Where in the world was the Quality Control at CGC??? 42 42

[workingdog]

On 9/15/2022 at 3:59 PM, Gaard said:

[sarcasm] They're busy [/sarcasm]

As someone once said to me, In Business busy is a goal not an excuse.

[Kosmo23]

On 9/14/2022 at 7:00 PM, Sigur Ros said:

So the X-Mens were both 9.8 but then downgraded to 9.4 because of the staple tears they caused.... ?!

How did you know your X-Mens were graded 9.8?

[Sigur Ros]

On 9/15/2022 at 7:57 PM, Kosmo23 said:

How did you know your X-Mens were graded 9.8?

You're asking the wrong guy.  If there's an X in the title, I have no use for it.  But the guy whose books we are discussing, said they were 9.8 MEs.

 

[Kosmo23]

On 9/15/2022 at 11:05 PM, Sigur Ros said:

You're asking the wrong guy.  If there's an X in the title, I have no use for it.  But the guy whose books we are discussing, said they were 9.8 MEs.

 

Which member said his books were a 9.8??

[Sigur Ros]

On 9/15/2022 at 11:06 PM, Kosmo23 said:

Which member said his books were a 9.8??

The one I replied to.

[jokiing]

On 9/15/2022 at 5:57 PM, Kosmo23 said:

How did you know your X-Mens were graded 9.8?

CGC graded them at 9.8 and I sent back as ME and CGC regraded the books, that they damaged, at 9.4

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 9/15/2022 at 11:14 PM, jokiing said:

On 9/15/2022 at 7:57 PM, Kosmo23 said:

How did you know your X-Mens were graded 9.8?

CGC graded them at 9.8 and I sent back as ME and CGC regraded the books, that they damaged, at 9.4

It's worth noting that "ME" stands for mechanical errors, because it was a 9.8 prescreen, which means they were only supposed to be 9.8's that got encapsulated or slabbed. The fact they sent back a "9.6" in a slab constitutes the "error"

[Larryw7]

On 9/15/2022 at 1:22 PM, CGC Mike said:

It's only fitting you create your next id as "Erased"!  

I can't keep up with him. I always enjoy reading his stuff, but by the time I see his new I.D., he's been banned already.

[jokiing]

On 9/15/2022 at 10:43 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

It's worth noting that "ME" stands for mechanical errors, because it was a 9.8 prescreen, which means they were only supposed to be 9.8's that got encapsulated or slabbed. The fact they sent back a "9.6" in a slab constitutes the "error"

Got me mixed up with Stefan_W. My books were not pre-screen. Was awarded a 9.8 but had to send back via Mechanical Error because books arrived with staple tears. CGC turned them into 9.4's

[Still Only 20¢]

I recently received ME submission 4116285 (8 Modern books) back from CGC.  Upon inspecting the books, I found that 4 had noticeable spots on the inside of the slabs. What I find frustrating about this spotting is if the slab were inspected prior to encapsulation and the spots were spotted , it appears they could be easily wiped off.  I attempted to search this discussion for this issue and haven't seen it raised, so @CGC Mike I wanted to bring this to CGC's attention.  Thanks,

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 9/16/2022 at 3:12 PM, Still Only 20¢ said:

I recently received ME submission 4116285 (8 Modern books) back from CGC.  Upon inspecting the books, I found that 4 had noticeable spots on the inside of the slabs. What I find frustrating about this spotting is if the slab were inspected prior to encapsulation and the spots were spotted , it appears they could be easily wiped off.  I attempted to search this discussion for this issue and haven't seen it raised, so @CGC Mike I wanted to bring this to CGC's attention.  Thanks,

Pics would help if you can...?

[Still Only 20¢]

On 9/16/2022 at 4:16 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Pics would help if you can...?

2 examples.  1st is from DC Comics 26 (Front) and the 2nd is from X-Men 100 (Back).  I'm including the original images from when I scanned the items before submitting.  It's a bit subtle, and I was having difficulty capturing the spotting taking an image of the entire front/back so I ended up focusing on small areas.

DC Comics 26 Front Original

Spoiler

DC Comics Presents 26 Front, spots underlined in red (Note they're under the Newton Ring... [cough])

X-Men 100 Back Original (it was a bit dirty, but not where the scratches are)

Spoiler

X-Men 100 Back, spots underlined in red

Hopefully this was helpful.

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 9/16/2022 at 5:17 PM, Still Only 20¢ said:

2 examples.  1st is from DC Comics 26 (Front) and the 2nd is from X-Men 100 (Back).  I'm including the original images from when I scanned the items before submitting.  It's a bit subtle, and I was having difficulty capturing the spotting taking an image of the entire front/back so I ended up focusing on small areas.

DC Comics 26 Front Original

  Reveal hidden contents

DC Comics Presents 26 Front, spots underlined in red (Note they're under the Newton Ring... [cough])

X-Men 100 Back Original (it was a bit dirty, but not where the scratches are)

  Hide contents

X-Men 100 Back, spots underlined in red

Hopefully this was helpful.

Yes that's helpful or at least something cause cgc Mike has to show proof or evidence.

I actually see the X-Men 100 marks on the raw comic,.but the newton rings aren't severe; that said, they seem to come back clear nowadays... Rather than the oily representation. So I wonder if cgc sees this as some improvement?

Edited September 16, 2022 by ADAMANTIUM

[Still Only 20¢]

On 9/16/2022 at 6:23 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Yes that's helpful or at least something cause cgc Mike has to show proof or evidence.

I actually see the X-Men 100 marks on the raw comic,.but the newton rings aren't severe; that said, they seem to come back clear nowadays... Rather than the oily representation. So I wonder if cgc sees this as some improvement?

On the X-Men 100 slab, the spots are within the blue shading on the back next to the words "NEW", "Models.", and "together!".  The original is soiled in the white margin, but not in the area of the spots.  The spotting is a bit hard to capture in a picture because it's kind of 3 dimensional.

I sent most of the 8 books in this ME submission back originally because of Newton Rings.  Only 2 of the 8 slabs shipped back to me have significant Newton Rings.  I'm not sure if I would send them back for the Newton Rings, but both also have the spotting.

Edited September 16, 2022 by Still Only 20¢
Bad Grammar

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 9/16/2022 at 5:37 PM, Still Only 20¢ said:

On the X-Men 100 slab, the spots are within the blue shading on the back next to the words "NEW", "Models.", and "together!".  The original is soiled in the white margin, but not in the area of the spots.  The spotting is a bit hard to capture in a picture because it's kind of 3 dimensional.

I sent most of the 8 books in this ME submission back originally because of Newton Rings.  Only 2 of the 8 slabs shipped back to me have significant Newton Rings.  I'm not sure if I would send them back for the Newton Rings, but both also have the spotting.

I'm not trying to push as it will be ultimately up to cgc, but when you underlined the soiling, I can notice most of the same dots in the blue areas of the raw scan. Just fyi, but I hope you find resolution

 

 

[Still Only 20¢]

On 9/16/2022 at 7:33 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

I'm not trying to push as it will be ultimately up to cgc, but when you underlined the soiling, I can notice most of the same dots in the blue areas of the raw scan. Just fyi, but I hope you find resolution

 

 

It's not the same.  Thanks for your participation. 

[Gaard]

It's a shame that CGC can basically say "Yeah, your slab has ugly NRs, and you're not happy. But c'mon, it's not that bad. Just live with it. We'll decide what is and what isn't acceptable to you."

[CGC Mike]

On 9/16/2022 at 4:12 PM, Still Only 20¢ said:

I recently received ME submission 4116285 (8 Modern books) back from CGC.  Upon inspecting the books, I found that 4 had noticeable spots on the inside of the slabs. What I find frustrating about this spotting is if the slab were inspected prior to encapsulation and the spots were spotted , it appears they could be easily wiped off.  I attempted to search this discussion for this issue and haven't seen it raised, so @CGC Mike I wanted to bring this to CGC's attention.  Thanks,

Sorry to hear this.  I will mention to the QC manager that going forward, the slabs should be checked for spots before encapsulation. 

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 9/16/2022 at 7:37 PM, CGC Mike said:

Sorry to hear this.  I will mention to the QC manager that going forward, the slabs should be checked for spots before encapsulation. 

"Checked for spots" ?

Is this new? I haven't ever heard of "spots" being caused, so is it an "effect?" Or actual "soiling?"

Could you elaborate on "spots" and why you check for them? I wouldn't have known to check for those upon receiving 

 

[CGC Mike]

On 9/16/2022 at 8:40 PM, ADAMANTIUM said:

"Checked for spots" ?

Is this new? I haven't ever heard of "spots" being caused, so is it an "effect?" Or actual "soiling?"

Could you elaborate on "spots" and why you check for them? I wouldn't have known to check for those upon receiving 

 

I don't think you need to get too alarmed about this, as I believe it is real rare.  @Still Only 20¢ said there were spots on the inside of the slab.  I said I would bring it up to the QC manager.