Grader Notes

[LWM-migration]

This is outrageous that I send in a book at lets say the $60 tier and I receive a 6.5 and I have to pay an additional amount of money to find out how they came to that grade. I deserve as a paying customer who also paid a fee to join the "club" why the book graded the way it did. It's bad enough that they charge a price for a turn around time and can't honer it. How many companies would not then say they are sorry and then offer you a refund of some kind. You pay for 40 business days and now they post it's going to be more like 100 days. Yup, that's what happens when there is no competition. To think that a company can do so many things to alienate it's customer base with so little regard for them is mind boggling.

[COI]

Yup, that's what happens when there is no competition.

 

There's that, and there's also the fact that collectors behave like addicts.

[Racer-X]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here between what buyers want and what they're entitled to under the terms of service. The two aren't the same, people.

Yup. It's sort of like buying a cake from a bakery and saying you should also get the recipe free of charge.

 

Unless the bakery used to include the recipe, and then removed it, it is a poor analogy.

I always just saw the notes as a courtesy occasionally provided by CGC. That's why they've always limited the number of note requests somebody could make.

 

I have no idea how people have gotten the idea that sharing the notes are part of CGC's service. As far as I know, they've never advertised the service. They never listed it on their website until they decided to charge for the service.

 

Show me where CGC ever promised to make notes part of their normal service. They never have. It's presumptuous to think that you're entitled to the notes free of charge.

 

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I agree.

 

The notes are part and parcel of what is being paid for by the submitter. It's a list of defects that quantify the big, fat fingh number in the upper left. That number has been paid for, therefore, so have the notes that gave it rise.

 

So when somebody fixes your car, you bought the wrench, too?

 

No, but you're entitled to the details of the service you received. Would anyone take their car in for scheduled maintenance and pay the bill without an understanding of what was actually done to the car?

 

Exactly. Tho a devil's advocate could argue that this analogy is more applicable to a restorer's need to tell you what he/she's done to your book, not by an evaluator of a condition.

 

That said, I am only arguing that proper notes should have always been taken, and should be provided to members as good business.

 

 

[joeypost]

A more proper analogy would be if I expected to receive the slabbing machine along with my graded book... the answer would be no.

 

I would take an encapsulation machine over notes anyday.

[COI]

A more proper analogy would be if I expected to receive the slabbing machine along with my graded book... the answer would be no.

 

The problem seems to be that some people are looking at CGC's service as buying encapsulation and a number, not an evaluation.

[DrWatson]

A more proper analogy would be if I expected to receive the slabbing machine along with my graded book... the answer would be no.

 

The problem seems to be that some people are looking at CGC's service as buying encapsulation and a number, not an evaluation.

It's all three.

[Ghost Town]

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I can understand that line of thinking more than the idea that anybody is entitled to the notes free of charge, in perpetuity, for the rest of CGC's and mankind's existence.

 

Here's some random and completely unfounded speculation and on my part. But hey, it's Comics General and that seems to be pretty normal around here. I wouldn't be surprised if the people that are complaining the loudest are the people that called for the notes most often and are part of the reason CGC decided to start charging for the notes. Maybe CGC got tired of giving the notes and their time away.

[DrWatson]

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I can understand that line of thinking more than the idea that anybody is entitled to the notes free of charge, in perpetuity, for the rest of CGC's and mankind's existence.

 

Here's some random and completely unfounded speculation and on my part. But hey, it's Comics General and that seems to be pretty normal around here. I wouldn't be surprised if the people that are complaining the loudest are the people that called for the notes most often and are part of the reason CGC decided to start charging for the notes. Maybe CGC got tired of giving the notes and their time away.

I haven't seen Schmell, Brulato, or Lauterbach posting at all.

[Flaming_Telepath]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here between what buyers want and what they're entitled to under the terms of service. The two aren't the same, people.

Yup. It's sort of like buying a cake from a bakery and saying you should also get the recipe free of charge.

 

Unless the bakery used to include the recipe, and then removed it, it is a poor analogy.

I always just saw the notes as a courtesy occasionally provided by CGC. That's why they've always limited the number of note requests somebody could make.

 

I have no idea how people have gotten the idea that sharing the notes are part of CGC's service. As far as I know, they've never advertised the service. They never listed it on their website until they decided to charge for the service.

 

Show me where CGC ever promised to make notes part of their normal service. They never have. It's presumptuous to think that you're entitled to the notes free of charge.

 

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I agree.

 

The notes are part and parcel of what is being paid for by the submitter. It's a list of defects that quantify the big, fat fingh number in the upper left. That number has been paid for, therefore, so have the notes that gave it rise.

 

So when somebody fixes your car, you bought the wrench, too?

 

No, but you're entitled to the details of the service you received. Would anyone take their car in for scheduled maintenance and pay the bill without an understanding of what was actually done to the car?

 

But nothing was actually done to the book.

 

The notes are tools used to arrive at the desired result. The result is the only thing that a submitter has paid for.

[Ghost Town]

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I can understand that line of thinking more than the idea that anybody is entitled to the notes free of charge, in perpetuity, for the rest of CGC's and mankind's existence.

 

Here's some random and completely unfounded speculation and on my part. But hey, it's Comics General and that seems to be pretty normal around here. I wouldn't be surprised if the people that are complaining the loudest are the people that called for the notes most often and are part of the reason CGC decided to start charging for the notes. Maybe CGC got tired of giving the notes and their time away.

I haven't seen Schmell, Brulato, or Lauterbach posting at all.

That doesn't mean they're not complaining about it.

[DrWatson]

But nothing was actually done to the book.

 

The notes are tools used to arrive at the desired result. The result is the only thing that a submitter has paid for.

The booked was evaluated and assigned a grade based on that evaluation.

[DrWatson]

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I can understand that line of thinking more than the idea that anybody is entitled to the notes free of charge, in perpetuity, for the rest of CGC's and mankind's existence.

 

Here's some random and completely unfounded speculation and on my part. But hey, it's Comics General and that seems to be pretty normal around here. I wouldn't be surprised if the people that are complaining the loudest are the people that called for the notes most often and are part of the reason CGC decided to start charging for the notes. Maybe CGC got tired of giving the notes and their time away.

I haven't seen Schmell, Brulato, or Lauterbach posting at all.

That doesn't mean they're not complaining about it.

But they aren't complaining about it in this thread.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here between what buyers want and what they're entitled to under the terms of service. The two aren't the same, people.

Yup. It's sort of like buying a cake from a bakery and saying you should also get the recipe free of charge.

 

Unless the bakery used to include the recipe, and then removed it, it is a poor analogy.

I always just saw the notes as a courtesy occasionally provided by CGC. That's why they've always limited the number of note requests somebody could make.

 

I have no idea how people have gotten the idea that sharing the notes are part of CGC's service. As far as I know, they've never advertised the service. They never listed it on their website until they decided to charge for the service.

 

Show me where CGC ever promised to make notes part of their normal service. They never have. It's presumptuous to think that you're entitled to the notes free of charge.

 

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I agree.

 

The notes are part and parcel of what is being paid for by the submitter. It's a list of defects that quantify the big, fat fingh number in the upper left. That number has been paid for, therefore, so have the notes that gave it rise.

 

So when somebody fixes your car, you bought the wrench, too?

 

No, but you're entitled to the details of the service you received. Would anyone take their car in for scheduled maintenance and pay the bill without an understanding of what was actually done to the car?

Thats right, you own the estimate and the itemized bill.

[Flaming_Telepath]

This is outrageous that I send in a book at lets say the $60 tier and I receive a 6.5 and I have to pay an additional amount of money to find out how they came to that grade.

 

Do you expect them to also send along a six-pack and a large-chested hooker with your slabbed book?

 

No. Because you didn't pay for them.

 

Show we where CGC have stated that, as part of the service you paid for and the contract you entered into with them, you are entitled to access to their internal tools?

 

Again, people are confusing what they want, what they think they deserve, with what they actually paid for.

[DrWatson]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here between what buyers want and what they're entitled to under the terms of service. The two aren't the same, people.

Yup. It's sort of like buying a cake from a bakery and saying you should also get the recipe free of charge.

 

Unless the bakery used to include the recipe, and then removed it, it is a poor analogy.

I always just saw the notes as a courtesy occasionally provided by CGC. That's why they've always limited the number of note requests somebody could make.

 

I have no idea how people have gotten the idea that sharing the notes are part of CGC's service. As far as I know, they've never advertised the service. They never listed it on their website until they decided to charge for the service.

 

Show me where CGC ever promised to make notes part of their normal service. They never have. It's presumptuous to think that you're entitled to the notes free of charge.

 

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I agree.

 

The notes are part and parcel of what is being paid for by the submitter. It's a list of defects that quantify the big, fat fingh number in the upper left. That number has been paid for, therefore, so have the notes that gave it rise.

 

So when somebody fixes your car, you bought the wrench, too?

 

No, but you're entitled to the details of the service you received. Would anyone take their car in for scheduled maintenance and pay the bill without an understanding of what was actually done to the car?

That's right, you own the estimate and the itemized bill.

You may not "own" them, but I damn well guarantee you get them handed to you from the mechanic at the end of the service.

[Ghost Town]

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I can understand that line of thinking more than the idea that anybody is entitled to the notes free of charge, in perpetuity, for the rest of CGC's and mankind's existence.

 

Here's some random and completely unfounded speculation and on my part. But hey, it's Comics General and that seems to be pretty normal around here. I wouldn't be surprised if the people that are complaining the loudest are the people that called for the notes most often and are part of the reason CGC decided to start charging for the notes. Maybe CGC got tired of giving the notes and their time away.

I haven't seen Schmell, Brulato, or Lauterbach posting at all.

That doesn't mean they're not complaining about it.

But they aren't complaining about it in this thread.

I have no idea if those guys are complaining about it or not. My point is that the people who called for the notes most often, and feel that it's something they're entitled to free of charge, could be part of the reason that CGC decided to start charging for the notes.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

There seems to be a lot of confusion here between what buyers want and what they're entitled to under the terms of service. The two aren't the same, people.

Yup. It's sort of like buying a cake from a bakery and saying you should also get the recipe free of charge.

 

Unless the bakery used to include the recipe, and then removed it, it is a poor analogy.

I always just saw the notes as a courtesy occasionally provided by CGC. That's why they've always limited the number of note requests somebody could make.

 

I have no idea how people have gotten the idea that sharing the notes are part of CGC's service. As far as I know, they've never advertised the service. They never listed it on their website until they decided to charge for the service.

 

Show me where CGC ever promised to make notes part of their normal service. They never have. It's presumptuous to think that you're entitled to the notes free of charge.

 

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I agree.

 

The notes are part and parcel of what is being paid for by the submitter. It's a list of defects that quantify the big, fat fingh number in the upper left. That number has been paid for, therefore, so have the notes that gave it rise.

 

So when somebody fixes your car, you bought the wrench, too?

 

No, but you're entitled to the details of the service you received. Would anyone take their car in for scheduled maintenance and pay the bill without an understanding of what was actually done to the car?

That's right, you own the estimate and the itemized bill.

You may not "own" them, but I damn well guarantee you get them handed to you from the mechanic at the end of the service.

Fair enough

[DrWatson]

I've always thought the notes should be provided to the original submitter. If you're paying someone to evaluate something, it only makes sense that a rationale for that evaluation should be provided if, for no other reason than to give submitters the assurance that their book was given appropriate, non-arbitrary consideration, especially in light of the fact that CGC's grading guidelines are not made available to the public.

I can understand that line of thinking more than the idea that anybody is entitled to the notes free of charge, in perpetuity, for the rest of CGC's and mankind's existence.

 

Here's some random and completely unfounded speculation and on my part. But hey, it's Comics General and that seems to be pretty normal around here. I wouldn't be surprised if the people that are complaining the loudest are the people that called for the notes most often and are part of the reason CGC decided to start charging for the notes. Maybe CGC got tired of giving the notes and their time away.

I haven't seen Schmell, Brulato, or Lauterbach posting at all.

That doesn't mean they're not complaining about it.

But they aren't complaining about it in this thread.

I have no idea if those guys are complaining about it or not. My point is that the people who called for the notes most often, and feel that it's something they're entitled to free of charge, could be part of the reason that CGC decided to start charging for the notes.

Of course it is. If no one ever called, they wouldn't have heard the sound of two nickels rubbing together.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I think it was Barton who mentioned earlier that CGC limited the number of grader notes enquiries to three per day.

 

If you actually had a right to those notes, this could not be the case. If you'd just received 75 books back, you would be entitled to 75 sets of notes...no limits.

 

It was a courtesy, a courtesy that CGC no longer wish to extend, which is their right.

 

I'll say it again, the real problem is, when you get down to brass tacks, what are you actually entitled to for your grading fee? What is it that you've bought?

 

A Big Number and a plastic holder.

 

That realisation is somewhat shocking, isn't it?

[Ghost Town]

I have no idea if those guys are complaining about it or not. My point is that the people who called for the notes most often, and feel that it's something they're entitled to free of charge, could be part of the reason that CGC decided to start charging for the notes.

Of course it is. If no one ever called, they wouldn't have heard the sound of two nickels rubbing together.

So I can sarcastically thank the people who think they're entitled to free notes for ruining it for the rest of us?