Is anyone else getting books back with warped inner wells? 23 23

[mikenyc]

On 9/5/2024 at 8:09 PM, MAY1979 said:

You’ve repeated this many, many times throughout this thread. The premise requires us to extrapolate that CGC not only completely understands what is happening but is selectively applying that lower standard to those who submit in smaller numbers; favoring those who submit in volume. 

Not sure I would draw that conclusion from anecdotal evidence. 

Edited September 6 by mikenyc
Referring to number 4. In above post

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

On 9/5/2024 at 7:55 PM, MAY1979 said:

My books took 8 week to get back from re-holdering and they were in worse condition than when i have sent them back. 50% had color breaking ticks and the bend remained.

If my 9.8's were cracked out and re-submitted they would be 9.4's at best. I'm not alone it that as it seems to be the norm. Simply read the last 20-25 pages of this thread and you can confirm the last sentence.

I’m so sorry to hear this. Your thread rundown that you just made to me a few posts up? Very restrained, given the situation. 

[MAY1979]

On 9/5/2024 at 9:20 PM, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

I’m so sorry to hear this. Your thread rundown that you just made to me a few posts up? Very restrained, given the situation. 

BTW; Love your Forum ID

[SusScrofaX]

I just recently got back into the hobby (most of my collection is from my teens in the 80s and 90s) and struggled with the decision whether or not to keep my collection raw or go the route of grading the more valuable books. Finally came to the conclusion that it would be a fun experience to take the top 4 books and submit them to the industry leader in grading. I went the route of submitting through my LCS for simplicity.

It's been the exact opposite of fun, and it all comes down to a lack of transparency. Things happen and when businesses are transparent and proactive when addressing problems, customers can be understanding.

CGC has placed their customers in a position where many of us are on pins and needles wondering if books with great sentimental or monetary value are being damaged.

Not only are they not being transparent about the origin of the problem and what is being done to address it, they are clearly falling behind on processing submissions. They continue to claim a 15 working day turn-around time for modern books when this is clearly not the case. Just announce the actual turn around times! I'm sure we are all happy to wait longer for proper encapsulation! Be up-front about it, CGC.

CGC needs to work on both their QC AND their PR. I'll be sticking to raw collecting for the near future. I just hope my 4 most favorite books aren't bananas.

[Stuk]

On 9/5/2024 at 1:19 PM, Stefan_W said:

I completely agree with you, and I dont think you were rude at all. I dont mind answering questions about the positions I take. 

The distinction I am making is I am talking specifically about human error being the source cause of the problem. Managers ignoring something is a massive and very expensive issue, if that did happen, but that did not cause the issue to begin with. Enabled it - yeah for sure, if that is what happened. 

Doesn't the view that "if it was human error then they would have fixed it" depend on CGC actually seeing it as something that needs fixing? (Or is that what you are saying?) DaveFSU just posted about getting back 40+ books from a bowing ME re-submission and said the books were returned unchanged because, per CS, the bowing was normal. CGC's only statement (?) didn't refer to this as a "problem," did it? But if they really don't (even privately) see this as a problem then that would be the ultimate hubris. And this is what brings me to Iconic1s 's post about all of this fitting snugly within CGC's new business model—the "CGC" label is what is valuable, not the book. This may be true, but could it really be intentional or has CGC just wound up here by happenstance, inertia, etc.? It's hard to believe, but if it is intentional then the idea that they don't see bowing as a problem would be consistent with it. 

[Tnexus]

On 9/5/2024 at 7:22 PM, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

That explains why I’ve gotten my GA back, but not my moderns. 

CGC may not be changing their public position, but the fact they don’t just slab my moderns means, to me at least, that they are acknowledging the problem (at least internally). Otherwise, they’d go ahead and encapsulate my books just to shut me up

I think CGC is well aware of this problem. People want to speculate what's going on, but I think the simplest answer is probably the most likely one. And that is that CGC knows there's a problem, but they don't know how to fix it. They can't stop production because it costs them money, they can't announce it because that costs them money (and liabilities), and you can't just redesign the slab because that takes time and money. So what do you do? Stay quiet, pretend like everything is normal, and try any and all bandaid fixes in secret. (Though it also wouldn't surprise me if we see some sort of coincidental slab "improvement" announcement before Newport Beach opens shop.)

Edited September 6 by Tnexus

[LordRahl]

On 9/5/2024 at 8:10 PM, Tnexus said:

I think CGC is well aware of this problem. People want to speculate what's going on, but I think the simplest answer is probably the most likely one. And that is that CGC knows there's a problem, but they don't know how to fix it. They can't stop production because it costs them money, they can't announce it because that costs them money (and liabilities), and you can't just redesign the slab because that takes time and money. So what do you do? Stay quiet, pretend like everything is normal, and try any and all bandaid fixes in secret. (Though it also wouldn't surprise me if we see some sort of coincidental slab "improvement" announcement before Newport Beach opens shop.)

While everything you say is perfectly logical, the one thing that I don't get is, how can they not know the cause of the problem. I mean they've been slabbing books for 20 years and didn't have this issue then all of a sudden a few months ago, BAM. Now, bent wells. Also, it seems isolated to modern subs. In theory all CGC needs to do is a comparison between last year's processes and this year or vintage versus modern and they should be able to figure it out pretty quickly. I just don't get why they wouldn't be able to figure it out

[GawkHawk]

I got 5 SA Marvels back yesterday and each one is totally flat, unlike many of the moderns from the last several batches that I submitted.  Looks like I'll be submitting vintage until the curved inner wells get fixed.

[MAY1979]

On 9/6/2024 at 12:50 AM, LordRahl said:

While everything you say is perfectly logical, the one thing that I don't get is, how can they not know the cause of the problem. I mean they've been slabbing books for 20 years and didn't have this issue then all of a sudden a few months ago, BAM. Now, bent wells. Also, it seems isolated to modern subs. In theory all CGC needs to do is a comparison between last year's processes and this year or vintage versus modern and they should be able to figure it out pretty quickly. I just don't get why they wouldn't be able to figure it out

I have it going back to 427 series which is June 2023. From 427-435 seems to be a coin flip, then a near certainty from 436+

Edited September 6 by MAY1979

[grendel013]

Another great video from @Stefan_W. 

[DaveSFU]

 

On 9/5/2024 at 5:24 PM, VintageComics said:

By 1973/74, Marvel at least, had gone to a noticeably thinner cover stock. I can't remember right now when / if that changed for DC.

So Bronze books (Moderns, 1975 and later as designated by CGC) seem to use thinner cover stock than early 70's books. 

This may or may not be a factor but it's worth noting. 

 

Almost positive this has the biggest impact on the degree of damage.   All my 75-83(ish) books were the ones most heavily damaged.   It got less from that point in the timeline forward.   Same degree of warping produced less spine ticks.   Its consistent across what ive been seeing other people on the boards, Facebook and IG post in the "mail call" posts too.   I cant tell you how many 9.8 Wolverine 1's from the SS Signing ive seen people post and show off that have visible damage.   

[Yorick]

On 9/5/2024 at 10:50 AM, MadGenius said:

It's been assumed that this issue is only affecting Modern (1975-present) books, but are we certain of that? If we are, then why is it only affecting that segment of books? There's not much difference in structure between a 1974 comic and a 1976 comic for example. It could be argued that ultra-moderns are printed on better quality paper than the newsprint used back in the day, so theoretically shouldn't more modern books be sturdier and thus more resistant to bending than older books?

If only modern tier books are being affected, then we can rule out many outside factors such as environment and materials. The answer can almost only be human error if, in fact, the warped inner well is only showing up on modern tier books. 

1975 is the date set by CGC to change the submission fee.  Pre-75 is $40, post-75 is $25.  I wonder why it cost less to grade a post 1975 book? 

[Tnexus]

On 9/5/2024 at 11:50 PM, LordRahl said:

While everything you say is perfectly logical, the one thing that I don't get is, how can they not know the cause of the problem. I mean they've been slabbing books for 20 years and didn't have this issue then all of a sudden a few months ago, BAM. Now, bent wells. Also, it seems isolated to modern subs. In theory all CGC needs to do is a comparison between last year's processes and this year or vintage versus modern and they should be able to figure it out pretty quickly. I just don't get why they wouldn't be able to figure it out

It's very likely they know what the problem is, they may just not know how to fix it. The swap to a full seal to fix the Swapgate drama is the probable cause. The dates line up too well to be a fluke. But they can't revert to the old seal because then they're back to square one.

Edited September 6 by Tnexus

[Stefan_W]

On 9/6/2024 at 11:14 AM, grendel013 said:

Another great video from @Stefan_W. 

Thank you for watching!

[CGC Mike]

Hi all

I have not read today's posts yet, as I am on vacation.  Here is a new statement that I have been given to post.

We have seen reports that some of the soft-plastic wells used inside of the CGC holder exhibit a curve when viewed from the side. After learning of this, we conducted an extensive review and found that the smallest well size, which is used for the thinnest comic books, is more pliable than other wells and, in some cases, will exhibit a slight curve.

Importantly, this curve does not cause any damage to the comic book, and it does not affect the grade in any way. The angle of bend required to create a stress line simply cannot be done within the CGC holder. In addition, very high grade comic books can still exhibit minimal stress lines according to CGC’s official grading standards.

We do not consider this slight curve to be a mechanical error that requires reholdering. Still, we are always listening and want to serve our customers the best way we can. We have found that our next-largest well size does not exhibit this slight curve and have started to use that well in lieu of our smallest size.

We appreciate all of the feedback from our community, and we are grateful to be the hobby’s first choice for grading for nearly 25 years. Many of us are collectors too, and we care deeply about the services that we provide. If you have any comments, questions or concerns, please write to us at Service@CGCcomics.com or call or text us at +1-855-GRADE10.

[Nschenks]

[MadGenius]

On 9/6/2024 at 2:50 PM, CGC Mike said:

Hi all

I have not read today's posts yet, as I am on vacation.  Here is a new statement that I have been given to post.

We have seen reports that some of the soft-plastic wells used inside of the CGC holder exhibit a curve when viewed from the side. After learning of this, we conducted an extensive review and found that the smallest well size, which is used for the thinnest comic books, is more pliable than other wells and, in some cases, will exhibit a slight curve.

Importantly, this curve does not cause any damage to the comic book, and it does not affect the grade in any way. The angle of bend required to create a stress line simply cannot be done within the CGC holder. In addition, very high grade comic books can still exhibit minimal stress lines according to CGC’s official grading standards.

We do not consider this slight curve to be a mechanical error that requires reholdering. Still, we are always listening and want to serve our customers the best way we can. We have found that our next-largest well size does not exhibit this slight curve and have started to use that well in lieu of our smallest size.

We appreciate all of the feedback from our community, and we are grateful to be the hobby’s first choice for grading for nearly 25 years. Many of us are collectors too, and we care deeply about the services that we provide. If you have any comments, questions or concerns, please write to us at Service@CGCcomics.com or call or text us at +1-855-GRADE10.

[MadGenius]

On 9/6/2024 at 2:50 PM, CGC Mike said:

Hi all

I have not read today's posts yet, as I am on vacation.  Here is a new statement that I have been given to post.

We have seen reports that some of the soft-plastic wells used inside of the CGC holder exhibit a curve when viewed from the side. After learning of this, we conducted an extensive review and found that the smallest well size, which is used for the thinnest comic books, is more pliable than other wells and, in some cases, will exhibit a slight curve.

Importantly, this curve does not cause any damage to the comic book, and it does not affect the grade in any way. The angle of bend required to create a stress line simply cannot be done within the CGC holder. In addition, very high grade comic books can still exhibit minimal stress lines according to CGC’s official grading standards.

We do not consider this slight curve to be a mechanical error that requires reholdering. Still, we are always listening and want to serve our customers the best way we can. We have found that our next-largest well size does not exhibit this slight curve and have started to use that well in lieu of our smallest size.

We appreciate all of the feedback from our community, and we are grateful to be the hobby’s first choice for grading for nearly 25 years. Many of us are collectors too, and we care deeply about the services that we provide. If you have any comments, questions or concerns, please write to us at Service@CGCcomics.com or call or text us at +1-855-GRADE10.

I mean...seriously? This is materially false. We've seen damaged books in holders with the curved inner well. There are many, many accounts from pressers who have done their work to eliminate spine ticks on books only for them to return when placed in the warped inner well. It's clear CGC is in CYA mode here. Good luck with that. 2025 can't come soon enough.

[LordRahl]

On 9/6/2024 at 11:40 AM, Yorick said:

1975 is the date set by CGC to change the submission fee.  Pre-75 is $40, post-75 is $25.  I wonder why it cost less to grade a post 1975 book? 

It doesn't cost any less to grade a 1975 book than a 1974 book, but there has to be some sort of cutoff so 1975 it is. It was initially 1975 and then they tried to adjust to 1980 as the cutoff but CBCS came along and had their cutoff at 1975 so CGC, knowing they would lose business to CBCS, went back to 1975. Competition = good thing for the consumer. Realistically it probably does cost less to grade a book from the 2000's than it does one from the 70's. It doesn't take long to see that a 10 year old book is a 9.8 but a 7.0 from 1976 would take a bit longer to grade. Multiply that out by the many thousands that they grade and I get why it would cost less to grade a modern than a vintage book. 

[LordRahl]

On 9/6/2024 at 11:58 AM, MadGenius said:

I mean...seriously? This is materially false. We've seen damaged books in holders with the curved inner well. There are many, many accounts from pressers who have done their work to eliminate spine ticks on books only for them to return when placed in the warped inner well. It's clear CGC is in CYA mode here. Good luck with that. 2025 can't come soon enough.

I agree but I never expected them to admit to damaging books. The liability is too great. I'd be happy if their fix works, it makes some sense but my question would be WHY TF did they wait so long for what is a pretty simple fix?