• 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.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Big change at CGC

Started by stanley1883,

289 posts in this topic

Number 6

Number 6

Posted
Posted
I really don't think it is possible to do a defining assessment of a company's grading quality standards through pictures alone, ....

 

Good grief!

 

Now my comments are the "defining assessment"? I had no idea I had that much clout!

 

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number 6

Number 6

Posted
Posted
I'm sure the back cover scans would show why they are 9.6's and not 9.8's.

 

Backs look good, but I'm sure if I cracked them out I'd immediately find what's wrong with them to drop them to a 9.6. I've cracked enough slabs so I have no delusions about that.

 

As I stated somewhere else, my earlier statement that 'my 9.6s are better than their 9.8s' is a mistake on my part. What I meant to say and should have said is that 'my 9.6s look better than some of their 9.8s' or that they 'present better'. Those would probably be more accurate statements.

 

And those statements could be just as true of many CGC 9.8s too. Guess I got caught up in the hype over the new grading and was expecting more, so my critical comments probably tilted too far the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psithyrus

Psithyrus

Posted
Posted
Overall, I'm pleased with the change, regardless of the reason. This means I will be subbing more books, but yes, with a few more changes, CGC could proably reap even greater rewards.

 

Hopefully, it is just the start of more change to come though. Getting rid of that silly "Admin or Invoice Fee" would be very nice. I HATE having to pay that. Yes, it is not a lot of money, but it does really annoy me. Especially annoying if I am sending books from different tiers. It is akin to other hated fees like "system access fees" or whatever they call them for cell phones. Just a cheap money grab. Free grader notes would be nice too and to me, should just be considered "part of the service" when we send books in to be graded.

 

As for TAT, if you want your books faster, there is the Fast Track option. I also think TAT will be an issue for the "other company" too though. I have no idea of what the logistics or costs involved in getting another encapsulation machine are, if that is indeed what is slowing down books moving out.

 

As for what they call the tiers...Why not simply use a letter or number code? Example: Tier A/1 - 1974 to present, etc. There is something to be said for keeping things simple.

Fast track is NOT fast, and why am I paying all this extra money to NOT get my books back anywhere near their stated TAT's? I have a $600.00 bill from them, and my books are still received after a month+. They got their money, I want my books. This is not rocket science.

 

Correct. The appropriate response to the TaT debate is not, "hey, if you want your books fast, do fast track" lol

 

We have this issue sometimes at work, and I always remember this when I'm talking with our researchers who want their work now. They say "Rush" means two days... I have to tell them that "Rush" means "put in front of the other research." I didn't name it. If I had, I would gave called it something else. I'm trying to change it.

 

If we are swamped with clinical work for a week, that research is sitting for a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeffro.

Jeffro.

Posted
Posted
Overall, I'm pleased with the change, regardless of the reason. This means I will be subbing more books, but yes, with a few more changes, CGC could proably reap even greater rewards.

 

Hopefully, it is just the start of more change to come though. Getting rid of that silly "Admin or Invoice Fee" would be very nice. I HATE having to pay that. Yes, it is not a lot of money, but it does really annoy me. Especially annoying if I am sending books from different tiers. It is akin to other hated fees like "system access fees" or whatever they call them for cell phones. Just a cheap money grab. Free grader notes would be nice too and to me, should just be considered "part of the service" when we send books in to be graded.

 

As for TAT, if you want your books faster, there is the Fast Track option. I also think TAT will be an issue for the "other company" too though. I have no idea of what the logistics or costs involved in getting another encapsulation machine are, if that is indeed what is slowing down books moving out.

 

As for what they call the tiers...Why not simply use a letter or number code? Example: Tier A/1 - 1974 to present, etc. There is something to be said for keeping things simple.

Fast track is NOT fast, and why am I paying all this extra money to NOT get my books back anywhere near their stated TAT's? I have a $600.00 bill from them, and my books are still received after a month+. They got their money, I want my books. This is not rocket science.

 

Correct. The appropriate response to the TaT debate is not, "hey, if you want your books fast, do fast track" lol

 

I have only fast tracked one order and it was fine as mostly I am somewhat ok to wait...My bad for assuming the service ran as it should or at least close to on schedule :sorry:...However, I do not see anything wrong with offering a "premium" or "faster" service, lots of different companies offer similar things, so long as it delivers of course.

 

You're right that any service that promises a certain TaT should actually deliver on their promises. (I know, kooky talk right?) Saying one thing and then not doing it repeatedly leads to low customer satisfaction. However, when you're the only game in town the customers will put up with a lot of stuff they shouldn't be putting up with. Hopefully, competition changes that.

 

However, the response of some people here when hearing about the TaT backlogs, respond with "just send it fast track" Yes, that's an option, but doesn't really solve the problem. Additionally, you're giving CGC more money because they cannot adhere to their non fast track TaTs and also contributing to a fast track TaT backlog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing