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

[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?

 

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.

 

Nah, effectively they are monopoly. PGX provides competition for CGC they same way a company selling candles provides competition to the electric company.

[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.

 

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

 

 

You just want to argue.

 

There ARE lots of "value grey areas", but I don't see how you can argue that the value is a "grey area" in my example. But, ok.

 

[techtre2003]

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.

 

Point taken there, I don't know what it was like since in the early 90s I was a kid buying comics off the spinner rack at the gas station.

[RockMyAmadeus]

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?

 

Here's the pertinent part:

 

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.

 

To which my answer is "the reason it is "No" isn't necessarily because the customers are cheap, but that the value for the price paid may not be there", to which I added a clearcut example, complete with rhetorical question at the end to illustrate it.

[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.

 

Nah, effectively they are monopoly. PGX provides competition for CGC they same way a company selling candles provides competition to the electric company.

 

Fair point.

[cheetah]

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 ?

 

If you want to hammer CGC about consistency issues, go after page quality. A good press of a previously graded book will more times than not get you a PQ boost, too. Old label books are almost invariably graded with lower PQ than the same book today. Of course, now PQ is considered more in the grade than it was at first, too.

[Hammerhead]

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 ?

 

I see you have brought this up a few times....unfortuanetly no ones seems to want to discuss this. I find this hard to swallow as well....especially on such a high priced comic.

[ComicConnoisseur]

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 ?

 

I see you have brought this up a few times....unfortuanetly no ones seems to want to discuss this. I find this hard to swallow as well....especially on such a high priced comic.

If someone can screw up 6.0 to 7.0 to 6.0,then what makes people think that a 9.6 to 9.8 can`t be screwed up as well?

[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.

 

 

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

 

You know you're beginning to make Kav look like the sane one, right? :doh:

 

You got a well-deserved strike (what was it - a year ago or something?), you're still sore about it and you seem to believe I had something to do with it. I didn't. Deal with it & move on.

[RockMyAmadeus]

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 ?

 

I see you have brought this up a few times....unfortuanetly no ones seems to want to discuss this. I find this hard to swallow as well....especially on such a high priced comic.

If someone can screw up 6.0 to 7.0 to 6.0,then what makes people think that a 9.6 to 9.8 can`t be screwed up as well?

 

Because it's not a "screw up."

 

It's an opinion, of *this* book, at *this* time, on *this* day.

 

And yes, you're perfectly right: a 9.6 and 9.8 can often be interchangeable.

[kav]

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

 

You know you're beginning to make Kav look like the sane one, right? :doh:

 

You got a well-deserved strike (what was it - a year ago or something?), you're still sore about it and you seem to believe I had something to do with it. I didn't. Deal with it & move on.

If you are a mod, using a member as a term of insult is highly unprofessional.

[VintageComics]

Here's the pertinent part:

 

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.

 

To which my answer is "the reason it is "No" isn't necessarily because the customers are cheap, but that the value for the price paid may not be there", to which I added a clearcut example, complete with rhetorical question at the end to illustrate it.

 

I really don't want to argue. I want to leave this discussion.

 

I think we both agree on most things but we are often just slightly talking past ourselves but I can't spend all day here.

 

That's kav's job now.

 

 

[seanfingh]

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

 

You know you're beginning to make Kav look like the sane one, right? :doh:

 

You got a well-deserved strike (what was it - a year ago or something?), you're still sore about it and you seem to believe I had something to do with it. I didn't. Deal with it & move on.

If you are a mod, using a member as a term of insult is highly unprofessional.

 

That works out great, because he isn't a mod.

[ComicConnoisseur]

 

i'd bet $1,000. that if i resubbed my 3 books that i think are questionably touched, at least one would come back blue

 

This scares me. It appears CGC is going to be bombarded with resubmitted

PLOD's, trying to slip it past them, and then come on here and say 'I told you so'. I hope all of you waste a lot of money and still get the PLOD and a lower grade.

CGC, if you are listening, to put a stop to all this nonsense I would start grading tight, tight, tight. Let the resubs take a beating and slow this train down for a while.

 

I would think having a system in place to really check any books submitted from the top 100 Golden Age, top 50 Silver Age and Top 20 Bronze Age get compared to scans of previously graded comics in similar grade. Or maybe all comics worth $5,000 or more. With the technology today it shouldn't be that difficult or time consuming, should it? Maybe have a hit list using census data of books that have a high number of restored copies that get extra scrutiny. Something like that might help with consistency.

 

May biggest issues are with the ability or lack thereof to detect restoration and what is or is not being done to address the problem.

 

I would also like to know who submitted the book the last time and get their side. Or at least I would like to know if this is a high volume CGC customer or someone that just submits a few comics to be graded. Taking a risk of getting a high value comic downgraded to become less valuable seems like something that a person who has only submitted a few comics to CGC would NOT do. Big risk to roll the dice unless you are fairly sure of the outcome before you do it.

I like your ideas. (thumbs u

If anyone of your ideas got implemented they would be a game changer, unfortunately though your ideas will be pushed under the rug, and a year from now there will be another big goof by CGC without anything really being done.

"Wash, rinse, repeat"

Edited April 2, 2014 by ComicConnoisseur

[kav]

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

 

You know you're beginning to make Kav look like the sane one, right? :doh:

 

You got a well-deserved strike (what was it - a year ago or something?), you're still sore about it and you seem to believe I had something to do with it. I didn't. Deal with it & move on.

If you are a mod, using a member as a term of insult is highly unprofessional.

 

That works out great, because he isn't a mod.

Why does everyone keep saying that?? That he's a mod???

[VintageComics]

To which my answer is "the reason it is "No" isn't necessarily because the customers are cheap, but that the value for the price paid may not be there"

 

And I would disagree with you. The average North American consumer is thrifty (cheap sounds demeaning and I don't want to offend anybody).

 

Just look at all the coupons, rewards programs, surveys, freebies, lotto purchases, etc. These things drive a huge portion of the economy.

 

Look at black Monday and Boxing day shopping. and

 

This capitalistic, industrial society is in a constant death spiral towards cheaper at the expense of quality. Perceived quality is all that matters. But that's a discussion for another forum.

 

 

[seanfingh]

Not everything that gets typed on the Internet is true.

[chrisco37]

 

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

 

 

Just in case people missed it

 

(RMA saw it, but nobody else has commented yet).

 

 

[kav]

Not everything that gets typed on the Internet is true.

I know but I'm just wondering why someone would think that-what clues led them to believe such a thing etc...

[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.

 

 

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

 

You know you're beginning to make Kav look like the sane one, right? :doh:

 

You got a well-deserved strike (what was it - a year ago or something?), you're still sore about it and you seem to believe I had something to do with it. I didn't. Deal with it & move on.

If you are a mod, using a member as a term of insult is highly unprofessional.

 

That works out great, because he isn't a mod.

Why does everyone keep saying that?? That he's a mod???

 

It's just CBT

 

He got a strike for threatening someone, I happened to see what he posted prior to it getting yanked, ergo I must be CGCMod0 in a cunning disguise. Yeah, doesn't make sense to me either.