CGC Response on Suspected Ewert Books

[Transplant]

Hello everyone,

 

Please excuse the lengthy “shotgun” style post. We are going to address a few concerns that have been raised in various threads.

 

First, CGC’s policy has not changed since 2006 when Harshen posted the following:

 

As we stated in Sept of last year, CGC will review any CGC-certified book purchased from Jason Ewert (eBay id: ejanter) between September 2004 and September 2005. Other than shipping, there will be no charge for this review.

Please contact CGC Customer Service for submission instructions at submissions@cgccomics.com or 1-877-NM.COMICS.

 

Harshen Patel

V.P. of Operations

 

We still stand by this and it will be reposted as a sticky today. Why was it removed? Until books were sent in recently, CGC hadn’t been sent a single comic book purchased from Jason Ewert for review in over a year. This recent review submission was prompted because of the diligent attention of message board members, so we’re appreciative of these efforts.

 

Please email Harshen directly if you have concerns about specific books in your collection (hpatel@cgccomics.com). The list of submission numbers that have been compiled elsewhere is comprehensive, but also inaccurate. It is a list of books sold by Jason Ewert, not a list of those submitted by him. Only books submitted to CGC for certification by Ewert are eligible to be sent in for review. If you have a book on that list, contact Harshen and he will tell you if it should be reviewed.

 

Out of the number of books submitted by Jason Ewert that CGC has reviewed, the percentage found to be micro-trimmed is less than 10%.

 

Chat Board members have raised concerns regarding the detection of micro-trimming. Inherently, it is very hard to detect. Because of our significant attention to this form of alteration, we have developed a consistent methodology which we believe allows CGC to identify micro-trimming with a high degree of accuracy. While no one in our industry can promise to identify this type of alteration 100% of the time, I believe that our process is as good as any currently available. Are we going to reveal how to spot micro-trimming? Not on a chat board. That information might be used for dishonest purposes.

 

Some Chat Board members have put forth the misconception that CGC restoration designations have changed since we opened, specifically that restored books can be placed in a Universal Label. First, the important thing to note is that detected restoration is ALWAYS DISCLOSED by CGC. Our policy concerning whether a comic gets a Universal or Restored label is unchanged and our procedure for this has been on the back of each and every CGC label since we opened. On the back of the CGC label, the Certification Notice reads: “At the sole discretion of CGC, very minor color-touch or glue may be assigned a marked and color coded “Universal” label, however, a description of the detected restoration, in general or specific terms, will be disclosed.”

 

When restoration is detected by CGC, it is always disclosed on the CGC label in the “Grading Text” field, which is the line directly above the page quality description. A Universal Label might be used if it is a book from 1950 or earlier and has very minor amount of glue or color touch. Many of these books that we designated as a Universal have 1 or 2 dots of glue or color touch at the top or bottom spine. In every case it is very minor. In addition, CGC factors the minor restoration into the overall grade of the book by downgrading it 1 step from the grade it would otherwise receive.

 

If you have any specific questions, please call 1-877-662-6642; contact those of us that are on the boards via PM or contact us via email. Thanks.

 

Just wanted to make sure people saw this since the other thread is now locked where it first appeared.

[awe4one]

And I'll post my question here as well..

 

Plitch...if you say the Ewert submission list posted on this Board is in error, why don't you just release the Ewert submission list and save everyone some time? Why are you making the customers guess instead of proactively helping them to determine if they have an Ewert slab? That's the only way to put this issue to bed...

 

Jim

[Transplant]

We still stand by this and it will be reposted as a sticky today. Why was it removed? Until books were sent in recently, CGC hadn’t been sent a single comic book purchased from Jason Ewert for review in over a year. This recent review submission was prompted because of the diligent attention of message board members, so we’re appreciative of these efforts.

Is this because CGC checks the cert # of every re-sub it gets or b/c someone questioned about whether their book was a Ewert sub?

Please email Harshen directly if you have concerns about specific books in your collection (hpatel@cgccomics.com). The list of submission numbers that have been compiled elsewhere is comprehensive, but also inaccurate. It is a list of books sold by Jason Ewert, not a list of those submitted by him. Only books submitted to CGC for certification by Ewert are eligible to be sent in for review. If you have a book on that list, contact Harshen and he will tell you if it should be reviewed.

 

Out of the number of books submitted by Jason Ewert that CGC has reviewed, the percentage found to be micro-trimmed is less than 10%.

 

1) Why won't CGC simply release a list of the cert #s for books that were submitted by Ewert?

2) Why doesn't CGC proactively contact registry members who have such a book?

3) Is anyone else troubled that the % of Ewert submitted books, which were trimmed, is close to 10%?

 

I am thankful CGC has at least addressed the questions raised for weeks now. But frankly, I think the answer is lacking.

[joe_collector]

3) Is anyone else troubled that the % of Ewert submitted books, which were trimmed, is close to 10%?

 

No, those are only the micro-trimmed books that CGC has certified as being micro-trimmed, and by their own admission of not being able to catch them all, the real percentage will be higher.

[BlowUpTheMoon]

 

2) Why doesn't CGC proactively contact registry members who have such a book?

 

Excellent question. It seems like it would be very easy to accomplish.

[brasseye]

3) Is anyone else troubled that the % of Ewert submitted books, which were trimmed, is close to 10%?

 

No, those are only the micro-trimmed books that CGC has certified as being micro-trimmed, and by their own admission of not being able to catch them all, the real percentage will be higher.

 

Well in their defense, they know the books they need to be paying special attention to when they were/are returned.

And obviously if they can spot some, there is something about micro trimming that gives it away.

Therefore I suspect their revision work should have a fairly good strike rate

[Old Fashion PB and J]

This is going to be very interesting. When I read this stuff, I am actually happy with my modern/copper slabs ..

[Flaming_Telepath]

Oh, and another question for CGC...

 

Why is Tom Brulato no longer reimbursing purchase price in the event of a book being determined to have been trimmed?

[Transplant]

As we stated in Sept of last year, CGC will review any CGC-certified book purchased from Jason Ewert (eBay id: ejanter) between September 2004 and September 2005.

Please email Harshen directly if you have concerns about specific books in your collection (hpatel@cgccomics.com). The list of submission numbers that have been compiled elsewhere is comprehensive, but also inaccurate. It is a list of books sold by Jason Ewert, not a list of those submitted by him. Only books submitted to CGC for certification by Ewert are eligible to be sent in for review. If you have a book on that list, contact Harshen and he will tell you if it should be reviewed.

Not to keep going but the original post/offer to review seemed to concentrate on books sold by Ewert and not just those submitted to CGC by him. Which raises the following question:

 

Why was the 09/04 to 09/05 period chosen? Is there any reason to think that he didn't trim books before then or after then?

[mica]

... why don't you just release the Ewert submission list and save everyone some time?

[THE_BEYONDER]

Why must it always become a cat & mouse game with CGC? Good grief...

[buttock]

I have huge issues with this whole situation, primarily re: CGCs ability or inability to reliably detect trimming.

 

Most of the focus has been on whether or not they can detect it, and how hard it is to detect it. But what about mis-detection - i.e. calling a book trimmed when it isn't?

 

This push to have them all evaluated is operating on the assumption that it can (a) be detected with some degree of certainty, and (b) that this detection is valid.

 

Neither of those two points have been established, and I don't see them being established. Until they are, every Ewert book remains suspect regardless of what CGC says. Any "clearance" by CGC is a false security blanket.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

[JohnT]

I have huge issues with this whole situation, primarily re: CGCs ability or inability to reliably detect trimming.

 

Most of the focus has been on whether or not they can detect it, and how hard it is to detect it. But what about mis-detection - i.e. calling a book trimmed when it isn't?

 

This push to have them all evaluated is operating on the assumption that it can (a) be detected with some degree of certainty, and (b) that this detection is valid.

 

Neither of those two points have been established, and I don't see them being established. Until they are, every Ewert book remains suspect regardless of what CGC says. Any "clearance" by CGC is a false security blanket.

 

They say they have a reliable methodology. You either have to take them at their word or live with the ambiguity.

[buttock]

I've seen blatantly MACROtrimmed books in blue CGC holders. I don't take them at their word on this.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

This whole thing is very interesting..

[codfish]

Why was the 09/04 to 09/05 period chosen?

 

With no info from CGC in the public eye I would say that the two logical assumptions are:

 

1) They were told by Ewert the date range

 

2) Those are the earliest and latest dates they identified via resubmissions. Since they are a for profit company they wouldn't want the burden of taking all the books back in so they took a bit of a money saving approach.

 

Is there any reason to think that he didn't trim books before then or after then?

 

With no information from CGC as to why this range was chosen I would say that all Ewert books are suspect. The most logical, but costly, procedure would have been to basically recall all books submitted by Ewert and have them all checked. This, in absence of and admission by Ewert as to the actual range, would be the only way to confirm just what is suspect and what isn't. Even if they had an admission that should also be tempered by the fact that likely somewhere down the line Ewert likely lied to CGC and Brulato so any admitted range by him should also be suspect.

 

This is what I would guess anyway. Most companies would not want to do a recall but sometimes it is just the best course of action because the legal ramifications of not doing one could be far higher ... not to mention the loss in sales that could come from lack of confidence in the product.

[buttock]

I've seen blatantly MACROtrimmed books in blue CGC holders. I don't take them at their word on this.

 

I want to clarify that I'm not calling CGC "liars", simply that I don't think that anyone can reliably claim to detect or rule out trimming when done well. I think in some cases, there are probably tell-tale signs, but I'm sure there are probably just as many cases with no signs. Therefore a CGC "OK" doesn't mean it's not trimmed. Nor would an OK from anyone else.

[kc120us]

I've seen blatantly MACROtrimmed books in blue CGC holders. I don't take them at their word on this.

 

Buttock,

Have you made CGC aware of these blatant mistakes? Were there a lot of them? Were there any books that were indeed "mis-detected"? Did you make CGC aware of these? I'm just saying any company will make mistakes and it is up to us to make them aware of these mistakes so they can correct them and improve their product.

[kc120us]

I've seen blatantly MACROtrimmed books in blue CGC holders. I don't take them at their word on this.

 

I want to clarify that I'm not calling CGC "liars", simply that I don't think that anyone can reliably claim to detect or rule out trimming when done well. I think in some cases, there are probably tell-tale signs, but I'm sure there are probably just as many cases with no signs. Therefore a CGC "OK" doesn't mean it's not trimmed. Nor would an OK from anyone else.

 

That could be said of any person or company. No one or thing is 100% perfect or reliable. So then how do you define reliabilty? 99%? 95%? If you can't accept this, how do you live? Your car isn't 100% reliable. Your computer? So asking for 100% reliabilty in CGC is absolutely ridiculous. But, just because they are not 100% perfect, does not mean they are not reliable.