Time To Lift The Ban on Voldemort's?

[lizards2]

Wasn't that hard!

 

 

I was hoping you'd choose more of a bikini-style cover-up..., or Wendy O. Williams...,

[Mio]

It would be nice to have an open discussion about the other slabbing companies - including the tiny ones that most of us have never heard of. I would love to see a thread showing books de-slabbed from one co. and re-subbed to another! Those are always fun.

[Hulksdaddy1]

If and when other companies start paying the fees associated with hosting this site, it would be appropriate to showcase their merchandise.

 

Thing is the Coin section is part of this site and Collectors Society allows the showing and even selling of PCGS, ANACS and other non-CGC TPGs.

 

 

.... so true. I never understood the harm, but it's not my site GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

/thread.

[DavidTheDavid]

It would be nice to have an open discussion about the other slabbing companies - including the tiny ones that most of us have never heard of. I would love to see a thread showing books de-slabbed from one co. and re-subbed to another! Those are always fun.

 

You can do that. Just not here.

[Chip Cataldo]

But this isn't just a comic forum - it's CGC's forum. Why should they allow discussion about other company's products??

They do so, in the coin section.

 

They also do so RIGHT HERE with PGX and Halo and Rutabaga or whatever the other scrub slab companies are called.

 

It's hypocritical.

[HarveySwick]

So why continue using such a hypocritical site?

[HarveySwick]

By the way, they proofed a PGX thread two days ago so looks like they don't allow PGX discussion anymore either.

 

It's simple - their site, their rules. If you don't like their rules

[jsilverjanet]

I guess this is CG version of the WC politics

 

 

[SquareChaos]

I agree with what many others have stated - the rule makes little to no logical sense, but it's just good manners to respect the rules of the people that run the place.

[Badger]

My ...

 

 

I've dropped my signature line out of a lot of my posts because there are a couple of CBCS holders in my sig line, but I refuse to cut the labels off of high grade book scans to appease Harry Potter's wand wavers.

 

Besides, the books in my sig line aren't being offered for sale anyway, so there's no marketing going on.

 

Truth is, Steve Borock has had nothing but generous things to say about CGC since the CBCS forum started up. Not only does he allow the display of CGC holders on their site, he's made nice comments on a number of mine.

 

I'm not sure why this is such a big deal on these forums, but it comes across as petty and insecure. As pointed out, the coin collectors side of the Collector's Society allows display and even sales of coins in other holders. One could not be faulted for seeing these separate forum policies as hypocritical.

I don't own any Voldemort slabs but it would annoy the out of me if I had books as nice as yours, Cat, and to not be able to share them. Free Voldemort!

[Buzzetta]

The problem is that there is no blanket rule across the CGC forum.

 

Over in coins, it is perfectly acceptable to talk about the another grading company. The other company is competition to CGC. This then leads me to believe that CGC does not want to allow mention of another comic grading company because of the nature of the former relationship between those that started the other company up and CGC.

 

This is not a matter of protecting one's intellectual property, or advertising another brand. This is a matter of Harshen and company having having a playground temper tantrum because Stevie B decided that he can do what CGC was doing and do it better.

 

Here is the real truth of the matter though. CGC was growing stagnant being the only viable player on in the game. They were taking themselves for granted.

 

Don't believe me?

 

Take a look at all of the innovation that CGC has implemented since the boys over at Franklin's Tower came into existence.

 

1 - New labels have been introduced

2 - Free notes for slab owners

3 - Faster turn around times

4 - New concepts such as allowing account holders to submit adult coloring books with their names in the credits of the SS book.

5 - Branching out like the partnership with Perez

6 - Branching out like the partnership with Valiant

 

The truth is that CGC started to step up their game because of Stevie B and I am thankful for it.

 

However, the hissy fit nonsense and double standard is childish and petty. If anything it shows that CGC is actually concerned if not fearful over what the other company might be capable of doing in the next year or so.

 

My post is not a ban worth, wrist slap worthy, or any moderation worthy post. If it is, I will deliver the same message but by rephrasing it.

 

The upper level CGC boys are upset not at competition but at Steve because he took the curtain away.

[Bills Comics]

I agree with the ones who said above. It seems childish and petty. It really would not hurt to be able to discuss both , or all other competitors openly .

[gcstomp]

This site has decided to hold onto a very petty position, to mention the competition makes the post, and maybe thread poof. The defenders have decided it is reasonable, with language such as if you dont like you go away, shoo, fly, shoo.

 

But the coin part of forum can be the adult and discuss, display, the other big coin company. And Steve B and his partnership have been so generous and open in any discussion regarding anything, even if it touches on CGC, to what end? The respect is not only not returned, but we have to refer to them as those who cannot be named.

 

We have the start up company acting in an evolved manner, and the old guard acting like the 3 monkeys covering eyes, ears, mouth. There will be movement in this position, but it will take a decade I would guess, and when it becomes painfully obvious to everyone how silly current situation is, we will have open arms.

[Lucky Baru]

I can see the point that both sides are trying to make. However, one side owns the forum we all post in. That means they set the rules. Unless they wish to change them then they like the status quo and there isn't going to be a change.

 

It is that simple.

[Transplant]

The problem is that there is no blanket rule across the CGC forum.

 

Over in coins, it is perfectly acceptable to talk about the another grading company. The other company is competition to CGC. This then leads me to believe that CGC does not want to allow mention of another comic grading company because of the nature of the former relationship between those that started the other company up and CGC.

 

This is not a matter of protecting one's intellectual property, or advertising another brand. This is a matter of Harshen and company having having a playground temper tantrum because Stevie B decided that he can do what CGC was doing and do it better.

 

Here is the real truth of the matter though. CGC was growing stagnant being the only viable player on in the game. They were taking themselves for granted.

 

Don't believe me?

 

Take a look at all of the innovation that CGC has implemented since the boys over at Franklin's Tower came into existence.

 

1 - New labels have been introduced

2 - Free notes for slab owners

3 - Faster turn around times

4 - New concepts such as allowing account holders to submit adult coloring books with their names in the credits of the SS book.

5 - Branching out like the partnership with Perez

6 - Branching out like the partnership with Valiant

 

The truth is that CGC started to step up their game because of Stevie B and I am thankful for it.

 

However, the hissy fit nonsense and double standard is childish and petty. If anything it shows that CGC is actually concerned if not fearful over what the other company might be capable of doing in the next year or so.

 

My post is not a ban worth, wrist slap worthy, or any moderation worthy post. If it is, I will deliver the same message but by rephrasing it.

 

The upper level CGC boys are upset not at competition but at Steve because he took the curtain away.

 

Agreed. CBCS has motivated CGC in innumerable ways. Good for you, Steve. And good luck to the new company.

[SquareChaos]

This site has decided to hold onto a very petty position, to mention the competition makes the post, and maybe thread poof. The defenders have decided it is reasonable, with language such as if you dont like you go away, shoo, fly, shoo.

 

Many have said it is a rule that makes no sense (myself included), but you follow a rule on a forum to the best of your ability until it's changed - even if you don't like it. That's the truly mature thing to do.

 

Having said that, I approve of threads like this raising the question and trying for a discussion around changing the rule(s), that's how you go about doing it.

 

I'm 100% for being able to post and discuss a book from any source.

 

 

[Mark 1]

But this isn't just a comic forum - it's CGC's forum. Why should they allow discussion about other company's products??

 

You wouldn't go on a Coca-Cola memorabilia forum and post Pepsi memorabilia. If they chose the policy respect it or move on. There are plenty of alternative forums to post on.

 

I've gone on the Fender forum and talked about Gibson guitars.

 

I've gone on the Apple forum and talked about PCs.

 

Do you think Apple tells its forum not to mention Dell? They don't care.

 

It's only the insecure CGC who won't allow us to mention the company for some fear we will jump ship or promote them. It's stupid and another reason for me to dislike CGC management for their draconian mandates to their members.

[Comicdey]

I think you'd end up having multiple slab by slab comparisons going on, then there's be slab quality discussions which would lead to all the little things that annoy collectors like halos, quality control, shaken slab syndrome, which would also lead into grading trends on consistency, leniency or harshness.

 

I would love to see someone who's been getting books slabbed as a collector for the past ten years to post up ten (6.0-9.8 range) examples from each year and note the trends albeit unscientific on ease and harshness in grading. Or even someone in the know that could work to document the actual periods of harshness and tightness. I've seen anecdotal comments. Wouldn't it be great to just know the grade was the grade across all era of slabbing.

 

100 slabs of truth as they say.

 

I see a lot of older slabs being sold that I surmise would lose a grade point or more if resubbed right now. Many have experienced it. The old grade is probably the more consistent in most cases and likely would fall in line with the current competition.

 

I'm a buyer now of new slabs. But I'm not real excited about selling any I've had slabbed. Just way to nice for the given grade in most cases. Now we are talking 9.4 vs 9.6 or 9.0 vs 9.4 so its only a few steps but those steps are the multipliers in the market.

 

I have many high grade bronze and silver keys unslabbed and I'm not willing to put them through the gauntlet now to end up seeing a true 9.6+ book come back 9.4 or lower from CGC. It's ok and I can live with the $200 and lower books but when it comes to books that will hit four figures it just isn't worth the frustration. Yet.

 

I'm waiting to see how this all plays out, as I'm sure many others are too.

 

General submissions down? Dealer submissions still feeding the machine I'd assume.

 

 

 

With all that said, I love the front clarity on CGC's new slabs. Picked up two from A Boardie last week and the 9.0 Doc is purty and the 7.0 GL is a gem. I finally found the feint defect that brought an otherwise 9.0+ book town to a 7.0. Maybe the grade is right. At least as a buyer I'd be hard pressed to call it any lower and I know I've seen books like this sold as much higher grade raw.

 

 

[Mark 1]

The whole policy of not mentioning the competition is total horse manure here. Fact is CGC is scared and shows it by banning us from even mentioning them.

 

It's ridiculous. Do you think on the Gibson guitar forum we can't talk about Fender guitars? Of course we can. Any other forum I frequent the competition isn't even a worry. Be confident in your own business.

 

The other company isn't going away so how about allowing open discussion? Most people are here because they like CGC. Right?

 

 

 

My ...

 

 

I've dropped my signature line out of a lot of my posts because there are a couple of CBCS holders in my sig line, but I refuse to cut the labels off of high grade book scans to appease Harry Potter's wand wavers.

 

Besides, the books in my sig line aren't being offered for sale anyway, so there's no marketing going on.

 

Truth is, Steve Borock has had nothing but generous things to say about CGC since the CBCS forum started up. Not only does he allow the display of CGC holders on their site, he's made nice comments on a number of mine.

 

I'm not sure why this is such a big deal on these forums, but it comes across as petty and insecure. As pointed out, the coin collectors side of the Collector's Society allows display and even sales of coins in other holders. One could not be faulted for seeing these separate forum policies as hypocritical.

 

 

 

 

 

Right back at you

[OrangeNemesis]

competition is good for everyone in the end.