Where in the world was the Quality Control at CGC??? 43 43

[Qalyar]

On 5/14/2022 at 12:14 PM, joeypost said:

You can see how easily this could happen. Someone used to cracking out slabs that have the inner well could easily forget these old “creep engine” slabs only had a thin piece of plastic covering the book and a screwdriver could easily slide in and damage the book. 

While that is one of the issues the bigger one is the person who damages the book without speaking up. 

Correct. It is clear that there is no culture of reporting at CGC, and that's one of the most serious problems.

[Iceman399]

On 5/14/2022 at 1:14 PM, joeypost said:

You can see how easily this could happen. Someone used to cracking out slabs that have the inner well could easily forget these old “creep engine” slabs only had a thin piece of plastic covering the book and a screwdriver could easily slide in and damage the book. 

While that is one of the issues the bigger one is the person who damages the book without speaking up. 

I was beyond shocked to find it tossed in the box without any notification from CGC.

They would have had to go through the process of editing the graders notes and grade on the serial number (as they kept those the same).  Clearly a few people in the process knew what had happened in order to make those corrections.

Very disappointed in the entire process of it.  This isn't a oops we missed labeled it and didn't realize it or oops there are shards of plastic and we didn't realize it.  Instead a few members realized it and just hoped to essentially pass the buck to the client.

[MetalPSI]

On 5/14/2022 at 11:57 AM, Iceman399 said:

I was beyond shocked to find it tossed in the box without any notification from CGC.

They would have had to go through the process of editing the graders notes and grade on the serial number (as they kept those the same).  Clearly a few people in the process knew what had happened in order to make those corrections.

Very disappointed in the entire process of it.  This isn't a oops we missed labeled it and didn't realize it or oops there are shards of plastic and we didn't realize it.  Instead a few members realized it and just hoped to essentially pass the buck to the client.

Its certainly a blow to credibility and the policy to "ignore it and continue business as usual" is going to bring all this to a close

Wonder how chefs feel when they lose their Michelin star rating?

[JC25427N]

On 5/14/2022 at 2:12 PM, The Meta said:

Its certainly a blow to credibility and the policy to "ignore it and continue business as usual" is going to bring all this to a close

Wonder how chefs feel when they lose their Michelin star rating?

[Sigur Ros]

On 5/14/2022 at 8:34 AM, Bludriver said:

CGC has got to do something about this as soon as possible because faith in a product is a fragile thing.

 

No, they don't.  They have too many loyal customers who don't care about the small problems because they just sell the books anyway, and continuously send in more, and they don't need to care about other peoples' big problems. Not to mention all the authorized dealers w/discounts who send in thousands, including those of their customers. 

CGC has no reason to care about the problems they create, because money keeps rolling in.  They are hoping not everyone will bother sending them back and will only have to fix a percentage of what they know they're sending out. They aren't going to read these threads, they barely read emails. None of this matters because they're just too big to care. 

[MetalPSI]

On 5/14/2022 at 1:53 PM, Sigur Ros said:

None of this matters because they're just too big to care. 

Untrue

They don't have the competition needed

For now

I expect this to change, and soon

[jcjames]

On 5/12/2022 at 5:21 PM, Iconic1s said:

When I see stuff like this I wonder why we keep sending in books at all. So disappointing!

Yet I continue to care about CGC’s opinion of my books!

Some of us WON'T send books in, and haven't for a few years already precisely because QC apparently sucks there. 

They. Don't. Care.

 

[Catwomancomics]

On 3/6/2022 at 9:16 AM, joeypost said:

I'll show you a dozen books I just got back with zero visible damage graded 9.4 and lower. Makes you scratch your head.

I had a similar situation with a few books.without graders notes.

[wombat]

Wait, people still assume QC is a thing at CGC?

@CGC Mike I think I've asked before, but can we get a definitive answer if EVERY books goes through a full QC process or just a certain %?

 

[Robert_L]

Last incident I will mention, and this one really bothered me. I was able to get one of the 300 J Scott Campbell AP copies of the X-Men Rogue. The signed one that he had a deal with CGC where he signed them, then sold then on his site, and CGC would accept them for a yellow label.  
I got my copy, it looked great and sent it on to CGC, in a top loader, in a box. It came back an 8.5…due to a corner crunch!! Something that wasn’t there to begin with. I emailed CGC to complain about this. The Rep says they have no control over the grading, noting they will not accept any packages that are damaged. So that confirmed that damage was done after it was received. I even did some shock tests with a top loader and could not replicate the damage. 
I was so peeved about this, I just sold it off, because I didn’t want to see it anymore.  

[CGC Mike]

On 5/15/2022 at 12:28 AM, wombat said:

Wait, people still assume QC is a thing at CGC?

@CGC Mike I think I've asked before, but can we get a definitive answer if EVERY books goes through a full QC process or just a certain %?

 

I am going to work on getting some answers for people regarding QC issues next week.  

[Cat]

On 5/15/2022 at 9:38 PM, CGC Mike said:

I am going to work on getting some answers for people regarding QC issues next week.  

That'd be great, Mike. I understand having a veil of secrecy around certain processes, but QC needs to be more transparent, especially now at this critical juncture. 

[zzutak]

On 5/15/2022 at 4:38 AM, CGC Mike said:

I am going to work on getting some answers for people regarding QC issues next week.  

Many thanks, Mike!    I have long speculated (recently, in this thread) that the "Quality Control Review" (Step 6/7 of CGC's highly-touted Grading Process) may actually be just one of the assignments of the Encapsulation (Step 5/7) and/or Packaging (Step 7/7) personnel, as opposed to the only assignment of dedicated (sole responsibility) QC personnel.  In my mind, it's the only logical explanation for how an upside-down book can actually pass a QA/QC review.  If I'm correct, this would be a huge organizational blunder.

In any event, there are few things that will ruin a business or individual more quickly than regularly/routinely making promises you're unable to keep.  Just one man's opinion. 

[skypinkblu]

On 5/15/2022 at 12:28 AM, wombat said:

Wait, people still assume QC is a thing at CGC?

@CGC Mike I think I've asked before, but can we get a definitive answer if EVERY books goes through a full QC process or just a certain %?

 

Another question would be, what do they look for during the process? Also are the QC people familiar with comics? Because the book I posted, clearly had the writer/artist's name on it, plus a 10-cent book would not be from 1986, so there were two things that should have been on a check list not just one. I get that people make mistakes, I also get that there are a limited amount of people who are willing to work in Sarasota and know a lot about comics...but training for the people who are there seems to be an issue.

[Timely]

On 5/15/2022 at 8:43 AM, skypinkblu said:

Another question would be, what do they look for during the process? Also are the QC people familiar with comics? Because the book I posted, clearly had the writer/artist's name on it, plus a 10-cent book would not be from 1986, so there were two things that should have been on a check list not just one. I get that people make mistakes, I also get that there are a limited amount of people who are willing to work in Sarasota and know a lot about comics...but training for the people who are there seems to be an issue.

Even easier than that would be to look for the July cover date on the comic not matching the 10/1986 label date!

[Gaard]

On 5/15/2022 at 1:13 AM, Robert_L said:

Last incident I will mention

 

why?

[zzutak]

On 5/15/2022 at 6:43 AM, skypinkblu said:

Because the book I posted, clearly had the writer/artist's name on it, plus a 10-cent book would not be from 1986, so there were two things that should have been on a check list not just one.

I totally get the point you and Timely are making here. 

This being said, the error you're highlighting here is in large part due to the fact that there are two different series with exactly the same title: Katy Keene #1-62 (1949-1962, also known as Katy Keen Comics) and Katy Keene #7-33 (1984-1990, formerly Katy Keene Special #1-6).  Not including "Comics" in the first series and dropping the word "Special" from the second series (part way through the title run) led to this error.  It's a hot mess: Overstreet, the Grand Comics Database, and CGC each have different opinions on how the two series should be titled. 

[skypinkblu]

On 5/15/2022 at 11:17 AM, zzutak said:

I totally get the point you and Timely are making here. 

This being said, the error you're highlighting here is in large part due to the fact that there are two different series with exactly the same title: Katy Keene #1-62 (1949-1962, also known as Katy Keen Comics) and Katy Keene #7-33 (1984-1990, formerly Katy Keene Special #1-6).  Not including "Comics" in the first series and dropping the word "Special" from the second series (part way through the title run) led to this error.  It's a hot mess: Overstreet, the Grand Comics Database, and CGC each have different opinions on how the two series should be titled. 

Thanks, that is interesting for sure. I guess my point is, that people need to be looking at the books, not just drop downs and they should know enough about comics for a light bulb to go off at some point. I'm not sure if that's practical for the company...but it's what I'd like to see as a collector/customer.

[Gaard]

On 5/15/2022 at 11:33 AM, skypinkblu said:

Thanks, that is interesting for sure. I guess my point is, that people need to be looking at the books, not just drop downs and they should know enough about comics for a light bulb to go off at some point. I'm not sure if that's practical for the company...but it's what I'd like to see as a collector/customer.

This is what I hear at my work...

"We're not machines, we're people. Think."

Edited May 15, 2022 by Gaard

[zzutak]

And, yes, I realize that there are several multiple-series titles.  Phantom Stranger is the one that first comes to mind.  Correctly dealing with such titles should not be a difficult task.

Getting back to your Katy Keene #17, I'm wondering if the date field on the CGC submission form automatically populated to 10/86 rather than 07/54 when the issue number was entered (and neither the submitter nor CGC caught the error).  This is an interesting example -- at CGC, would the primary responsibility for catching this error this rest with the Verification (Step 2/7) personnel rather than the Quality Control (Step 6/7) personnel? 

Edited May 15, 2022 by zzutak