Is anyone else getting books back with warped inner wells? 27 27

[DanJD]

On 9/25/2024 at 12:18 PM, lostboys said:

Comic books MUST BE FLAT in any type of storage to avoid spine damage.

 

This is day one stuff...

 

What are we even talking about here?

Unreal.

Thank you!

[miraclemet]

CGC CUstomer Service is giving me a headache... 

First (on 9/22) they tell me: 
"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."

So I say "Cool. So if I resubmit, for a reholder, you will use the next largest size well, that doesn't have the curve?"

To which they say:  
If the submission is submitted again I would not be able to promise they will use the new holders.

So they are using the next largest size well holders, even though the curved problem holders arent a problem (then why change?), BUT they cant say they'll use those holders if I resubmit, even though they're using those holders?!?!?

@CGC Mike these guys are killing us, and making your life harder in this thread... So what is it? Is CGC now using the next to smallest well instead of the smallest well? Or are they still using the smallest well? And why cant Customer Service say for certain that a reholder wont end up in the same smallest well slab with the non-problematic curve?   

[MadGenius]

On 9/25/2024 at 1:38 PM, miraclemet said:

CGC CUstomer Service is giving me a headache... 

First (on 9/22) they tell me: 
"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."

So I say "Cool. So if I resubmit, for a reholder, you will use the next largest size well, that doesn't have the curve?"

To which they say:  
If the submission is submitted again I would not be able to promise they will use the new holders.

So they are using the next largest size well holders, even though the curved problem holders arent a problem (then why change?), BUT they cant say they'll use those holders if I resubmit, even though they're using those holders?!?!?

@CGC Mike these guys are killing us, and making your life harder in this thread... So what is it? Is CGC now using the next to smallest well instead of the smallest well? Or are they still using the smallest well? And why cant Customer Service say for certain that a reholder wont end up in the same smallest well slab with the non-problematic curve?   

I suspect that this confusing exchange is because the curve doesn't have much to do with the size of the well at all, but rather some kind of problem with the encapsulation process (seals too tight? inexperienced encapsulators? lack of QC?), but I'm interested to hear CGC's response.

[miraclemet]

On 9/25/2024 at 2:52 PM, MadGenius said:

I suspect that this confusing exchange is because the curve doesn't have much to do with the size of the well at all, but rather some kind of problem with the encapsulation process (seals too tight? inexperienced encapsulators? lack of QC?), but I'm interested to hear CGC's response.

they seemed to think that where ever the problem lay, it was less likely (or not going) to occur with the larger/deeper wells, so even if the problem wasnt the actual material but the process, if you knew your deeper wells "solved" the problem (either by material or by the material as affected by the process) why wouldnt you just use the deeper wells for the time being? And why would you continue to use the shallow wells that seems to make the problem continue to crop up? 

[MadGenius]

On 9/25/2024 at 2:59 PM, miraclemet said:

they seemed to think that where ever the problem lay, it was less likely (or not going) to occur with the larger/deeper wells, so even if the problem wasnt the actual material but the process, if you knew your deeper wells "solved" the problem (either by material or by the material as affected by the process) why wouldnt you just use the deeper wells for the time being? And why would you continue to use the shallow wells that seems to make the problem continue to crop up? 

Very curious! What we know so far is this: CGC made an official statement saying the larger inner wells will solve the curving issue. We've also received confirmation that the smaller wells were discontinued "a few weeks ago." But also, people who have received books this week are reporting the curved inner well is still a thing. Someone is lying and I don't think it's the customers who want their books encapsulated in a problem-free slab.

[Msgarmar]

On 9/25/2024 at 8:32 AM, SpineTic said:

From ask cgc this morning. 

 

 

This was my question they responded to. I have a feeling this is not the last we’ll hear about this (just a hunch!)

I’m disappointed but also now faced with the decision to pop it open and lose the signature series but prevent potential further damage. If it was a blue label it would be an easy decision. I’ve got a few other SS books being graded right now so I’m hoping they figure it out. 
 

It was a cool experience to meet JR Jr either way!

[OJ Pimpson]

On 9/24/2024 at 8:27 AM, Barrakuda said:

While this would be excellent from a customer service perspective, this is actually not something CGC would see as in their best interest.  If they generate photographic evidence of the condition of a book that presents without damage on receipt and later shows damage after encapsulation, they cannot then deny the damages came from their process or blame inbound shipping (as they could if you provide your own images of the book pre-shipping).

CGC's demonstrated stance on integrity and customer service clearly indicates that this is something they will not consider.

I would argue it’s in their best interest provided they are confident that they can resolve this issue and not repeat it in the future. PSA implemented this policy because droolers were submitting imperfect cards and then going online and blaming PSA for the defects. It protects them from bad publicity and false allegations. However this policy can only be implemented if you aren’t actively damaging your customers collectables and have no way to stop it. 

[HotKey]

the fact that cgc can't say "we stopped using them on certification number X and everything after that is free of problems." is REALLY amateur hour from the supposed leader in the industry. 

If someone wrote this script for Hollywood it would get rejected for not being believable. 

Absolutely unreal.

[miraclemet]

Latest from customer service:

I had asked about reholdering and how to request the deeper, uncurved wells. 

 

Thank you for contacting us back. After reaching out to our internal teams regarding Reholdering the submission. CGC released information today, stating they will be able to replace everything when Reholdering including the inner well. We will be using the new inner-well for the Reholdered submissions and there is no need to request the new well. CGC is using the new well for every Reholder service moving forward. I can assure you the old well is going to be replaced with the new wells if you decide to send the comics back for Reholder. For submitting the comics you would select the Reholder service with the "unlimited value" for a 3 business day turnaround time.

[DanJD]

On 9/25/2024 at 5:32 PM, miraclemet said:

Latest from customer service:

I had asked about reholdering and how to request the deeper, uncurved wells. 

 

Thank you for contacting us back. After reaching out to our internal teams regarding Reholdering the submission. CGC released information today, stating they will be able to replace everything when Reholdering including the inner well. We will be using the new inner-well for the Reholdered submissions and there is no need to request the new well. CGC is using the new well for every Reholder service moving forward. I can assure you the old well is going to be replaced with the new wells if you decide to send the comics back for Reholder. For submitting the comics you would select the Reholder service with the "unlimited value" for a 3 business day turnaround time.

Are you having to pay for this reholder service or is CGC eating the cost due to the defective product?  Seems very unfair to pay for a product the first time and then have to pay again because the product was bad and damaging your valuable collectible.

[Homeboy32]

I recently won an X-Men 100 CGC 9.6 with white pages [Cert #4422397001] from Comiclink. Really good looking copy. When I received it, it absolutely has the bend. However, there's no damage to the book. I'm not going to send in for a reholder as the risk of the book getting damaged just isn't worth it. I don't plan on selling it, but if I did, I'd have no problem selling it as is. I don't consider the book damaged. 10yrs from now, nobody will look at my book and even think twice to check the profile. I'm sure I have other books that aren't perfectly flat, but they're mounted on the wall so can't really tell.

[miraclemet]

On 9/25/2024 at 7:21 PM, DanJD said:

Are you having to pay for this reholder service or is CGC eating the cost due to the defective product?  Seems very unfair to pay for a product the first time and then have to pay again because the product was bad and damaging your valuable collectible.

They are not paying for anyone to have their books reholdered... because they say the bent wells aren't damaged... but they stopped using them... for "reasons"

[Stefan_W]

On 9/25/2024 at 7:41 PM, Homeboy32 said:

I recently won an X-Men 100 CGC 9.6 with white pages [Cert #4422397001] from Comiclink. Really good looking copy. When I received it, it absolutely has the bend. However, there's no damage to the book. I'm not going to send in for a reholder as the risk of the book getting damaged just isn't worth it. I don't plan on selling it, but if I did, I'd have no problem selling it as is. I don't consider the book damaged. 10yrs from now, nobody will look at my book and even think twice to check the profile. I'm sure I have other books that aren't perfectly flat, but they're mounted on the wall so can't really tell.

I have a few books like this as well. I dont believe they are as common as the ones that look unpressed, but there are a bunch out there. 

[CGC Mike]

On 9/25/2024 at 1:38 PM, miraclemet said:

@CGC Mike these guys are killing us, and making your life harder in this thread... So what is it? Is CGC now using the next to smallest well instead of the smallest well? Or are they still using the smallest well? And why cant Customer Service say for certain that a reholder wont end up in the same smallest well slab with the non-problematic curve?   

Every reholder gets a completely new inner and outer well.  I promise.

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 9/25/2024 at 4:41 PM, Homeboy32 said:

10yrs from now, nobody will look at my book and even think twice to check the profile.

[Barrakuda]

On 9/25/2024 at 6:02 PM, OJ Pimpson said:

I would argue it’s in their best interest provided they are confident that they can resolve this issue and not repeat it in the future. PSA implemented this policy because droolers were submitting imperfect cards and then going online and blaming PSA for the defects. It protects them from bad publicity and false allegations. However this policy can only be implemented if you aren’t actively damaging your customers collectables and have no way to stop it. 

Absolutely true - if we are talking about a company that takes responsibility for issues, communicates truthfully and frequently, and takes real steps to resolve an issue and prevent reoccurrence in the future.  Essentially, the exact opposite of everything we have seen with this issue to date.

In the case of a company that appears to be doing everything possible to deflect and alter the narrative (remember - their own grading policies are that a non-flat spine is a defect in a book) in order to avoid responsibility, truthfulness, and the monetary cost that owning up to the issue and making whole the customers whose property has been damaged by their products and/or services, then this is not a desirable policy from their perspective.  Instead of protecting a company like this from bad publicity or false allegations, this would do the opposite - expose them for the truth of how they operate.

A company that truly values integrity and is focused on customer service, providing the best product or service possible for the customer's dollar, is a rarity in today's corporate world.  The dollar is the only thing that matters to them - by hook or by crook, but not by taking responsibility.

What kind of company is CGC?  Rather than being a willfully ignorant fanboy or hater, look at what has transcribed over the past months and make an informed determination of your opinion on that one.  I know my opinion.  Can CGC change it?  Yes.  In either direction too, better or worse, based on their actions and not their ludicrous statements.  For me, their actions would need to display a seismic shift in what I see as their corporate culture to one of integrity and customer service, and I would need to see this sustained over a significant period of time.  This does not mean that mistakes won't be made, but how they respond to those mistakes are the most telling way to judge them.

I have a stack of books I put together to submit a few months ago - a first submission as I have never slabbed any of my books before - but I'm not willing to take that risk.  I will either remain a raw only collector, purchase hard cases for my nicer books on my own which means the books never leave my hands and sight, or I will consider an alternative company if I determine they are a viable, trustworthy option whose business plan is to do the best job they can.  

[Homeboy32]

For reference, here's the book. Would I send it in to get it flattened? Sure. But there's no guarantee that the book will come back perfectly flat. Again, I never once thought to look at the profile of a book before buying; Looking at different angles, different views? Sure, but not never on its side. Book is a 9.6 hands down.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

On 9/25/2024 at 1:38 PM, miraclemet said:

CGC CUstomer Service is giving me a headache... 

First (on 9/22) they tell me: 
"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."

So I say "Cool. So if I resubmit, for a reholder, you will use the next largest size well, that doesn't have the curve?"

To which they say:  
If the submission is submitted again I would not be able to promise they will use the new holders.

So they are using the next largest size well holders, even though the curved problem holders arent a problem (then why change?), BUT they cant say they'll use those holders if I resubmit, even though they're using those holders?!?!?

@CGC Mike these guys are killing us, and making your life harder in this thread... So what is it? Is CGC now using the next to smallest well instead of the smallest well? Or are they still using the smallest well? And why cant Customer Service say for certain that a reholder wont end up in the same smallest well slab with the non-problematic curve?   

They can't promise they won't use the cases they previously promised they weren't using any more. What's the confusing part?

[Msgarmar]

On 9/25/2024 at 6:32 PM, miraclemet said:

Latest from customer service:

I had asked about reholdering and how to request the deeper, uncurved wells. 

 

Thank you for contacting us back. After reaching out to our internal teams regarding Reholdering the submission. CGC released information today, stating they will be able to replace everything when Reholdering including the inner well. We will be using the new inner-well for the Reholdered submissions and there is no need to request the new well. CGC is using the new well for every Reholder service moving forward. I can assure you the old well is going to be replaced with the new wells if you decide to send the comics back for Reholder. For submitting the comics you would select the Reholder service with the "unlimited value" for a 3 business day turnaround time.

Wait, there wasn’t an issue with the wells and they weren’t causing damage, but they decided to fix them anyway going forward, and you can get their mistake fixed, the mistake they didn’t make, by paying for the most expensive reholder option which will cost $200 minimum?

Edited Thursday at 09:10 AM by Msgarmar

[lostboys]

On 9/25/2024 at 8:43 PM, Homeboy32 said:

For reference, here's the book. Would I send it in to get it flattened? Sure. But there's no guarantee that the book will come back perfectly flat. Again, I never once thought to look at the profile of a book before buying; Looking at different angles, different views? Sure, but not never on its side. Book is a 9.6 hands down.

If you sold that to me, Id send it back and look for another copy.

Honestly, Id have trouble sleeping if that book was in my collection.

Sure, im a bit OCD but I think most comic collectors are when it comes to big money books.

Id rather spend more for a flat copy and sleep like a baby.