HUGE increase in CGC Grading fees 2 2

[csaag]

On 12/12/2023 at 4:25 PM, Axelrod said:

It's kind of criminal for them to charge such huge fees based on what they think the books are worth.  I mean, you really ought to be able to submit a book and just say, please grade this, and get it done for a flat fee. Not like the service changes.  They are not an auction house to be demanding a cut of the total value like this.  

Now, if you want insurance, that's a whole different ball game.  I understand declaring a value, and then they might have to charge more to cover the insurance.  But if you want to set your own "risk" level as far as that goes, they shouldn't be bumping you up because they decide the books are more valuable than what you decided.  

Meh.  What do I know.  I guess this happens everywhere, but still annoys me.  

Would CGC settle a claim for what he put as FMV or FMV based on what they ultimately charged him?   Is that specified anywhere how this type of case would be handled?

[Axelrod]

On 12/15/2023 at 7:00 PM, csaag said:

Would CGC settle a claim for what he put as FMV or FMV based on what they ultimately charged him?   Is that specified anywhere how this type of case would be handled?

I'm sure it's specified that if he puts in a value and they lose/f-up his book, that's the max value he gets, even if the book was worth more.  That's kind of how insurance works.  But, on the flip side, if he over-values his book and they lose/f-up his book, they will only give him "fair market" for the book, and not whatever it was he valued it/paid for.  

But if you're asking if they upcharge him because (they say) he undervalued his book and he pays the upcharge, then I would assume they are back on the hook for the value they said it was when they upcharged him.  Don't think they can upcharge him, lose/f-up his book, and then say "well, we're only compensating you based on the value you originally claimed....

[sledgehammer]

On 12/12/2023 at 11:30 AM, comicparadox said:

Agree, good problem to have, but I was quite surprised by the fee!

If you had submitted this 2 years ago, and a copy had happened to be sold 2 weeks before, they might have been able to claim the value was $75,000.

Then they could have told you the fee was $3,000, and today you would have a copy worth whatever you could sell it for now.

Congrats on the good fortune. I'm curious what you thought the grade was, because like what has been said, a 2.5 recently sold for more than what qualifies for the $85 fee tier.

[kcm54]

So, the moral is always undervalue your books? 

[Action252Kid]

Do you have a picture of the Action 242?  That's a monster grade for that book.

[Lightning55]

On 12/15/2023 at 8:24 PM, Axelrod said:

I'm sure it's specified that if he puts in a value and they lose/f-up his book, that's the max value he gets, even if the book was worth more.  That's kind of how insurance works.  But, on the flip side, if he over-values his book and they lose/f-up his book, they will only give him "fair market" for the book, and not whatever it was he valued it/paid for.  

But if you're asking if they upcharge him because (they say) he undervalued his book and he pays the upcharge, then I would assume they are back on the hook for the value they said it was when they upcharged him.  Don't think they can upcharge him, lose/f-up his book, and then say "well, we're only compensating you based on the value you originally claimed....

There was a thread earlier this year where the submitter got a huge upcharge, and checked with CGC as to how they were going to handle the return insurance.  They said they only use the original DV and last I saw, would not deviate from that.  He scrambled to find alternative insurance, like C.I.S.

So they got the extra money for the service, which if submitted properly in the correct tier, was supposedly to pay to insure the book for that large number.  But since they didn't know it was a large value until grading was completed, they were never on the hook for more than the DV.  And even when they knew what they had, they never intended to insure it for that higher value, either at the facility, or en-route.  So what was the extra the money for???  Profit, of course, and because they can.

[Heronext]

Tell them you can't afford it and ask them to send back to you raw.  Sell as raw unpressed VF and NM- with a note that CGC evaluated them at those grades and found no restoration 

[Eric C M]

On 12/12/2023 at 4:25 PM, Axelrod said:

It's kind of criminal for them to charge such huge fees based on what they think the books are worth.  I mean, you really ought to be able to submit a book and just say, please grade this, and get it done for a flat fee. Not like the service changes.  They are not an auction house to be demanding a cut of the total value like this.  

Now, if you want insurance, that's a whole different ball game.  I understand declaring a value, and then they might have to charge more to cover the insurance.  But if you want to set your own "risk" level as far as that goes, they shouldn't be bumping you up because they decide the books are more valuable than what you decided.  

Meh.  What do I know.  I guess this happens everywhere, but still annoys me.  

Agreed, this business practice might be a bit more palatable if they were also refunding money when the customer is getting grades lower than anticipated. I didn’t get a refund when I submitted (clean/press/grade) under High Value and then ended up with a book that is worth less than $300. But they will charge more if I undervalue something…

[PossumGrease]

The process doesn't pass the smell test, but we could always send our books elsewhere if we don't like it, right? Or not send our books at all. 

Still, to charge more based on a nebulous "market value" and then to not even insure the items for the amount you required me to pay, it just feels wrong. But I also think it's criminal for a real estate agent to get 3-6% to sell a house, even though it's the same amount of work to sell a $100k home as a $1 million home.

[the blob]

On 12/29/2023 at 4:33 PM, PossumGrease said:

The process doesn't pass the smell test, but we could always send our books elsewhere if we don't like it, right? Or not send our books at all. 

Still, to charge more based on a nebulous "market value" and then to not even insure the items for the amount you required me to pay, it just feels wrong. But I also think it's criminal for a real estate agent to get 3-6% to sell a house, even though it's the same amount of work to sell a $100k home as a $1 million home.

It probably isn't the same amount of work when you take into account staging, assuming the $1 million home is bigger (and will probably get higher end staging) and more ads for the more expensive home. Of course, the $100K home could be a brute to sell and have 100 showings, so yeah. With that said it is just as much work to carry an $80 steak to me as a $12 pasta, so why is my tip based on the value rather than per plate?

 

[PossumGrease]

On 12/29/2023 at 8:08 PM, the blob said:

It probably isn't the same amount of work when you take into account staging, assuming the $1 million home is bigger (and will probably get higher end staging) and more ads for the more expensive home. Of course, the $100K home could be a brute to sell and have 100 showings, so yeah. With that said it is just as much work to carry an $80 steak to me as a $12 pasta, so why is my tip based on the value rather than per plate?

 

That’s a great point. If we can’t ban tipping completely, then at least charge it based on number of plates or number of customers. Not the cost of the meal. Similarly, I would like it if the grading companies charged based on the time and expense involved and not the value of the book.