• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

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

Started by Spider-Dan,

2,401 posts in this topic

MetalPSI

MetalPSI

Posted
Posted
I have noticed that anyonemost who has anything to do with the money that CGC brings in posts in noncomittal ways and is vague.

.

 

That's not entirely true.

 

I have something to do with the money that CGC brings in, having a good chunk of my income from slabbed books, and I have posted very committed and very specific posts.

 

I don't want CGC to fail. I want them to get better. Right now, they lack the incentive to do that.

 

Fixed and I agree, I don't wish to see anyone fail. It would be nice to have a company dedicated to customer support though and be able to shoot straight. Having a product that is impeccable would be nice too.

 

But like I have stated elsewhere, its mostly the customers fault companies cannot tell it like it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brendanb438

brendanb438

Posted
Posted
There are definitely folks on here who see this as no big deal, which surprises me.

 

But...they hearken back to the dark days of doctored books and rampant trimming, amateur color touch with sharpies, etc, and feel like CGC's mistakes are far outweighed by what they've brought to the collecting world--namely the ability to buy with confidence online and record sales.

 

I get all that.

 

I still like the idea of an external CGC audit to gauge what the variance is with resubs. I'm guessing it's in the 15%+ range, rather than the 1-2% range.

 

I don't think the frequent comment of, "If you're not happy with your grade, just resub it" would be so common if the variance was only 1-2%.

 

(shrug)

 

I don't think there's anyone in this thread who doesn't see this as a significant screw-up from CGC's side (aka "a big deal") ...

 

But, yes, I personally don't think a mistake like this somehow invalidates all the benefits that CGC have brought to this hobby :shrug:

 

As for the 15%+ range, I'd say you're way off there - look at the SS forum, for instance. That forum is basically comprised of people who crack & re-slab books over & over again and there's a new "how often do your SS books change grades"-thread every 6 months or so. None of those threads have ever displayed a level of variance anywhere near those 15% - nor have I experienced this myself with the 300-400 books I've personally cracked for SS. Roy's 1-2% variance seems spot on as far as I can tell.

 

It all makes sense now about you being a CGC Mod. When I got the chance to meet you in person and you had on that t-shirt that said "I'm a CGC Mod sucka!" I didn't put two and two together.

 

:insane:

 

CBT can I be a CGC Mod also in your eyes?

 

Now Dre introducing himself to me as JJ was pretty damn funny also. If only I didn't actually know JJ I might have went along with it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
Restoration can't be detected reliably. Accept it and move along. Nothing to see here....

 

Most restoration can be detected reliably by people who have studied restoration. Reliably does not mean 100% as there is a human factor involved.

 

I can sometimes tell if a book is restored from 4 feet away. Sometimes I need a loop to confirm what I think might have been done to a book. Once in awhile I miss something.

 

If you are looking for perfection, then, yes, move along. The only place it exists is Fantasy Land.

 

Many collectors learn from reading the boards, so there is always something to see here......

 

my tongue was firmly in cheek for the number of people who apparently can't accept missed restoration and human error in this thread and thus get off the cgc criticism and move on from this thread ...not the boards :D

 

You're missing the point. As has been noted before, many people, especially those who put down large sums of money for comics, have educated themselves in restoration and grading. The problem comes when a potential buyer cannot examine a book for themselves, using their own education (whatever level it may be) to decide if the book is restored or not.

 

In that regard, CGC (and any other grading company worth anything; currently none) HAS to be near-perfect in detecting it, because by encasing it, they've (mostly) removed the ability for the buyer to investigate on his own.

 

It's not about making mistakes. No one that I have seen has ever said "CGC must be perfect, always, period." It's about how you go about fixing those mistakes. And if CGC makes such a mistake, they must be prepared to rigorously confront it and resolve it to the satisfaction of all parties involved, precisely because every buyer must (nearly always) accept CGC's word that a book isn't or is restored. There are literally millions (if not billions) of dollars resting on that reputation.

 

It is, after all, why they've been paid to do what they do for the last 15 years. For all the thousands upon thousands of books that people have paid them to grade, part of that is "mistake insurance."

 

It is the way that CGC addresses these situations that is being criticized, not that the situations exist.

 

They don't have to address it. They cover themselves on the certification notice. And I quote....

 

"A good faith effort is made to detect restoration, but CGC does not warrant the process or the results."

 

Warrant = Guarantee.

 

1HWQIPa.gif

 

 

 

 

You should probably read the whole thread.

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Speedy-D

Speedy-D

Posted
Posted

 

Someone buys a book that was graded, EXPECTING it to grade higher...expecting the SAME company to grade it higher. He said he thought it would be a 6.5.

There is a risk factor there, Dan has said that...sometimes he "wins" sometimes he loses...but isn't his whole business model based on the fact that he does NOT expect CGC to be consistent?

If he kept the book slabbed as a 6.0, he wouldn't have lost a thing.

The book could have come back a 5.5, would he have been damaged then?

When something is slightly inconsistent, it doesn't always mean it's going to be a higher grade.

Risk/Reward...it's a gambling term.

People who actually buy things based on the expected inconsistencies in grading are gambling.

I'm sure it's a small percentage, but there are people who scour slabs for the gamble. You don't always win when you gamble...this time it was just a little odder than the normal risks because of the color label change.

There are always going to be inconsistencies where humans are involved.

More risk for the potential reward.

[/color]

 

Sharon speaks the truth here. The resub game exists soley because of CGC's propensity for inconsistency. The game isn't necessarily rigged when it goes against you. It's just gambling, period.

If you want a more regulated playing field try stocks, more specifically stock options. You don't need a big bankroll to play options. I'd rather make my money there and spend it on comics. :makepoint:

 

I don't entirely agree with this assessment. Yes, CPR exists because of CGC's inconsistency, but also because CGC grading is not as strict as it was in the past.

:gossip: That's called inconsistency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bomber-Bob

Bomber-Bob

Posted
Posted
Agree with PHAMPTON 100%

 

Self-deleted post or removed? hm

 

It was lengthy, but I took from it that some vote with their voice, and others with their wallets.

 

Be the change you wish to see :D

 

I had posted a response to the PHAMPTON thread that is now gone. It looks like his thread and everything after it was deleted ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BeachBum

BeachBum

Posted
Posted
There are definitely folks on here who see this as no big deal, which surprises me.

 

But...they hearken back to the dark days of doctored books and rampant trimming, amateur color touch with sharpies, etc, and feel like CGC's mistakes are far outweighed by what they've brought to the collecting world--namely the ability to buy with confidence online and record sales.

 

I get all that.

 

I still like the idea of an external CGC audit to gauge what the variance is with resubs. I'm guessing it's in the 15%+ range, rather than the 1-2% range.

 

I don't think the frequent comment of, "If you're not happy with your grade, just resub it" would be so common if the variance was only 1-2%.

 

(shrug)

 

I don't think there's anyone in this thread who doesn't see this as a significant screw-up from CGC's side (aka "a big deal") ...

 

But, yes, I personally don't think a mistake like this somehow invalidates all the benefits that CGC have brought to this hobby :shrug:

 

As for the 15%+ range, I'd say you're way off there - look at the SS forum, for instance. That forum is basically comprised of people who crack & re-slab books over & over again and there's a new "how often do your SS books change grades"-thread every 6 months or so. None of those threads have ever displayed a level of variance anywhere near those 15% - nor have I experienced this myself with the 300-400 books I've personally cracked for SS. Roy's 1-2% variance seems spot on as far as I can tell.

 

It all makes sense now about you being a CGC Mod. When I got the chance to meet you in person and you had on that t-shirt that said "I'm a CGC Mod sucka!" I didn't put two and two together.

 

:insane:

 

CBT can I be a CGC Mod also in your eyes?

 

Now Dre introducing himself to me as JJ was pretty damn funny also. If only I didn't actually know JJ I might have went along with it. :)

 

Maybe it was Dre when you first met JJ?

 

:baiting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
Agree with PHAMPTON 100%

 

Self-deleted post or removed? hm

 

It was lengthy, but I took from it that some vote with their voice, and others with their wallets.

 

Be the change you wish to see :D

 

Cool. No need to repost it. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MatterEaterLad

MatterEaterLad

Posted
Posted
Agree with PHAMPTON 100%

 

Self-deleted post or removed? hm

 

It was lengthy, but I took from it that some vote with their voice, and others with their wallets.

 

Be the change you wish to see :D

 

Cool. No need to repost it. (thumbs u

 

Wow. My one sentence response was deleted. Didn't say anything bad. Just mentioned why I thought Phantom's post was poofed. And poof...my post goes bye-bye as well.

 

 

(shrug)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted
Agree with PHAMPTON 100%

 

Self-deleted post or removed? hm

 

It was lengthy, but I took from it that some vote with their voice, and others with their wallets.

 

Be the change you wish to see :D

 

Cool. No need to repost it. (thumbs u

 

The cache feature is temporary so if you want to repost it for posterity, feel free (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted
Agree with PHAMPTON 100%

 

Self-deleted post or removed? hm

 

It was lengthy, but I took from it that some vote with their voice, and others with their wallets.

 

Be the change you wish to see :D

 

Cool. No need to repost it. (thumbs u

 

Wow. My one sentence response was deleted. Didn't say anything bad. Just mentioned why I thought Phantom's post was poofed. And poof...my post goes bye-bye as well.

 

 

(shrug)

 

CGC can poof this! :sumo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2
Go to topic listing