• 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

Comicopolis

Comicopolis

Posted
Posted
Is this thread about carpets and unicorn farts now?

 

And are both related?

 

There appears to be a direct correlation....

 

Have you ever smelled a carpet from the 70's?

 

 

I'm not into older women....

 

Just wait until you get older.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MatterEaterLad

MatterEaterLad

Posted
Posted
You're sending them books to sell, so it's understandable that you would care less in the long run.

 

I don't send in my books because I care less. I send in my books because it's really my only option when running an internet sales store. If course I care.

(shrug)

 

Sorry. I stated that poorly. CGC facilitates the ability to buy with confidence online. I get that. I buy online and appreciate knowing I'm getting a graded book.

 

As an individual collector (and not a dealer), slabbing is a personal expense, not a business expense, so I take their poor performance personally.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skypinkblu

skypinkblu

Posted
Posted
That book was never a 6.0 purple or blue.

 

Well, it was graded 6.0 blue twice and 7.0 purple once (not 6.0), but you have a point.

 

All possibly trimmed books should be put into gray labels.

 

Solved. ;)

 

 

But then what would people call them? GLOD is already taken, right?

 

GRODDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites
greggy

greggy

Posted
Posted
That book was never a 6.0 purple or blue.

 

Well, it was graded 6.0 blue twice and 7.0 purple once (not 6.0), but you have a point.

 

All possibly trimmed books should be put into gray labels.

 

Solved. ;)

 

 

But then what would people call them? GLOD is already taken, right?

 

GRODDs

:screwy:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skypinkblu

skypinkblu

Posted
Posted
That book was never a 6.0 purple or blue.

 

Well, it was graded 6.0 blue twice and 7.0 purple once (not 6.0), but you have a point.

 

All possibly trimmed books should be put into gray labels.

 

Solved. ;)

 

 

But then what would people call them? GLOD is already taken, right?

 

GRODDs

:screwy:

 

You are going to get tennis elbow if you keep that up;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Badger

Badger

Posted
Posted

If you knew how to do something which was in demand to the point where people paid you to do it based on the skill rather than just the labor, would you teach them how to do it?

 

That's how it works routinely in the Arts and Sciences.

 

For CGC though, not at all.

 

Not really. It depends on the area of art and science. If it's proprietary (like a biological firm's drug or medicinal secrets) they won't release it until they can monetize it.

 

 

Sad but true as I think we'd be much more advanced in those fields if there were more knowledge sharing going on.

 

You'd de- incentivize the entire industry. Without the prospect of a profitable monopoly you can't get the research funded. NOT sharing is what makes research possible 2c

 

That's definitely a point against it and I really do understand that. I still believe in a lot of a cases a better system could be developed which could benefit more people by the advancement of knowledge and still retain profitability. Greed just plays too big a part in the whole equation for that to happen.

 

Edit:

Here is a super simplified example of what I'm trying to say:

 

Company A puts $10 million into R&D for a specific drug that they predict will be a $20 million a year drug.

Company B is doing the same thing. Company A and Company B have both figured out a few different things working to create this drug that the other hasn't yet. They don't want to share that information because they don't want to share the $20 million a year they will get from the drug.

However, if they had worked together they could have put the drug on the market 2 years earlier, split the profits and be working on another project.

 

Again, over simplified but that's kind of the concept I was implying with the knowledge sharing being a beneficial thing.

What you are talking about happens all the time. I worked for a small biotech research firm and we had partnerships with Proctor and Gamble and SmithKline. When a major company, like P&E, puts out a new drug, process, or piece of equipment there is frequently a smaller partner in the wings making a profit off of it as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Badger

Badger

Posted
Posted

If you knew how to do something which was in demand to the point where people paid you to do it based on the skill rather than just the labor, would you teach them how to do it?

 

That's how it works routinely in the Arts and Sciences.

 

For CGC though, not at all.

 

Not really. It depends on the area of art and science. If it's proprietary (like a biological firm's drug or medicinal secrets) they won't release it until they can monetize it.

 

 

Arts and Sciences, not Industry.

 

Besides, academic scientists monetize their commercializable technologies through patents and the University technology transfer system. It doesn't stop them from teaching undergraduates, graduate students, post-doctoral fellows, and junior colleagues how to perform complex techniques they've mastered over many years, and how to think about how to select and address key scientific problems (the art of scientific investigation).

No, it does stop them. The engineering labs at large schools are quite top-secret with only the employed grad students and the employed post-docs knowing what is going on. They do not teach their findings until a patent is secured or a spin-off company is spun-up. They may even write a textbook and get profits from that.

 

The hard-science labs will publish findings in journals, it is a requirement to keep tenure, but you are smoking crack if you think these scientists aren't secretive about their experiments until they are ready to publish. Many, not all, but many file for patents before they publish. The patents usually belong to the University but the scientists get the praise and the tenure; occasionally they will even get a cut of profits when the patent, or company, sells.

 

Professors teach what is in the text books, "common knowledge", and profit off of their own research before sharing with the plebian undergrads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spider-Dan

Spider-Dan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Comics Guaranty LLC

 

We don't actually guarantee much, but we're a bit better at detecting resto than a few people.

 

Buy from us! (thumbs u

 

One thing that NEVER disappoints is your sig line (worship)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MetalPSI

MetalPSI

Posted
Posted
A guaranty is not a guarantee

 

Explain that drivel.

 

Its drivel, hence self explainatory :grin:

 

I tried three times to spell explainitory and give up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
A guaranty is not a guarantee

 

Explain that drivel.

Guarantee, vb. 1. To assure that a promise will be kept {the coach guaranteed that every boy on the team would play at least one inning}. 2. To agree to answer for another’s unpaid debt or other unfulfilled obligation {the father guaranteed his son’s car loan}. 3. To state with confidence {I guarantee that our client will be pleased with the settlement offer}.

 

Guarantee, n. The promise that an act will be carried out or a condition will be fulfilled {I will give you a written guarantee that the brief will be filed on time}.

 

Guaranty, n. The promise to pay the debt or fulfill the obligation of another if that person fails to do so {the father signed a guaranty for his son’s car loan}.

 

Guaranty formerly functioned also as a verb—a variant of guarantee—but that form is now obsolete. Guaranty should now be used only in its modern legal sense, as a noun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flaming_Telepath

Flaming_Telepath

Posted
Posted
A guaranty is not a guarantee

 

Explain that drivel.

Guarantee, vb. 1. To assure that a promise will be kept {the coach guaranteed that every boy on the team would play at least one inning}. 2. To agree to answer for another’s unpaid debt or other unfulfilled obligation {the father guaranteed his son’s car loan}. 3. To state with confidence {I guarantee that our client will be pleased with the settlement offer}.

 

Guarantee, n. The promise that an act will be carried out or a condition will be fulfilled {I will give you a written guarantee that the brief will be filed on time}.

 

Guaranty, n. The promise to pay the debt or fulfill the obligation of another if that person fails to do so {the father signed a guaranty for his son’s car loan}.

 

Guaranty formerly functioned also as a verb—a variant of guarantee—but that form is now obsolete. Guaranty should now be used only in its modern legal sense, as a noun.

 

Explain that drivel.

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