LOCKED - OP request - CLOSED MODS PLEASE REMOVE IF POSSIBLE 5 5

[Diamonddave]

As far as mediation, that appears to be the most sensible course.

Edited April 10, 2022 by Diamonddave

[wombat]

On 4/9/2022 at 9:10 PM, Diamonddave said:

On 4/9/2022 at 7:24 PM, wombat said:

I believe in order to put someone on the PL list it has to be known up front how they would get off of the list. So yeah, presenting vagueness on what  your acceptable resolution would be seems like it would actually prevent being added to the list in the first place. 

I have offered him books to buy to help me recoup the cost, ive offered that he can send me partial payment in cash and books. Nothing has been accepted.

I believe you are going to have to share the specific details of these offers. It needs to be recognized EXACTLY what will constitute resolution. 

[Roger66]

Thank you everyone for your input and help so far. 

What bothers me at this point in time is I asked David to please consider a third party to mediate - someone we both know and respected on the Boards (and that covers a solid handful) but David immediately refused. His passionate belief that I am to be held fully accountable for 2 books that were very possibly damaged by a third party after leaving his hands perhaps a year ago should bear more scrutiny.  I know David to be a good guy but his decision to accuse me of "gross misrepresentation" in public without even the slightest consideration that the books could very well have been damaged by the pressing (CV4) and whoever or whatever detached the cover on the Baker after it admittedly left his hands not detached and then find himself further disappointed by auction results - all the while expecting what he unwaveringly determined as "full compensation" from me - is just troublesome in my book.  Plus I believe this could have been better handled privately with some sense of earnestness but for David's steadfast refusal to consider even an iota of fault on his or another involved party's end.  And if we should mediate - what about the potential damages to my reputation esp if David should be determined fully at fault by a third party of our choosing?

Edited April 10, 2022 by Roger66

[Callaway29]

An unfortunate happening. It’s not my place to say but I will anyway…

Please keep in mind often times when compromising, an indication of a fair deal is when both parties aren’t happy with it. 

All the best in finding common ground…glad to see the boards providing that mechanism.

[Grendel72]

Just speculating here but is David seeking restitution in the form of CGC fees + pressing as well? Right off the bat, since you say you are an experienced grader, and you assessed the book to be a 7.0 and not a 9.0 as Roger had assessed. Could the difference in price between a raw 9.0 vs a 7.0 help to settle issues. To keep saying Roger said it was a 9.0 is getting nowhere. I'm a noob compared to you guys but I have never had anyone guarantee me a grade after grading.  The most I got is a guarantee of no restoration.  I seriously don't think Roger ever thought you would hold his assessment of a 9.0 in such a manner. And seriously , you knew it was a 7.0 at the outset. Seems to give the impression you were holding out to take advantage.  Not saying you are but the vibes are not positive . If you dort settle , trust me, you will be the one losing out. Roger won't get nominated and you will get nothing.

[jaybuck43]

It would be really helpful for me if there were some more pictures here.  What I will say is looking at the scan of the CV4 I would definitely not trust either of the individuals grading here, because there is NO WAY that book EVER grades VF/NM.  Soft corners, spine issues, etc.  Pressers are not miracle workers.  What about the other book?  Any good quality scans before it was mailed?  From the small picture I can see, a detached cover is not going to drop that book to a 1.8.  What’s the back look like? Interiors? Etc?  

My feelings on this are complicated.  Buyer specifically is relying on sellers grades to determine the trade, and asked seller if he was willing to guarantee his grades (at least to a point).  Unless I am supremely confident in my grading, I would not make a guarantee, especially with being outside of control of the book (who knows how buyer is going to package it to send to CGC, if their presser is reputable).  To put a blanket “No matter what, this book will absolutely be a 9.0 or above” is just foolish. Seller should be held to make things ‘right’ (i.e. to put them in the place they should have been in had the trade been as advertised).

[Diamonddave]

I have a call scheduled with Roger to resolve this once and for all tomorrow.

I am hopeful this can be settled amicably. 

[thehumantorch]

On 4/9/2022 at 6:38 PM, Diamonddave said:

I am a very experienced grader, ive been buying and selling here for almost a decade and I've not had a book sold here returned to me in almost 7 years. 

I did not see any pinholes, but I also do not have a jewelers loop. 

I dont value other people's grading opinion above my own, however grading is all subjective. If Roger was willing to  say that this book would get a VF/NM and go so far as to say there is no way it isn't was good enough for me. 

You state you're a very experienced grader yet you accepted books that CGC eventually graded much lower than represented by the other party.  This is a problem because it's possible damage may have occurred during shipping, pressing or grading.  The best time to dispute the grades was when you received the books.  You didn't see the pinholes that CGC detected and that suggests you didn't inspect the books carefully and that's also a problem.

I do believe Roger over-graded these books and think it's reasonable for you to ask for compensation.  Roger has said he'd be open to compensation but I think it's clear your request for $2800 is a non-starter.  Mediation would be a wonderful direction as I believe you are both good and reasonable guys.

 

[Dick Pontoon]

[Chaz G.]

On 4/9/2022 at 6:04 PM, Diamonddave said:

Possiby a 7.0

This is where I'm stuck.

Dave, if you consider yourself an experienced grader, why didn't you contact Roger immediately when you thought his grading was off regardless of what you felt he was "guaranteeing" you?

Additionally, if you strongly felt it was a 7.0, while he thought it was a 9.0, why didn't you you take detailed pics and post it on the "Please Grade My" forum and get a consensus to share with Roger, before sending it to CGC?

It seems plain to me that you both share in the responsibility here.

I genuinely hope you can work this out.

Edited April 10, 2022 by Chaz G.

[Black_Adam]

I will let the more experienced boardies debate who has the winning case here, but I did notice the comment in the first post about the cover hanging by a thread. Any buyer sending a comic in that condition to be graded should not be surprised if they end up with a detached cover - which always results in a CGC 1.8 grade.

 

[Pitboss]

On 4/9/2022 at 11:43 PM, Black_Adam said:

I will let the more experienced boardies debate who has the winning case here, but I did notice the comment in the first post about the cover hanging by a thread. Any buyer sending a comic in that condition to be graded should not be surprised if they end up with a detached cover - which always results in a CGC 1.8 grade.

 

Type in CGC detached cover on Ebay. 

[Randall Dowling]

After reading this back and forth today, I think it's really best to take mediation/arbitration to a private setting, possibly with a 3rd party if you can't work it out.  There's always a performative aspect in public and I think that works counter to resolution.

After you've reached settlement, one or both should come back here and simply state satisfaction with the outcome.  No need to disclose terms publicly.  But you have to clear any reputational damage that both parties may have incurred by this thread.  

[speedcake]

On 4/10/2022 at 1:26 AM, Randall Dowling said:

After reading this back and forth today, I think it's really best to take mediation/arbitration to a private setting, possibly with a 3rd party if you can't work it out.  There's always a performative aspect in public and I think that works counter to resolution.

After you've reached settlement, one or both should come back here and simply state satisfaction with the outcome.  No need to disclose terms publicly.  But you have to clear any reputational damage that both parties may have incurred by this thread.  

after reading everything, some of it twice, seconded.

[Black_Adam]

On 4/9/2022 at 10:17 PM, Pitboss said:

Type in CGC detached cover on Ebay. 

My mistake, I was sure that I had grading guidelines that specified a 1.8 grade for a completely detached cover (and every comic I have ever submitted to CGC has come back a 1.8). Must just be a coincidence this one also garnered a 1.8 grade. 

[Domo Arigato]

On 4/10/2022 at 12:58 AM, Black_Adam said:

My mistake, I was sure that I had grading guidelines that specified a 1.8 grade for a completely detached cover (and every comic I have ever submitted to CGC has come back a 1.8). Must just be a coincidence this one also garnered a 1.8 grade. 

It was news to me when I found out a book with a detached cover could get at least a 5.0 blue label.......which I think is utter horse s**t and you can read my thoughts on it starting here.

 

[Joshua33]

On 4/9/2022 at 9:43 PM, Black_Adam said:

I will let the more experienced boardies debate who has the winning case here, but I did notice the comment in the first post about the cover hanging by a thread. Any buyer sending a comic in that condition to be graded should not be surprised if they end up with a detached cover - which always results in a CGC 1.8 grade.

 

I have a Superman 4 with a fully detached cover graded CGC 4.0

[Poekaymon]

On 4/9/2022 at 9:13 PM, Roger66 said:

Thank you everyone for your input and help so far. 

What bothers me at this point in time is I asked David to please consider a third party to mediate - someone we both know and respected on the Boards (and that covers a solid handful) but David immediately refused. His passionate belief that I am to be held fully accountable for 2 books that were very possibly damaged by a third party after leaving his hands perhaps a year ago should bear more scrutiny.  I know David to be a good guy but his decision to accuse me of "gross misrepresentation" in public without even the slightest consideration that the books could very well have been damaged by the pressing (CV4) and whoever or whatever detached the cover on the Baker after it admittedly left his hands not detached and then find himself further disappointed by auction results - all the while expecting what he unwaveringly determined as "full compensation" from me - is just troublesome in my book.  Plus I believe this could have been better handled privately with some sense of earnestness but for David's steadfast refusal to consider even an iota of fault on his or another involved party's end.  And if we should mediate - what about the potential damages to my reputation esp if David should be determined fully at fault by a third party of our choosing?

I'd be on your side if it wasn't for the line where you said "on the slim chance you are not [happy] we can discuss it than and I promise to do what I can to make things right."  So, now he's not happy.  What do you honestly think "makes things right"?  If you were on his side of the deal, what would you want?    

As for "potential damages to my reputation," there won't be any, particularly if you guys just come back here and say it's resolved.  Which really shouldn't be that tough from what I've seen.

[jimjum12]

Something no one mentioned, sometimes a CGC 6.0 is an 8.0 with a fingerprint, which further complicates a meeting of the minds in a trade scenario. If you want a raw to be slabbed, it's simplest to assign a "price per point" factor and finalize after the slabbing is complete, otherwise there will just be too many moving parts. GOD BLESS.... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[Ryan.]

On 4/10/2022 at 3:45 AM, Poekaymon said:

As for "potential damages to my reputation," there won't be any,

Arguable.