EsquireComics Willing To Provide The Same Guaranty Offered By CGC

[sfilosa]

Maybe I'm missing something -- but hasn't CGC repurchased every book that has ever been caught having restoration inside of a blue label slab? And hasn't Borock said at least three times on these boards that if CGC blows a call on restoration, CGC will buy the book from the owner? I'd call that a bit more than rhetoric, regardless of what the legalese on the label or website says.

 

I am sorry, but I do not see the point in this discussion at all.

 

But if CGC said they would buy any book back (which I believe you are correct that they have) and then said CF had been pressing books for clients prior to leaving CGC, what would we have to discuss on these boards?

 

Oh, I can think of one thing.............................comic bo.........oh, never mind.

[shadroch]

I certainly have not read Steve say this is CGCs policy.I have read where in this case(JEs books) CGC will buy books at fair market value as a last resort if Brulato or JE doesn't take responsibility.

With dozens of threads about similar things,it is quite possible I missed his statements,but why does it seem everyone else missed them as well?

[esquirecomics]

Or drop their free resto check,which was never the service they stressed anyway.

 

So you would be paying anywhere from $29 up, per book, just to have your book put in a pretty holder and get a grading opinion on it? Hey, then use PGX...faster and cheaper and no worse for grading. I don't think so. I've never heard anyone give that as the main reason for going to all the trouble of having their books certified.

 

I have heard over and over in the last couple years, people saying the best thing about CGC is the restoration check....that's the most valuable part of the package. What was the big slam on PGX? That they were weak on restoration.

 

I think CGC DID stress the restoration check, and CONTINUES to stress it. Not in so many words, but remove it from certification and submissions of gold and silver will drop like a stone.

 

They'll never drop the resto check.

 

Agreed, that is certainly how CGC wants itself to be perceived. Too bad it won't back up its own strengths in anything other than rhetoric. This should be the most significant aspect of CGC's services.

 

Maybe I'm missing something -- but hasn't CGC repurchased every book that has ever been caught having restoration inside of a blue label slab? And hasn't Borock said at least three times on these boards that if CGC blows a call on restoration, CGC will buy the book from the owner? I'd call that a bit more than rhetoric, regardless of what the legalese on the label or website says.

 

I am sorry, but I do not see the point in this discussion at all.

 

I don't know that at all to be true that CGC has repurchased every book for which they missed restoration.

 

And you, more than anyone Scott, should know that the posting of some comment on a message board, even if by an officer of the company, has no true value. Give me a break. Everyone attacks Steve's comments when they don't like them, but then stands behind them when they do? Let's have some consistency here.

 

It is rhetoric, and thats all it is. Now Steve may absolutely mean it. And, frankly, I would have little trouble believing he does. In fact, I would not be surprised that he would initiate efforts to possibly buy the book back. Given that Steve was likely one of the people who missed the restoration in the first place, I could see that he would take such a matter personally. Of course, that depends, I would imagine, on the cost of the book.

 

In any event, I have said this now three times:

 

CGC should be the entity that steps up to the plate and makes such a pledge with respect to its restoration detection service. It should do so aggressively and proactively, rather than defensively and selectively when a scandal arises.

 

If Steve's promise is as valid and true as you say, then CGC should formalize Steve's policy it as a true guaranty. Otherwise, it is virtually worthless, subject to change, and - as far as I am concerned - indicative of a lack of faith in its own service.

 

THAT is the point of this discussion.

[blazingbob]

When supposed "partners" appear to be arguing on a public forum it diminishes my belief that you are all working "together".

 

How about you two take and keep your disagreements private?

[FlyingDonut]

I certainly have not read Steve say this is CGCs policy.I have read where in this case(JEs books) CGC will buy books at fair market value as a last resort if Brulato or JE doesn't take responsibility.

With dozens of threads about similar things,it is quite possible I missed his statements,but why does it seem everyone else missed them as well?

 

From Steve's statement:

 

I have stated this before: CGC will look at any comic book that was bought from Jason in the last year even though I do not believe that the problem started more than seven months ago and the problem is not as widespread as many here believe. I truly believe that the boards are being fueled by paranoia, so the amount of books people are worried about that are in blue labels are much less then people believe. Tom Brulato, who has backed Jason as well as other comic book sellers, has already stated he would buy back any book CGC has found to be trimmed as long as it was a book he co-owned with Jason. He also stated that if he did not co-own the book with Jason, he would try to help that person get their money back from Jason.

 

If Tom cannot get the money back from Jason, CGC will buy the book back at what the person paid for it or its fair market value, whichever we choose.

[FFB]

Or drop their free resto check,which was never the service they stressed anyway.

 

So you would be paying anywhere from $29 up, per book, just to have your book put in a pretty holder and get a grading opinion on it? Hey, then use PGX...faster and cheaper and no worse for grading. I don't think so. I've never heard anyone give that as the main reason for going to all the trouble of having their books certified.

 

I have heard over and over in the last couple years, people saying the best thing about CGC is the restoration check....that's the most valuable part of the package. What was the big slam on PGX? That they were weak on restoration.

 

I think CGC DID stress the restoration check, and CONTINUES to stress it. Not in so many words, but remove it from certification and submissions of gold and silver will drop like a stone.

 

They'll never drop the resto check.

 

Agreed, that is certainly how CGC wants itself to be perceived. Too bad it won't back up its own strengths in anything other than rhetoric. This should be the most significant aspect of CGC's services.

 

Maybe I'm missing something -- but hasn't CGC repurchased every book that has ever been caught having restoration inside of a blue label slab? And hasn't Borock said at least three times on these boards that if CGC blows a call on restoration, CGC will buy the book from the owner? I'd call that a bit more than rhetoric, regardless of what the legalese on the label or website says.

 

I am sorry, but I do not see the point in this discussion at all.

 

I don't know that at all to be true that CGC has repurchased every book for which they missed restoration.

 

And you, more than anyone Scott, should know that the posting of some comment on a message board, even if by an officer of the company, has no true value. Give me a break. Everyone attacks Steve's comments when they don't like them, but then stands behind them when they do? Let's have some consistency here.

 

It is rhetoric, and thats all it is. Now Steve may absolutely mean it. And, frankly, I would have little trouble believing he does. In fact, I would not be surprised that he would initiate efforts to possibly buy the book back. Given that Steve was likely one of the people who missed the restoration in the first place, I could see that he would take such a matter personally. Of course, that depends, I would imagine, on the cost of the book.

 

In any event, I have said this now three times:

 

CGC should be the entity that steps up to the plate and makes such a pledge with respect to its restoration detection service. It should do so aggressively and proactively, rather than defensively and selectively when a scandal arises.

 

If Steve's promise is as valid and true as you say, then CGC should formalize Steve's policy it as a true guaranty. Otherwise, it is virtually worthless, subject to change, and - as far as I am concerned - indicative of a lack of faith in its own service.

 

THAT is the point of this discussion.

 

I guess you and I disagree about the legal effect of a public commitment made by the president of a company, whether on a message board or otherwise, that is backed up by a consistent practice in line with that commitment.

[FFB]

When supposed "partners" appear to be arguing on a public forum it diminishes my belief that you are all working "together".

 

How about you two take and keep your disagreements private?

 

Why? This doesn't have anything to do with the Ewert lawsuit. Mark and I disagree all the time.

[shadroch]

That statement I read.

But is this true of any book they miss restoration on,or only JEs books?

Is this a one time deal or a statement of a new policy.

 

Additionally,they need to clarify what they mean by fair market value. Is it FMV for an unrestored book,or a restored book?

If I buy a FF #12 8.5 and it turns out they missed the trim,will they buy it as the blue label I paid for or the PLOD that it realy is?

 

If CGC has now adopted this policy and will buy any book that they miss,I commend them and recommend that they issue the policy as an official statement,not simply as a line in a post on a message board.

[mica]

It got buried long ago in a thread far, far away, but I asked what if "the book" turns out to be the ultimate in scarcity, one of a kind, arguably worth millions.

 

Buying it back might be a tad difficult. Sure it's hypothetical, but can anyone guarantee it never to happen?.

[esquirecomics]

I guess you and I disagree about the legal effect of a public commitment made by the president of a company, whether on a message board or otherwise, that is backed up by a consistent practice in line with that commitment.

 

We do.

 

But more importantly, the stated committment, has Donut noted above, has been selective and targeted.

 

There is no general policy that I am aware of for CGC to buy back a book where CGC missed restoration.

[esquirecomics]

When supposed "partners" appear to be arguing on a public forum it diminishes my belief that you are all working "together".

 

How about you two take and keep your disagreements private?

 

Why? This doesn't have anything to do with the Ewert lawsuit. Mark and I disagree all the time.

 

Exactly. Absolutely nothing to do with the strengths and strategies underlying the Ewert litigation.

 

And just b/c Scott and I are co-counsel in a case doesn't even mean I like him, much less agree with him on multiple issues.

[esquirecomics]

If CGC has now adopted this policy and will buy any book that they miss,I commend them and recommend that they issue the policy as an official statement,not simply as a line in a post on a message board.

 

Exactly my point.

 

[FFB]

When supposed "partners" appear to be arguing on a public forum it diminishes my belief that you are all working "together".

 

How about you two take and keep your disagreements private?

 

Why? This doesn't have anything to do with the Ewert lawsuit. Mark and I disagree all the time.

 

Exactly. Absolutely nothing to do with the strengths and strategies underlying the Ewert litigation.

 

And just b/c Scott and I are co-counsel in a case doesn't even mean I like him, much less agree with him on multiple issues.

 

Screw you, pal, you love me!

[esquirecomics]

When supposed "partners" appear to be arguing on a public forum it diminishes my belief that you are all working "together".

 

How about you two take and keep your disagreements private?

 

Why? This doesn't have anything to do with the Ewert lawsuit. Mark and I disagree all the time.

 

Exactly. Absolutely nothing to do with the strengths and strategies underlying the Ewert litigation.

 

And just b/c Scott and I are co-counsel in a case doesn't even mean I like him, much less agree with him on multiple issues.

 

Screw you, pal, you love me!

 

Shhhhhhh. You're ruining people's fun thinking there is turmoil among us.

[FFB]

When supposed "partners" appear to be arguing on a public forum it diminishes my belief that you are all working "together".

 

How about you two take and keep your disagreements private?

 

Why? This doesn't have anything to do with the Ewert lawsuit. Mark and I disagree all the time.

 

Exactly. Absolutely nothing to do with the strengths and strategies underlying the Ewert litigation.

 

And just b/c Scott and I are co-counsel in a case doesn't even mean I like him, much less agree with him on multiple issues.

 

Screw you, pal, you love me!

 

Shhhhhhh. You're ruining people's fun thinking there is turmoil among us.

 

Whoops!

 

"I hate you!"

[Timulty]

I am totally non-plussed.

[PedigreeMan]

It got buried long ago in a thread far, far away, but I asked what if "the book" turns out to be the ultimate in scarcity, one of a kind, arguably worth millions.

 

The other thing, too, is that CGC must be the sole determiner of whether or not restoration detection has been blown. If one has lost confidence in CGC's resto detection ability, they can't readily take a book to another independent expert and get a second opinion. Such an act would (at a minimum) entail cracking the slab, thus negating the "guarantee" and (presumably) absolving CGC of any liability.

 

And don't even get me started on pedigree designations, which can end up being truly more art than science....

 

Alan

[jkrk]

Sounds like.........legaleese

 

1)CGC must guarantee the restoration check but they are not libel if new techiques are used but must be held accountable and must buyback books if they missed a restoration and are proven to be negligent as defined by whom?

 

2)CGC should have two levels of service, a)grading b)restoration and charge two different prices unless the submitter wants one blended price and it's up to the submitter to request in writing whether he/she wants to know either the grade and/or whether the book is restored.

 

3)CGC should continue to perform their service for collectors only and all dealers have to go before a group of collectors to receive a grade for their books.

 

4)All books submitted to CGC from this time foward will come back in new cases but the grade and level of restoration will only be made known if one calls for the notes.