Dennis Barger Jr vs CGC! 0

[Stronguy]

15 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

Was this on Dennis' wall or a FB group? I didn't see Steve's post.

CBCS Comic Collectors Club
He basically said, this looks like a labeling mistake. Please don't come on here and bash CGC.

Edited April 4, 2017 by Stronguy

[Mr.Mister]

All I here is "woof woof woof... I want attention... Woof woof woof... I want a treat.... Woof woof woof... I'm the best... Woof woof woof... CBs is better... *insert howl*" 

 

What a cry baby that Barger is. 

[Mercury Man]

Mistakes happen, we live in a very imperfect world.  Given the volume, you kind of have to applaud this type of mix up doesn't happen more often. 

[Rune]

4 hours ago, deadleg said:

I believe Newshane tested it a while back that water actually would penetrate the sealed mylar. 

Edit: Found the post. 

 

The old holders weren't watertight, I haven't seen the new holders tested though - maybe a new job for Newshane  

More likely the book got the wrong grade on the label  Now I wonder if I have some CGC 9.2 books that really should have been 9.8  

Edited April 4, 2017 by Rune

[Jimmy Linguini]

4 hours ago, comicquant said:

I just tried to look them up 1401373002 and its an invalid cert #.  Either CGC removed the book (which I think they said they would) or its a BS number.

https://www.cgccomics.com/grading/verify-cgc-comic.aspx?cgc-comic-cert=1401373002

I also find it interesting that Mark Roman, the signature program coordinator at CBCS, "thanks" Berger for the "advertising".  This whole thing reeks of deception.

https://www.facebook.com/dennis.barger 

CGC removed it.

What is interested is that CGC commented on the post but deleted the post.

So who ever runs the CGC facebook page already made an official CGC comment. Which is crazy.

It also sounds like CGC only started trying to correct the issue after images were posted online. (on comics heating up)

This is not dennis's book. I have no idea who owns it / is the original submitter.

[comicwiz]

1 hour ago, Stronguy said:

CBCS Comic Collectors Club
He basically said, this looks like a labeling mistake. Please don't come on here and bash CGC.

Thanks, I had only seen what was posted on Dennis' wall.

FWIW I think the situation could have been handled better. As mentioned, it was only addressed after the person posted about it. Even if he was relegated to being the bad guy for airing it publicly, the policy makes it seem like customers are quality control grunts at the mercy of a Seinfeld redux episode of no slabs for you!

Edited April 4, 2017 by comicwiz

[mschmidt]

8 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

Thanks, I had only seen what was posted on Dennis' wall.

FWIW I think the situation could have been handled better. As mentioned, it was only addressed after the person posted about it. Even if he was relegated to being the bad guy for airing it publicly, the policy makes it seem like customers are quality control grunts at the mercy of a Seinfeld redux episode of no slabs for you!

How should CGC have handled it differently? This guy either doctored the slab scan or received a book back that suffered from a patently obvious QC error. 

If the latter is the case - that the book simply got the wrong label - any sane person would simply have emailed or called CGC, informed them of the problem, and would have had CGC fix it for free - which they do every single time an issue like this is brought to their attention.

[comicwiz]

23 minutes ago, mschmidt said:

How should CGC have handled it differently? This guy either doctored the slab scan or received a book back that suffered from a patently obvious QC error. 

If the latter is the case - that the book simply got the wrong label - any sane person would simply have emailed or called CGC, informed them of the problem, and would have had CGC fix it for free - which they do every single time an issue like this is brought to their attention.

That's certainly one perspective, but there's a cost of inconvenience even if CGC sends a driver to my door. Lost opportunity if you consider the person had intended to list it for sale the first time it was sent, and now requiring to wait a second time on CGC TAT's to get the book back before it can sell. 

I mean we are comic people here, and timing should mean something on a book like this because it's on a downward spiral effect from the Netflix reviews, so what's this going to look like a month or two after it returns is anyone's guess, but I'd certainly prefer selling it now if it were mine.

Of all "clerical errors", grading error has the most significant impact, because if this had been a note, issue assignment or page quality error, it would be disclosed in the listing.

It's significant because of the reputational toll. If the person decides he's had enough monkeying around with shipping, waiting, and dealing potentially with some other snag when it's sent or returned, he lists it with FULL DISCLOSURE, it looks bad on the company.

I can think of a handful of times boardie's here have listed books saying they felt CGC overgraded the book, and disclosed it as such.

I've seen listings where people have disclosed damage to the slab, and/or to the book after transit. No imminent ban from any of these events.

They could have handled it differently in the manner and accommodation. 

"Thanks for bringing this to our attention. We would like to offer to have the book regraded, and apologize for the inconvenience. Alternatively, send the book back to us and we can assign a FMV and offer a buyout for $X.XX to factor in the inconvenience and grading cost, and/or offer a free submission for your next book."

Even if you don't give the person a freebie, don't immediately resort to banning if the person doesn't comply.  Work with the person to arrive at a solution.

The message otherwise is when we get things wrong, it's our way or highway.

Whether or not you and I agree on the proper manner of handling such issues, it should really come as no surprise when you get a retaliatory response when you behave/handle customer service issues this way.

Book hits eBay (as it has already), look at the blind ump who graded this, and Jimmy crack corn and I don't care.

Edited April 4, 2017 by comicwiz

[mschmidt]

1 minute ago, comicwiz said:

That's certainly one perspective, but there's a cost of inconvenience even if CGC sends a driver to my door. Lost opportunity if you consider the person had intended to list it for sale the first time it was sent, and now requiring to wait a second time on CGC TAT's to get the book back before it can sell. 

Of all "clerical errors", grading error has the most significant impact, because if this had been a note, issue assignment or page quality error, it would be disclosed in the listing.

It's significant because of the reputational toll. If the person decides he's had enough monkeying around with shipping, waiting, and dealing potentially with some other snag when it's sent or returned, he lists it with FULL DISCLOSURE, it looks bad on the company.

I can think of a handful of times boardie's here have listed books saying they felt CGC overgraded the book, and disclosed it as such.

I've seen listings where people have disclosed damage to the slab, and/or to the book after transit.

They could have handled it differently in the manner and accommodation. 

"Thanks for bringing this to our attention. We would like to offer to have the book regraded, and apologize for the inconvenience. Alternatively, send the book back to us and we can assign a FMV and off a buyout for $X.XX to factor in the inconvenience and grading cost, and/or offer a free submission for your next book."

Even if you don't give the person a freebie, don't immediately resort to banning if the person doesn't comply.  Work with the person to arrive at a solution.

The message otherwise is when we get things wrong, it's our way or highway.

Whether or not you and I agree on the proper manner of handling such issues, it should really come as no surprise when you get a retaliatory response when you behave/handle customer service issues this way.

Book hits eBay (as it has already), look at the blind ump who graded this, and Jimmy crack corn and I don't care.

It's not a grading error, though - it's a straight-up label error, no different than if I submitted a book for SS and it came back with a blue label that still had the signature listed.

I've received books back from CGC I thought were over-graded - and disclosed them as such when I sold them. I've also received books back that I felt were under-graded - which I happily touted in my sales listing as well.

That's not the case here - there's no grader on the planet that would have looked at this book and said "yeah, this looks like a 9.2".

[comicquant]

If you read the comments on the post it's pretty obvious the entire thing was a staged act.  Having a CBCS rep chime in, the submitter say they would only use CBCS etc.  There is no philosophy behind this...  How the book got that way is immaterial (photoshop, label swap, dunking or qc issue), it was going to happen one way or another as it's a means to try to go after CGC.  Anyone who submits a book to CGC and has it returned looking like this would've simply called CGC and had it handled not jump on their soapbox and start preaching to their cult.

[comicwiz]

7 minutes ago, comicquant said:

Anyone who submits a book to CGC and has it returned looking like this would've simply called CGC and had it handled not jump on their soapbox and start preaching to their cult.

From what I read, it sounded like the person did attempt contact, but only received a response to their issue when it was posted online.

Edited April 4, 2017 by comicwiz

[comicquant]

20 minutes ago, comicwiz said:

From what I read, it sounded like the person did attempt contact, but only received a response to their issue when it was posted online.

It could be true but I've never had CGC take longer than a day or two to respond.  If the comments weren't posted in the context of a quest to embellish the insignificant I may take it more seriously.  All companies have priority queues when it comes to customer service inquiries and maybe a mislabel isn't A high priority.  If CGC did elevate the priority because of a social media backlash I'm not going to fault them for it.  I'd do the exact same thing.

Edited April 4, 2017 by comicquant

[Buzzetta]

Seriously? 

This is his latest "thing" 

This is the first time that I am saying this publicly.  I had a book that was graded wrong in my opinion.  It received a blue label marked missing centerfold when I knew that it should be a purple with some resto and a married centerfold.  I contacted CGC and they promptly took care of the situation.  They were professional and asked to review the book again and fixed the problem.

My book currently sits in that purple label book.  It frigging happens.  Is it supposed to?  Probably not but what is CGC success rate vs their mistakes? I am not being an apologist or a fanboy for them I am considering the number of books processed without incident vs the number of books processed with an incident.  They seem to have a great success rate. 

Furthermore Dennis is a tool from what I have read in regards to his rants online.  

Edited April 4, 2017 by Buzzetta

[lizards2]

42 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Seriously? 

This is his latest "thing" 

This is the first time that I am saying this publicly.  I had a book that was graded wrong in my opinion.  It received a blue label marked missing centerfold when I knew that it should be a purple with some resto and a married centerfold.  I contacted CGC and they promptly took care of the situation.  They were professional and asked to review the book again and fixed the problem.

My book currently sits in that purple label book.  It frigging happens.  Is it supposed to?  Probably not but what is CGC success rate vs their mistakes? I am not being an apologist or a fanboy for them I am considering the number of books processed without incident vs the number of books processed with an incident.  They seem to have a great success rate. 

Furthermore Dennis is a tool from what I have read in regards to his rants online.  

Apologist Fanboy

[thehumantorch]

4 hours ago, Stronguy said:

CBCS Comic Collectors Club
He basically said, this looks like a labeling mistake. Please don't come on here and bash CGC.

Steve is a classy man.  

[Kevin76]

Fake News

[jsilverjanet]

[comicwiz]

13 hours ago, comicquant said:

All companies have priority queues when it comes to customer service inquiries and maybe a mislabel isn't A high priority

I can't speak in this particular instance, but as someone working with top 100 global brands, most companies have dramatically reoriented their culture to understand this way of dealing with customers (i.e. "priority queues" as you state) has led to very costly and avoidable business mistakes.  Those doing it right assign a loyalty value on a customer contact attempt to directly arrive at a solution with the company because it keeps the matter offline.  The costs aren't exclusive to needing to chase it down like wildfire to fan the flames online - the heaviest toll for "preventable miscue" being when the incident carries enough traction and steam to have more coordinated and strategic oversight involved to arrive at a remedy.

[joeypost]

18 hours ago, Stronguy said:

CBCS Comic Collectors Club
He basically said, this looks like a labeling mistake. Please don't come on here and bash CGC.

I would expect no less from Steve. Regardless of how CGC found out about it, they did contact the owner and it appears he wanted more than just fixing the label. He must have wanted the difference in value of the book as he had it posted on EBay, cannot find the listing now.

 

Found it.

MP 15

Edited April 5, 2017 by joeypost
Clarification

[joeypost]

22 hours ago, bababooey said:

 Couldn't anyone dunk a graded comic to create water damage & then post it up to try and make a company look like they made a mistake?  

Why bother responding to it... 

IIRC Gary (moondog) had a flood years back and some of his CGC slabs were damaged. He proved back then they were not water tight. The simplest solution is this was an error with the label and nothing more.