggesting, in any way, that the actual graders are not the ones doing the grading. It is my belief that that's exactly what happens. But their warranty expressly states that this isn't necessarily the case. So, in that sense, FT is quite right.

 

If "comic professional A" and "comic professional B", neither of whom appear on that page, made the decision as to the grade of a book...that page has no meaning. And the warranty is expressly written to say that could very well be the case.

[Sqeggs]

Cheetah already named names, in a very interesting and informative golden age thread.

 

That was a good thread.

 

Thanks, but you'd have to leave the comforts of the Romper Room to read it. Some people don't get out enough.

 

I knew it. All this has really been about how the GA forum is superior to Comics General.

 

 

I thought that went without saying.

[mschmidt]

Who Is Grading Your Comics? Meet CGC’s Grading Team!

 

Not even close to enough people for the volume they do. They need to get their act together and stop being a mom&pop shop with everything they do.

 

They have more than enough income to do much much better. No excuses.

 

 

Which one of those is you?

 

 

My solve involvement with CGC is working for the Signature Series program at various shows throughout the year.

[VintageComics]

All of which is moot if none of those people look at the books.

 

There's a reason the wording was changed. It used to be "grader"...now it is "comic professional."

 

I'm not suggesting, in any way, that the actual graders are not the ones doing the grading. It is my belief that that's exactly what happens. But their warranty expressly states that this isn't necessarily the case. So, in that sense, FT is quite right.

 

If "comic professional A" and "comic professional B", neither of whom appear on that page, made the decision as to the grade of a book...that page has no meaning. And the warranty is expressly written to say that could very well be the case.

 

It was probably changed because it sounded better than pregrader.

 

[Sqeggs]

The first time I heard of CGC or anything like it was in an ad in the CBG looking to hire graders and other workers. At the time I thought it was a non-starter as fans wouldn't want their books encapsulated in plastic, but a few shop owners convinced me that the end result would be that I could call up a store in California and have them ship me a FF #1 sight unseen because it was in a plastic slab that stated it was a 6.0.

The whole idea behind CGC was to gain the ability to buy sight unseen, with confidence.

That seems a long time ago, these days.

 

This is the key. There is no way, imho, that prices would have taken off without CGC. There was too much monkey business going on with dealers "working" on high-dollar books for the market to have developed without an impartial third-party grader.

 

A return to the good old days of relying on supposedly trustworthy dealers selling raw books would lead to an implosion of prices, which is why there is no chance of its happening.

 

CGC provides a product most of us are happy to pay for ... given the alternatives.

[techtre2003]

Who Is Grading Your Comics? Meet CGC’s Grading Team!

 

Not even close to enough people for the volume they do. They need to get their act together and stop being a mom&pop shop with everything they do.

 

They have more than enough income to do much much better. No excuses.

 

 

Which one of those is you?

 

 

My solve involvement with CGC is working for the Signature Series program at various shows throughout the year.

 

Wow, that was just a joke, I really didn't know you worked with CGC. That explains some of your comments. And that's really not said to bash you, I'd be sticking up for them too in your case.

[techtre2003]

The first time I heard of CGC or anything like it was in an ad in the CBG looking to hire graders and other workers. At the time I thought it was a non-starter as fans wouldn't want their books encapsulated in plastic, but a few shop owners convinced me that the end result would be that I could call up a store in California and have them ship me a FF #1 sight unseen because it was in a plastic slab that stated it was a 6.0.

The whole idea behind CGC was to gain the ability to buy sight unseen, with confidence.

That seems a long time ago, these days.

 

This is the key. There is no way, imho, that prices would have taken off without CGC. There was too much monkey business going on with dealers "working" on high-dollar books for the market to have developed without an impartial third-party grader.

 

A return to the good old days of relying on supposedly trustworthy dealers selling raw books would lead to an implosion of prices, which is why there is no chance of its happening.

 

CGC provides a product most of us are happy to pay for ... given the alternatives.

 

One can only dream

[Sqeggs]

You're right, you can't remove humanity (yet), but you are still removing a variable by having a constant grader. Anytime you can remove a variable you are going to get more consistent results.

 

I agree

 

The difference is in how large the variable is, and is it worth their time and effort to

 

a) prevent graders from attending shows (I'm sure that CGC didn't pay for their head graders to fly off to Seattle without good reason)

b) hire and train more graders

c) pay them more

d) have them spend more time grading each separate book

3) charge more per book

 

The flip side of the coin is that you can ask the consumer the question: "Would you be willing to pay more for a better product?" The answer is usually a consistent "No." It's the way of the modern world. We want it all and we want it cheap and we want it now.

 

This can be shown by the outrage when CGC did change there prices a few years ago for the first time in nearly a decade.

 

I personally would pay more for a better service if it meant better service but then I'm usually in the minority.

 

Maybe it's because the prices being charged are *more than* the value that price provides to the average CGC consumer.

 

Example: a single 1976 Marvel comic book worth $100 in the slab costs $35 (before discount) while a single 1980 comic book worth $100 costs $18 (before discount.)

 

There is functionally no difference between that 1976 Marvel and that 1980 Marvel. It takes exactly the same amount of effort and cost to grade...but it's (almost) twice the price.

 

CGC has clearly demonstrated that they *can* grade that book for $18...so why do they charge almost double?

 

This isn't the only example, there are many such inconsistencies in the fee structure.

 

Uh, you do realize they are a monopoly, right?

[MatterEaterLad]

All of which is moot if none of those people look at the books.

 

There's a reason the wording was changed. It used to be "grader"...now it is "comic professional."

 

I'm not suggesting, in any way, that the actual graders are not the ones doing the grading. It is my belief that that's exactly what happens. But their warranty expressly states that this isn't necessarily the case. So, in that sense, FT is quite right.

 

If "comic professional A" and "comic professional B", neither of whom appear on that page, made the decision as to the grade of a book...that page has no meaning. And the warranty is expressly written to say that could very well be the case.

 

It was probably changed because it sounded better than pregrader.

 

 

Which sounds better than comic fluffer.

 

[sborock]

The first time I heard of CGC or anything like it was in an ad in the CBG looking to hire graders and other workers. At the time I thought it was a non-starter as fans wouldn't want their books encapsulated in plastic, but a few shop owners convinced me that the end result would be that I could call up a store in California and have them ship me a FF #1 sight unseen because it was in a plastic slab that stated it was a 6.0.

The whole idea behind CGC was to gain the ability to buy sight unseen, with confidence.

That seems a long time ago, these days.

 

Bingo! This is the ONLY reason I can see for CGC to exist. When it becomes: might be a 6.0 might be a 7.0, might be trimmed, might not that's where I fail to see the purpose.

 

The purpose of certification was to make it safer to buy and sell books. So, let's be clear here: I did not say "make it perfect", I said make it "safer", which it has. No one can question this if you were collecting high end books in the 70's, 80's, or 90's. (Unless you are in the anti-pressing group, but let's not start a pressing thread and take away from my points.)

 

I just read through all of this thread. Some of what I am going to write here, with some edits, was written in another thread a while back (shrunken covers) because it is faster for me to cut, paste and edit than having to write this "rant" from scratch.

 

First off, It's scary to me that collectors will now think that any book that looks/is miscut in a holder is now trimmed. I am in amazement at some of the things I have read on these boards.

 

I can tell when a book is trimmed most of the time. (A perfect micro trimming is almost impossible to detect without before and after scans, I don't care what anyone says, it's a 50/50 guess. I (we) will have to live with that, if we want to keep buying books from most dealers and collectors, certified or not). BTW....I also made sure I wrote "most of the time", because no one catches these things 100% of the time. No one.

 

Yes, this thread is about a bad mistake that happened. And guess what, if you are doing any job that involves going through many items, something will be missed (It also seems that the mistake seems to be in the process of being resolved. Very important!). For all we know, that book might have got through when it was me, Haspel, and Friesen grading the book early on. We caught so much restoration back then and, yes, a few books might have slipped through with good trimming. Hell, the micro trimmed books got past us and would have gotten past every dealer and collector I know. All that said, I really believe that the hobby is much better off now, with certification and these boards, then it was before. But, because when I was younger, I got screwed over a bunch of times, it made me study "collectible" comics to the point that I make very, very few mistakes these days. Sometimes, as John Hiatt would say, "That's how you learn, you just get burned". Which sucks, but it either makes you leave the hobby or gets you off your butt and learn, Every veteran hobbyist on these boards, has been burned.

 

Everyday I write my daughter a note that I put in her lunch bag, and on it I always write a quote before I write "Have a great day! I Love you!". One of those quotes I write quite often is "We learn and grow by our own mistakes." It just stinks when those mistakes in life cost us money or the enjoyment of something we love. I just want to enjoy our hobby.

End of

 

Peace,

-Steve

 

[mschmidt]

All of which is moot if none of those people look at the books.

 

There's a reason the wording was changed. It used to be "grader"...now it is "comic professional."

 

I'm not suggesting, in any way, that the actual graders are not the ones doing the grading. It is my belief that that's exactly what happens. But their warranty expressly states that this isn't necessarily the case. So, in that sense, FT is quite right.

 

If "comic professional A" and "comic professional B", neither of whom appear on that page, made the decision as to the grade of a book...that page has no meaning. And the warranty is expressly written to say that could very well be the case.

 

I think you're reading too much into the word "comic professional". You & I both know that Shawn Caffrey finalizes the modern books and Paul Litch does the same thing on the BA/SA/GA side - whilst nobody but CGC can be 100% sure who actually looks at the books before they get to the finalizer, it would be logical to assume that these "comic professionals" come from the pool of graders listed on the site. Which is a pretty far cry from the Orwellian "nameless employees" that FT rails against.

 

Then again, if someone wishes to believe that the CGC Grading Team page is purely a smokescreen and none of these people actually grade our books, I'm fairly certain nothing can be said that'll change their mind :shrug:

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

But then the customer has a legitimate argument to make against "paying a better price for a better service." The service isn't any better between the 1976 book and the 1980 book (and again...this happens up and down the fee structure), but the price is *already* nearly double.

 

And a point I didn't bring up: that 1976 book takes about 3.5 months start to finish, while that 1980 book takes a full month less. Slower service for almost double the price.

 

While you and I might know this, CGC doesn't have to explain or justify why they charge $X any more for grading a book than you or I need to for selling a book.

 

Granted. But the discussion wasn't about what CGC can or cannot, or should or should not, do. Your original contention was that CGC could consider raising prices to provide a better service.

 

But that suggestion fails if the price customers are paying *already* exceeds the value they are getting, real OR perceived. And, the uproar about raising prices after a set period of time may, in fact, be completely justified in that regard.

 

And clearly, the value they are getting for the service price for that 1976 book can't be considered reasonable, in the face of the facts about the 1980 book.

[TheLiamSturgess]

You're right, you can't remove humanity (yet), but you are still removing a variable by having a constant grader. Anytime you can remove a variable you are going to get more consistent results.

 

I agree

 

The difference is in how large the variable is, and is it worth their time and effort to

 

a) prevent graders from attending shows (I'm sure that CGC didn't pay for their head graders to fly off to Seattle without good reason)

b) hire and train more graders

c) pay them more

d) have them spend more time grading each separate book

3) charge more per book

 

The flip side of the coin is that you can ask the consumer the question: "Would you be willing to pay more for a better product?" The answer is usually a consistent "No." It's the way of the modern world. We want it all and we want it cheap and we want it now.

 

This can be shown by the outrage when CGC did change there prices a few years ago for the first time in nearly a decade.

 

I personally would pay more for a better service if it meant better service but then I'm usually in the minority.

 

Maybe it's because the prices being charged are *more than* the value that price provides to the average CGC consumer.

 

Example: a single 1976 Marvel comic book worth $100 in the slab costs $35 (before discount) while a single 1980 comic book worth $100 costs $18 (before discount.)

 

There is functionally no difference between that 1976 Marvel and that 1980 Marvel. It takes exactly the same amount of effort and cost to grade...but it's (almost) twice the price.

 

CGC has clearly demonstrated that they *can* grade that book for $18...so why do they charge almost double?

 

This isn't the only example, there are many such inconsistencies in the fee structure.

 

Uh, you do realize they are a monopoly, right?

 

Actually, they're not - a monopoly would imply they're the only game in town. They are not. PGX is still making enough money to stay in business and their books are at every show and all over eBay.

 

They suck professionally, but they still command a small portion of the market.

 

A quick Google search on the definition: "the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service."

 

Sorry, I know it's a nitpicky thing to point out, but I think we're giving CGC a little too much credit here.

 

That being said, I don't think PGX and CGC are on the same level. PGX is shady, shady, shady.

[VintageComics]

 

But then the customer has a legitimate argument to make against "paying a better price for a better service." The service isn't any better between the 1976 book and the 1980 book (and again...this happens up and down the fee structure), but the price is *already* nearly double.

 

And a point I didn't bring up: that 1976 book takes about 3.5 months start to finish, while that 1980 book takes a full month less. Slower service for almost double the price.

 

While you and I might know this, CGC doesn't have to explain or justify why they charge $X any more for grading a book than you or I need to for selling a book.

 

Granted. But the discussion wasn't about what CGC can or cannot, or should or should not, do. Your original contention was that CGC could consider raising prices to provide a better service.

 

But that suggestion fails if the price customers are paying *already* exceeds the value they are getting, real OR perceived. And, the uproar about raising prices after a set period of time may, in fact, be completely justified in that regard.

 

And clearly, the value they are getting for the service price for that 1976 book can't be considered reasonable, in the face of the facts about the 1980 book.

 

The 'value they are getting' is a grey area and subjective to experience and personal interest.

 

And it wasn't my point to suggest CGC needs to raise prices, rather I was trying to show that most businesses try to find a balance between the charges the offer to their customer and a relationship.

 

There is no 'perfect', absolute, black and white formula in this economy. charge.

 

Some things work better than others and I would say the pricing of the grading tiers fall under that statement.

 

There is only what the customer will pay...and as long as people keep paying CGC will continue to

 

 

[techtre2003]

You're right, you can't remove humanity (yet), but you are still removing a variable by having a constant grader. Anytime you can remove a variable you are going to get more consistent results.

 

I agree

 

The difference is in how large the variable is, and is it worth their time and effort to

 

a) prevent graders from attending shows (I'm sure that CGC didn't pay for their head graders to fly off to Seattle without good reason)

b) hire and train more graders

c) pay them more

d) have them spend more time grading each separate book

3) charge more per book

 

The flip side of the coin is that you can ask the consumer the question: "Would you be willing to pay more for a better product?" The answer is usually a consistent "No." It's the way of the modern world. We want it all and we want it cheap and we want it now.

 

This can be shown by the outrage when CGC did change there prices a few years ago for the first time in nearly a decade.

 

I personally would pay more for a better service if it meant better service but then I'm usually in the minority.

 

Maybe it's because the prices being charged are *more than* the value that price provides to the average CGC consumer.

 

Example: a single 1976 Marvel comic book worth $100 in the slab costs $35 (before discount) while a single 1980 comic book worth $100 costs $18 (before discount.)

 

There is functionally no difference between that 1976 Marvel and that 1980 Marvel. It takes exactly the same amount of effort and cost to grade...but it's (almost) twice the price.

 

CGC has clearly demonstrated that they *can* grade that book for $18...so why do they charge almost double?

 

This isn't the only example, there are many such inconsistencies in the fee structure.

 

Uh, you do realize they are a monopoly, right?

 

Actually, they're not - a monopoly would imply they're the only game in town. They are not. PGX is still making enough money to stay in business and their books are at every show and all over eBay.

 

They suck professionally, but they still command a small portion of the market.

 

A quick Google search on the definition: "the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service."

 

Sorry, I know it's a nitpicky thing to point out, but I think we're giving CGC a little too much credit here.

 

That being said, I don't think PGX and CGC are on the same level. PGX is shady, shady, shady.

That might be the literal definition, but that's not how it's used in business. Microsoft was found to have a "monopoly" on operating systems while there were plenty of alternatives around.

[Bomber-Bob]

I have already stated I liked CGC's and Paul's response. The book slipped through and they are human. It's okay.

However,

The grade went from 6.0 to 7.0 to 6.0.

The page quality went from OW to OW/W to OW.

And of course Blue to Purple to Blue.

Regarding standards and consistency, the one that bothers me the most is

the grade variance. This book had one specific flaw, a color breaking, vertical, book length crease along the spine. If there are standards, how does this one flaw go from 6.0 to 7.0 to 6.0 ?.

I repeat, If there are standards, how does this one flaw go from 6.0 to 7.0 to 6.0 ?

[Sqeggs]

The first time I heard of CGC or anything like it was in an ad in the CBG looking to hire graders and other workers. At the time I thought it was a non-starter as fans wouldn't want their books encapsulated in plastic, but a few shop owners convinced me that the end result would be that I could call up a store in California and have them ship me a FF #1 sight unseen because it was in a plastic slab that stated it was a 6.0.

The whole idea behind CGC was to gain the ability to buy sight unseen, with confidence.

That seems a long time ago, these days.

 

This is the key. There is no way, imho, that prices would have taken off without CGC. There was too much monkey business going on with dealers "working" on high-dollar books for the market to have developed without an impartial third-party grader.

 

A return to the good old days of relying on supposedly trustworthy dealers selling raw books would lead to an implosion of prices, which is why there is no chance of its happening.

 

CGC provides a product most of us are happy to pay for ... given the alternatives.

 

One can only dream

 

I have to come down on Cheetah's side in the debate some pages back over CGC's consistency v. big dealers' consistency. In my decades in the hobby I've bought a lot of books from a lot of dealers and I've never found anyone who is always spot on. (Of course, maybe they are and I just can't tell! )

 

They're human, sometimes they grade while bored, tired, or distracted, there are honest differences of opinion in how much a grade should be dinged for a particular defect, and so on. CGC's consistency seems reasonable to me in the context of how grading is done in the hobby.

 

Of course -- a point I made in another thread -- for high-dollar books, the strategy the OP (among many others) employs of cracking and resubmitting seemingly undergraded books results, over time, in high-dollar books being pushed towards the high-end of the range of their plausible grades.

[CBT]

Who Is Grading Your Comics? Meet CGC’s Grading Team!

 

Not even close to enough people for the volume they do. They need to get their act together and stop being a mom&pop shop with everything they do.

 

They have more than enough income to do much much better. No excuses.

 

 

as a mod, its not like you are an unbiased poster

[kav]

You're right, you can't remove humanity (yet), but you are still removing a variable by having a constant grader. Anytime you can remove a variable you are going to get more consistent results.

 

I agree

 

The difference is in how large the variable is, and is it worth their time and effort to

 

a) prevent graders from attending shows (I'm sure that CGC didn't pay for their head graders to fly off to Seattle without good reason)

b) hire and train more graders

c) pay them more

d) have them spend more time grading each separate book

3) charge more per book

 

The flip side of the coin is that you can ask the consumer the question: "Would you be willing to pay more for a better product?" The answer is usually a consistent "No." It's the way of the modern world. We want it all and we want it cheap and we want it now.

 

This can be shown by the outrage when CGC did change there prices a few years ago for the first time in nearly a decade.

 

I personally would pay more for a better service if it meant better service but then I'm usually in the minority.

 

Maybe it's because the prices being charged are *more than* the value that price provides to the average CGC consumer.

 

Example: a single 1976 Marvel comic book worth $100 in the slab costs $35 (before discount) while a single 1980 comic book worth $100 costs $18 (before discount.)

 

There is functionally no difference between that 1976 Marvel and that 1980 Marvel. It takes exactly the same amount of effort and cost to grade...but it's (almost) twice the price.

 

CGC has clearly demonstrated that they *can* grade that book for $18...so why do they charge almost double?

 

This isn't the only example, there are many such inconsistencies in the fee structure.

 

Uh, you do realize they are a monopoly, right?

 

Actually, they're not - a monopoly would imply they're the only game in town. They are not. PGX is still making enough money to stay in business and their books are at every show and all over eBay.

 

They suck professionally, but they still command a small portion of the market.

 

A quick Google search on the definition: "the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service."

 

Sorry, I know it's a nitpicky thing to point out, but I think we're giving CGC a little too much credit here.

 

That being said, I don't think PGX and CGC are on the same level. PGX is shady, shady, shady.

It's an effective monopoly. I still think no real company could do better. A theoretical company, yes. A real company, no.

[RockMyAmadeus]

By the way....what Steve Borock says is absolutely true:

 

For any of you who did not buy and sell comics prior to CGC, especially in the 90's when prices had risen to the 4 and 5 digits for most high grade, key books, it really, really, REALLY was the bad old days.

 

I shudder to think how many people paid $10,000+ for high grade, key Gold and Silver books in the 90's, and STILL haven't recovered what they paid (and much, much worse) after finding out, sometimes decades later, that the book had been restored. It was just heartbreaking.

 

For all its faults, CGC has provided a much SAFER trading environment, and for that, the market should always be very, very grateful.