CGC misses married wrap & other work on $10,000+ book, designates professional Conservation work done with all archival, reversible materials as "C" level resto. This is a HUGE problem... 5 5

[Phill the Governor]

Alright, happy Monday everyone!

It wouldn't be the CGC boards (especially nowadays) without some problems... so let's get right to it!

First off to get it out of the way- in the last several months CGC has incorrectly graded two seperate $10,000+ books that had professional conservation done to them by myself. One is currently in a Conserved holder and another was (incorrectly) labeled as Restored. Both books, at the request of my clients, will remain anonymous.

The bigger problem book that I will mention had a married wrap, spine split seals, small piece re-attached to the cover and cover reinforcement. This was graded and put (incorrectly) into a Restored A-1 level slab with a single notation of "cover reinforced". No mention of any of the other work - including the married wrap. This is not a slight oversight - this is completely unacceptable coming from a company that's job it is to accurately assess and grade the condition of these books. 

Aside from these two $10,000+ books that are now out in the wild...

CGC's review of my Conservation work, which up until 6 months ago always garnered a Conserved label (bar none), is now all over the place. The EXACT same work done on books with wheat paste, methyl cellulose and archival mending tissues is now garnering mostly Restored A, B, or C labels, with an occasional Conserved label. There is no consistency, and at this point my only option appears to have EVERY book I submit with Conservation work to be vetted first via email by graders/higher-ups at the company in order to prevent it from being incorrectly labeled to begin with. I can not afford to have the hand of each book held- prior to each submission, to ensure the proper label type will be selected for my books. This defeats the purpose of paying to have the books graded by "professionals" to begin with.

 

To CGC I ask which one of these scenarios (and it has to be either or) we are dealing with:

1. Employees who grade books are not being properly instructed how to clearly identify professional conservation and this will be addressed to minimize/ eliminate incorrect label designations going forward.

 or

2. CGC's rubric for what is allowable in Conserved labels has changed and a statement will be issued in order to properly convey to the public (CGC's clients) this change.

 

I will add this at the beginning since it is the most prevalent information regarding the thread:

This all started at the beginning of the year. I was told (after suddenly having books that should have otherwise come back Conserved, come back Restored) that structural piece fills were no longer acceptable if being done using wheat paste & archival mending tissues. However, structural pieces (and now seemingly all pieces) can be added through leafcasting and get a Conserved grade.

 

So:    structural pieces added with wheat paste & archival tissues = Restored (even though process is 100% reversible)

                                                 but

          leafasting any missing pieces on a cover = Conserved (even though leafcasting requires full water submersion [cover cleaned notation] & isn't 100% reversible)

 

At that point I gave up trying to approach this with reason, since clearly CGC has adopted their own Conservation scale that does not correlate to the vast majority of professional institutions categorizing paper conservation.

In all seriousness this is the root of the problem. All I could do, and continue to do is attempt to adapt to CGC's rubric of what is allowed in Conserved/Restored labels so that I can give clients reassurance that their book will end up with a specific label type.

 

 

CGC, please advise.

Edited July 26, 2021 by Phill the Governor
spelling

[theCapraAegagrus]

Your use of "wheat paste" is listed on CGC's website specifically as restoration:

Restoration Grading Scale

[Phill the Governor]

On 7/26/2021 at 2:45 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

Your use of "wheat paste" is listed on CGC's website specifically as restoration:

Restoration Grading Scale

Incorrect.

While wheat paste can also be classified as restoration... if you keep reading on that page you will see "Wheat glue" otherwise known as wheat paste is listed under "Materials used for conservation repair" as well. 

On 7/26/2021 at 2:57 PM, Mylark said:

You actually think CGC will do this?

Since they have been doing this, I expect at the very least for it to continue. My argument is that I shouldn't have to have books looked at twice - either before being graded to ensure the correct label type, or after a book was incorrectly labeled to begin with. In both cases my time is being wasted.

On 7/26/2021 at 2:51 PM, Mylark said:

Why not call them? Or use the Ask CGC section? Without tagging them I don't think you'll get a response here.

I have a direct line of communication with them, as well as through colleagues. Unfortunately while that is the best course of action I feel compelled to address this publicly as well.

[Randall Ries]

You are the same dude who accepted a $75 credit toward future grading or whatever after they did damage to your personal copy of Avengers #4. Keep right on doing business with CGC. You evidently haven't learned anything from your own experience.

[Phill the Governor]

On 7/26/2021 at 4:24 PM, Randall Ries said:

You are the same dude who accepted a $75 credit toward future grading or whatever after they did damage to your personal copy of Avengers #4. Keep right on doing business with CGC. You evidently haven't learned anything from your own experience.

 

The books in question are client owned, but I appreciate your thoughtful concern.

 

 

[lostboys]

I probably shouldn't stick my nose in here but I will anyway.

 

If you did this "work" yourself, shouldn't you attach a note along with the submission listing what you know has been done to the book?

 

 

[Qalyar]

Let's be honest. The rollout of the Conserved grade was a good idea on the part of CGC. It was, in my opinion, a necessary idea for the long-term physical stability of many GA comics. It was not, however, a flawless launch. The delineation between Conserved books and Restored books isn't entirely clear to the lay reader, is apparently not entirely clear the conservationist, and quite possibly isn't entirely clear to the graders.

In my opinion, anyone submitting a book for a Conserved label should be submitting it with documentation describing the full list of work done on the book (and setting aside the possibility of prior restoration work having been done). If you're already doing that, well, it's not like the fuzzy requirements for the gray label are a secret at the moment.

The idea that they'd miss a married wrap -- which, as an aside, I don't think should be Conservation-eligible -- is sort of a separate problem.

Edited July 26, 2021 by Qalyar

[The Lions Den]

Perhaps working with CGC rather than against them would be a more suitable course of action which could yield more positive results for everyone...

[Randall Ries]

On 7/26/2021 at 5:47 PM, The Lions Den said:

Perhaps working with CGC rather than against them would be a more suitable course of action which could yield more positive results for everyone...

I don't know how in this case. I imagine we could add copious restoration notes to a book and CGC would ignore them and do whatever they want to.

[Phill the Governor]

On 7/26/2021 at 4:53 PM, lostboys said:

I probably shouldn't stick my nose in here but I will anyway.

 

If you did this "work" yourself, shouldn't you attach a note along with the submission listing what you know has been done to the book?

 

 

This is why I started the thread to begin with!

Theoretically this is the easiest, most practical solution. However, unfortunately since CGC wan't to remain as "impartial" as possible, every time this has been done in the past it garnered 0 results. In fact, I have included slips with books before saying the cover or a piece was married and there was still no notation on the label. And this is a problem that colleagues of mine have had too so it's not isolated/anecdotal. 

On 7/26/2021 at 5:29 PM, Qalyar said:

Let's be honest. The rollout of the Conserved grade was a good idea on the part of CGC. It was, in my opinion, a necessary idea for the long-term physical stability of many GA comics. It was not, however, a flawless launch. The delineation between Conserved books and Restored books isn't entirely clear to the lay reader, is apparently not entirely clear the conservationist, and quite possibly isn't entirely clear to the graders.

In my opinion, anyone submitting a book for a Conserved label should be submitting it with documentation describing the full list of work done on the book (and setting aside the possibility of prior restoration work having been done). If you're already doing that, well, it's not like the fuzzy requirements for the gray label are a secret at the moment.

The idea that they'd miss a married wrap -- which, as an aside, I don't think should be Conservation-eligible -- is sort of a separate problem.

You make valid points (a response to including documentation I answered above).

However, my main argument is that for years- there HAS been a clear delineation between Conserved and Restored books. I have dozen and dozen and dozens of examples of books submitted over the last several years- and every single one of them I got into a Conserved holder- bar none.

Now, 2021 rolls around and I have a book in every submission with problems. 

[Randall Dowling]

On 7/26/2021 at 4:47 PM, The Lions Den said:

Perhaps working with CGC rather than against them would be a more suitable course of action which could yield more positive results for everyone...

I think you're right about this.  I know the OP has had several other issues before, but if you're going to continue to have a business relationship with someone, best to do your part to keep it positive.  

[Randall Ries]

On 7/26/2021 at 4:44 PM, Phill the Governor said:

 

The books in question are client owned, but I appreciate your thoughtful concern.

 

 

How do you explain things to your clients when things go south? I mean you are still posting negative CGC experiences looking for answers. That AV 4 would have been the end of it for me.

[Phill the Governor]

On 7/26/2021 at 6:02 PM, Randall Ries said:

How do you explain things to your clients when things go south? I mean you are still posting negative CGC experiences looking for answers. That AV 4 would have been the end of it for me.

Unfortunately CGC has undoubtedly tainted some relationships for me. Thankfully most people are understanding.

But the fact does remain that aside from everything, CGC remains the best 3rd party grading service. Otherwise I would have switched to a competitor a long time ago.

My goal is to have complete understanding on the Resto/Conso/Universal label rubric through CGC. As stated above, prior to 2021 I had literally a 100% success rate getting books into Conserved labels, with countless submissions. The inconsistency here is not on my end.

[jsilverjanet]

@Buzzetta this one is on the house

[Buzzetta]

On 7/26/2021 at 6:29 PM, jsilverjanet said:

@Buzzetta this one is on the house

K - I also had a book that when sent down they missed the trimming and also said that the center wrap was missing as the book was incomplete. 

Called them up and told them they missed a couple of things. 

They took the book back.  Saw that the wrap was married but was there and then saw that the book was indeed trimmed and noted it. 

They reimbursed me for the postage and grading fees.

I would... call them. 

[KCOComics]

 

I do think a detailed work order and stating your expected outcome (conserved label) would help. 

I had work done on a GA book a year or so ago. I wrote a very detailed note explaining everything that was done and who did it. I had the restorer review it to ensure I got all the details right and I wrote that based on the work and their criteria I was hoping for a conserved label. 

Everything went very smoothly. 

I imagine these steps are even more important today, with new graders and a tremendous backlog. They may be rushing or unfamiliar with some of the more nuanced differences.

[Phill the Governor]

On 7/26/2021 at 6:57 PM, Buzzetta said:

K - I also had a book that when sent down they missed the trimming and also said that the center wrap was missing as the book was incomplete. 

Called them up and told them they missed a couple of things. 

They took the book back.  Saw that the wrap was married but was there and then saw that the book was indeed trimmed and noted it. 

They reimbursed me for the postage and grading fees.

I would... call them. 

I have been reached out to by someone at CGC and am addressing the problem.

 

As I had stated previously (and this was expecting participation on my end through discussion), I did not expect this thread to give me the answer or solution that I wanted. I am very aware at this point that direct contact with CGC gets me the results that I desire.

My hope is that this thread can help expedite a sense of urgency on their end. Otherwise, at the very least, maybe something can come from public discourse on the topic as far as people becoming educated about CGC grading and restoration issues.

 

On 7/26/2021 at 7:00 PM, KCOComics said:

 

I do think a detailed work order and stating your expected outcome (conserved label) would help. 

I had work done on a GA book a year or so ago. I wrote a very detailed note explaining everything that was done and who did it. I had the restorer review it to ensure I got all the details right and I wrote that based on the work and their criteria I was hoping for a conserved label. 

Everything went very smoothly. 

I imagine these steps are even more important today, with new graders and a tremendous backlog. They may be rushing or unfamiliar with some of the more nuanced differences.

Unless CGC would like to chime in, I can say with almost 100% certainty that the note you included was promptly thrown away when the book was received, and that the reason it was graded properly with the Conserved label is because the work in question was indeed Conservation under their old rubric. This ongoing issue started in 2021. All books submitted prior are exceptions and were consistently graded accurately as far as I personally experienced. We (the clients) are not suppose to tell them (the graders) how to grade, that is literally the job they are paid to do.

Edited July 26, 2021 by Phill the Governor

[PovertyRow]

On 7/26/2021 at 3:21 PM, Mylark said:

So there's no difference between wheat paste and wheat glue? Why did CGC differentiate between the two? Just sloppy writing?

So called "wheat glue" is usually referred to as "wheat paste". Otherwise there is no difference.

I do object to the term "glue" as there are glues like PVA (poly vinyl acetate) and EVA (ethyl vinyl acetate) also used in restoration. Wheat paste is water reversible. Ideally PVA and EVA glues are also water reversible but it depends on the maker and formulation.

Using the term "wheat glue" just adds confusion to the already confused restoration/conservation glossary.

[Randall Ries]

On 7/26/2021 at 6:16 PM, Phill the Governor said:

The inconsistency here is not on my end.

Well, no. I understand that. You must have the patience of Job. I am going by your own experience and the growing number of unhappy submitters complaining about damage, inconsistent grading, wrong labels and long wait times. I find it hard to believe the other 2 grading companies could be any worse. And now CGC is under new ownership. There are GOING to be some problems with that as any company bought by another experiences a degree of upheaval. The trouble with that is it will be submitted valuables and collectibles that are going to feel the heat. Have you tried CBCS? I really can't understand how the same problems exist for all the grading companies and yet the other ones suck while CGC is given a pass. I guess it doesn't involve me. I'm too afraid to send in any raw books to be graded. If I did, it wouldn't be CGC doing the work.

[Phill the Governor]

On 7/26/2021 at 6:27 PM, Mylark said:

Maybe they've just finally caught on to you?

A part of me wishes it were that simple.

 

Unfortunately this all started at the beginning of the year. I was told (after suddenly having books that should have otherwise come back Conserved, come back Restored) that structural piece fills were no longer acceptable if being done using wheat paste & archival mending tissues. However, structural pieces (and now seemingly all pieces) can be added through leafcasting and get a Conserved grade.

 

So I was like.... okay        structural pieces added with wheat paste & archival tissues = Restored (even though process is 100% reversible)

                                                 but

                                         leafasting any missing pieces on a cover = Conserved (even though leafcasting requires full water submersion [cover cleaned notation] & isn't 100% reversible)

 

At that point I gave up trying to approach this with reason, since clearly CGC has adopted their own Conservation scale that does not correlate to the vast majority of professional institutions categorizing paper conservation.

In all seriousness this is the root of the problem. All I could do, and continue to do is attempt to adapt to CGC's rubric of what is allowed in Conserved/Restored labels so that I can give clients reassurance that their book will end up with a specific label type.

Edited July 26, 2021 by Phill the Governor