I'd say it's fun starting these new threads calling out CGC's quality control, but it really isn't. CGC claims no liability on book they improperly encased to begin with. 0

[Phill the Governor]

Hey everyone,

If you know me, you're aware I am no stranger to CGC's lack of quality control in the past year. 

I purchased a newer Modern book, graded a 9.6 several month back on ebay. Sometime shortly afterwards I dealt with a fiasco where (amid everything that happened), CGC encapsulated one of my 4-figure comics in a case and the bottom of the inner well was not sealed at all- causing the book to shift down and slide partially out of the inner well inside of the case. Thankfully, through some fluke, the book was not damaged bc of this (CGC did end up damaging the book after re-encapsulating it, but there's a whole different thread just on that). This incident recently made me more vigilant about checking my graded books. So I went back through my collection and came back across the 9.6 I had purchased previously. 

The 9.6 (It's a Walking Dead #48 for those curious) is covered in scuffs on the inner well - a really great feature of the often laughable "Crystal Clear Display" that CGC touts. The four corners of the case and all sides are secure, and there is no evidence that it was dropped.  I had intended to have the book re-encapsulated bc of the scuffs, but after looking back at it the other week I noticed that inner well is not sealed at the bottom of the book, at all! And of course, there is new damage on the bottom back cover corner that could not possibly have been there before the book was graded.

In the past, when I've encountered a problem with a slab that is unquestionably the fault of CGC, they have offered to re-encapsulate it for not extra cost (minus shipping). I think they should cover shipping expenses too, but I digress. More to my point, I was livid when I received this response back from CGC's customer service the other week about the problem with this book:

 

Dear Phillip,

 

Thank you for your inquiry. This book was submitted back in 2020. According to the terms and conditions, the customer must inspect all collectibles immediately upon receipt from a Company. A Company shall have no liability for any damage or errors unless reported to Company within fourteen (14) days of Customer’s receipt of the collectibles from Company.

 

CGC offers a Reholder service to replace the encapsulation of CGC certified books.  The cost is $20.00 per book for most books. 

The grade assigned to the book should not change unless any damage occurred post-encapsulation, in which case the grade will be adjusted accordingly. To qualify, the book must still be encapsulated in its original CGC holder.

 

 

Thank you, and have a great day.

 

 

I am disgusted by CGC's response, and I feel offended by CGC hiding behind a measly 14 day window that has to be utilized by the person who submitted the book in the first place. Why on earth would I re-sub the book on my own dime when CGC couldn't even grade and encase the book properly the first time, causing the book to become damaged? Apparently they do not care about having poor quality cases out in the either for prospective customers to see, and this example is acceptable to their quality control.

 

 

[Randall Dowling]

 

[theCapraAegagrus]

Let me get this straight: You want CGC to re-holder a book for free that you did not even submit?

That's absolutely absurd.

[Phill the Governor]

1 hour ago, Angel of Death said:

Let me get this straight: You want CGC to re-holder a book for free that you did not even submit?

That's absolutely absurd.

Correct, and this is based on their own, older business model.

In the past I've been able to re-sub books, on CGCs dime, if they deemed the problem "inherently the fault of something happening during encapsulation". For the few previous re-subs I've done like this, if there are a ton of newton rings, or scuffs like you see here, that has been more than enough for them to say "send it in, we'll take care of it". They knew that the $ they would spend on re-holdering on their dime helped remove undesirable cases like the one seen above from entering the marketplace.

It appears that before CGC actually cared about their product, and customers liking their product. But now, they could care less about having poor quality cases out in the market, and they don't care if they lose future submissions from people seeing books like this and becoming afraid it will happen to their own books if submitted. Their answer now is drastically different for a problem that isn't even purely aesthetic, and the problem here- specifically, is absurd- it's a defective case that has damaged, and will continue to damage the book as it slides up and down in the case.

[theCapraAegagrus]

3 minutes ago, Phill the Governor said:

Correct, and this is based on their own, older business model.

Then their "older business model" was flawed. I think it's ridiculous to allow people to re-holder an item for free that has changed hands.

[Phill the Governor]

9 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

Then their "older business model" was flawed. I think it's ridiculous to allow people to re-holder an item for free that has changed hands.

In theory I agree with you.

 

However, I expect a higher standard of a product when I buy a hundred dollar book that arrives looking like through the case (you know, the case with a "crystal clear display" ), and was actually damaged by the case itself- which completely negates the grade and point of the "protective" case in the first place. Good thing they presumably put microchamber paper inside the book, doing it loads of good! This book was better off before it was sent to CGC, graded, and they improperly encapsulated it. 

Edited May 28, 2021 by Phill the Governor

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 minute ago, Phill the Governor said:

However, I expect a higher standard of a product when I buy a hundred dollar book that arrives looking like through the case (you know, the case with a "crystal clear display" ), and was actually damaged by the case itself- which completely negates the grade and point of the "protective" case in the first place. Good thing they presumably put microchamber paper inside the book, doing it loads of good! This book was better off before it sent to CGC, graded, and they improperly encapsulated it. 

Sure, which is why the submitter should take care of it so nobody else has to complain about it.

I would blame the seller for obviously not giving a .

[Phill the Governor]

36 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

Sure, which is why the submitter should take care of it so nobody else has to complain about it.

I would blame the seller for obviously not giving a .

If the book arrived with the case cracked I would blame the seller. And of course some blame is on whoever submitted the book in the first place.

 

However, final responsibility lies with CGC as far as I am concerned. They should rectify the mistake made since they made it; why should anyone else? The book is no longer a 9.6, so CGC's integrity to accurately grade/properly encapsulate a book gets questioned right off the bat to a prospective buyer. It's advantageous for them to quickly rectify the problem so it's exposure is minimized.

 

Instead, here I am calling more attention to it. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

13 minutes ago, Phill the Governor said:

However, final responsibility lies with CGC as far as I am concerned. They should rectify the mistake made since they made it; why should anyone else? The book is no longer a 9.6, so CGC's integrity to accurately grade/properly encapsulate a book gets questioned right off the bat to a prospective buyer. It's advantageous for them to quickly rectify the problem so it's exposure is minimized.

Yeah, within reason. I think that 2 weeks from delivery to submitter is completely reasonable.

[Phill the Governor]

37 minutes ago, Angel of Death said:

Yeah, within reason. I think that 2 weeks from delivery to submitter is completely reasonable.

I disagree, and it's even worse coming from a company that is taking 6 weeks just to open packages and start processing orders. They either stand behind their product or they choose to hide behind a legal disclaimer with a tiny window. They chose the latter, and I am calling them out because it's disgusting, greedy behavior.

 

[Number 6]

2 minutes ago, Phill the Governor said:

I disagree, and it's even worse coming from a company that is taking 6 weeks just to open packages and start processing orders. They either stand behind their product or they choose to hide behind a legal disclaimer with a tiny window. They chose the latter, and I am calling them out because it's disgusting, greedy behavior.

 

I know this is going to come off like a snarky gotcha question but I genuinely don’t mean it that way:  are you now still going to submit on behalf of your clients?

Again, I don’t mean it as a jab. I’m seriously trying to figure out where I’m at with submitting to CGC and am just curious if this recent fail has changed your stance on that. 

[Phill the Governor]

4 minutes ago, Number 6 said:

I know this is going to come off like a snarky gotcha question but I genuinely don’t mean it that way:  are you now still going to submit on behalf of your clients?

Again, I don’t mean it as a jab. I’m seriously trying to figure out where I’m at with submitting to CGC and am just curious if this recent fail has changed your stance on that. 

This recent fail is just one in a sea of them, across the board with many dealers and collectors I know.

But to answer your question, yes. CGCs recent lack of QC has made me more vigilant, taking more pictures before submitting and making sure the insurance values are maximized - assuming CGC will damage each book in some way. In short, I'm just taking more precautions to make sure client books are protected as much as they can be once the books transition to CGC. 

 

[theCapraAegagrus]

23 minutes ago, Phill the Governor said:

I disagree, and it's even worse coming from a company that is taking 6 weeks just to open packages and start processing orders. They either stand behind their product or they choose to hide behind a legal disclaimer with a tiny window. They chose the latter, and I am calling them out because it's disgusting, greedy behavior.

o k

[lostboys]

13 hours ago, Angel of Death said:

Then their "older business model" was flawed. I think it's ridiculous to allow people to re-holder an item for free that has changed hands.

Yep.

He should be returned it to whoever sold it to him.

We all should be returning these as soon as CGC delivers them to us. It just takes soooooooo long to get your book graded that I think some people just settle for the scuffs and sell em on Ebay.

Return them as defective and help stop the madness!

[Vixom]

The majority of slabs I buy have some scuff scratches on them. On the outer case. Is cgc doing this or the people I buy from just not taking care of their slabs?

[Bird]

Not being the person who had it slabbed complicates it slightly, as one can only speculate since the chain of custody has an unknown in there.

I myself have a book received for reholdering...a 1975 book in 9.8 condition that had a buckling inner well. I wrote a note stating I thought no charge was appropriate due to defective design/materials so we'll soon see what they thought. I am not the one who had it slabbed and it still looks good to me but only once they get it out of that buckling inner well will they know if it is still 9.8. If not, then the fun begins I guess.

[Bird]

7 minutes ago, I_Am_Not_A_Cat said:

The majority of slabs I buy have some scuff scratches on them. On the outer case. Is cgc doing this or the people I buy from just not taking care of their slabs?

They seem to have a lot more scuffed and/or dirty inner wells lately, per anecdotal reports at least. There is also a lot of complaints about loose material in there as well. Both of these complaints seem to have decreased in the last 2/3 months as far as I can tell.

[Gaard]

3 hours ago, I_Am_Not_A_Cat said:

The majority of slabs I buy have some scuff scratches on them. On the outer case. Is cgc doing this or the people I buy from just not taking care of their slabs?

 

[Vixom]

I have plenty of inner well scuffs. But also scratches on outer hard shell. They are a smooth grey line scuff. 14 days return won't help me as I didn't submit them. Not that I would be thrilled to ship off my books. Wait weeks for them to open them. Wait half a year to have them graded. Hope they don't get damaged. Then have to send them back for a "free recase" Does this also include the shipping too and back? Insurance? 

[The Lions Den]

On 5/28/2021 at 8:22 AM, Phill the Governor said:

Correct, and this is based on their own, older business model.

In the past I've been able to re-sub books, on CGCs dime, if they deemed the problem "inherently the fault of something happening during encapsulation". For the few previous re-subs I've done like this, if there are a ton of newton rings, or scuffs like you see here, that has been more than enough for them to say "send it in, we'll take care of it". They knew that the $ they would spend on re-holdering on their dime helped remove undesirable cases like the one seen above from entering the marketplace.

It appears that before CGC actually cared about their product, and customers liking their product. But now, they could care less about having poor quality cases out in the market, and they don't care if they lose future submissions from people seeing books like this and becoming afraid it will happen to their own books if submitted. Their answer now is drastically different for a problem that isn't even purely aesthetic, and the problem here- specifically, is absurd- it's a defective case that has damaged, and will continue to damage the book as it slides up and down in the case.

In a situation like this, I would either pay to have it reholdered or crack it out and put the book in a mylar sleeve. I wouldn't keep it the way it is. Just my ...