If you were Steve Borock, What would you do?

[jbud73]

jbud,

 

Like I said . . .

 

 

If you were Steve Borock, What would you do?

 

Stick my head in the sand . . .

 

Ya David, I think unfortunately the main problem is that a lot of people still believe that CGC is an independant entity like the FCC, or the securities commission and the like. Part of this is of course because they have marketed themselves as the 'protector of the average Joe' in the big bad comic world full of evil doers

 

In effect I have come to view them as another business entity with a product. Like Gerber, Cole or Diamond. Instead of a Mylar you get a slab and an opinion on a comic book.

[heartened]

Thus, CGC is expected to (1) be lenient with grades, (2) be lenient with upgrading books, and (3) be lenient with what's considered restoration. CGC is simply living up to submitters' expectations.

 

The prices garnered by CGC books pretty much confirm that buyers don't believe CGC is lenient with grades, and based on my personal experience of collecting high grade books before CGC came around, I agree. In fact, I doubt you'll find many on here that view CGC's grading as "lenient" (outliers notwithstanding), regardless of whether or not they agree with CGC's policies on restoration, their relationship with Heritage, with PCS, etc.,.

 

CGC's handling and identifying restoration (pressing is not restoration, and GA books with slight resto getting Blue Labels) can certainly be considered lenient, but they are not lenient with grades.

 

I'm not really sure what you mean by "(2) be lenient with upgrading books"?

 

When a book is re-submitted, what per cent receive the same grade vs. a lower grade vs. a higher grade? If CGC's supplied this information, you might see something interesting.

[FFB]

So who is left? I can't think of anyone. Filling this spot isn't like putting an ad in the paper for a forklift operator.

 

Well, you just need to think "outside the box" . . . comics don't necessarily need to be on their resume, just paper conservation and restoration

 

I disagree. You need someone who is familiar with how restoration looks on a specific type of paper (groundwood pulp interiors and the highly calendared cover stock used on GA and SA books) in order to maximize their chances of spotting the most well hidden work.

[FFB]

Didn't you tell someone else to go buy a dictionary?

 

Why don't you go outside for some exercise to work off some of this newfound aggression. And those cream pies.

Yep I found it.

Ironically it was to Red Hook which you said the following:

Brad,

 

Do yourself a favor and tell your family you want a dictionary for Christmas.

 

So? In the time that took you, you could have finished your jog. You'd be in a much better mood right now too, because exercise releases endorphins and reduces stress.

 

Regards, Btw I do like your Captain America sig. ( I threw that one in to be nice)

 

FU Mica!

[Mushroom]

If I were Borock I would do nothing........the company is making money, the loudest opponents to the model all yell in his own backyard (keep your friends close to you........keep your enemies closer), slabs keep going up in price, they have a constant stream of tweaks that sustains the re-slabbing ethos, they support grade upgrades, they have their own chop shop and they have big friends in the hobby.

 

Why change anything?????

[Shield]

Maybe CGC should replace their 9.2/9.4/9.6/9.8/9.9 grades with simply 9.5-/9.5+.

 

That way...there would be less incentive to resubmit for incremental bumps.

 

I think CGC should change Wizard First to Darth First labels if I submitted enough books

 

Darth, that should read:

 

I think CGC WOULD change Wizard First to Darth First labels if I submitted enough books

[Darthdiesel]

Maybe CGC should replace their 9.2/9.4/9.6/9.8/9.9 grades with simply 9.5-/9.5+.

 

That way...there would be less incentive to resubmit for incremental bumps.

 

I think CGC should change Wizard First to Darth First labels if I submitted enough books

 

Darth, that should read:

 

I think CGC WOULD change Wizard First to Darth First labels if I submitted enough books

 

maybe a 2007 resolution...

[garthgantu]

Doing nothing, or next to nothing, which IMO is the most likely scenario. From the standpoint of any company exec, what's broken? (Bear in mind that they have no PR/communications expertise, especially at the executive level.) I can just see the CFO laughing out loud as he reads the proposal for whatever costly solution might help stem the tide of undetectable restoration. "You want $xx,000 to do WHAT?"

 

IMO, CGC should

- implement a scanning process that captures images of all books submitted and has some ability to use OCR technology to identify very similar books

 

- incorporate a system by which every book submitted to CGC has a serial number stamped somewhere inside. This serial number would be stamped in ink that's only visible under UV light or etc., so as not to harm the aesthetic qualities of the book. Each such stamp would be in the same place, so checking to see if a book is a resub becomes a 5-second process. If the book in question IS a resub, and is not acknowledged as such by the submitter, CGC can then search its dbase for both visual and text-based info pertaining to the book in question.

 

- CGC should also make full disclosure re: exactly what its definition of restoration is (this would also give CGC an opportunity to redefine its definition of resto based on new procedures put in place, changes in the marketplace, etc.) *I don't care if CGC's definition of resto changes moderately over the years, as long as they disclose the definition publicly and note all forms of resto, both those that warrant a PLOD and those that are acceptable by their definition, on the label.

 

- CGC should make full disclosure re: its grading policy while they're at it. Today, we have only vague assurances that "we at CGC follow the OS Grading Guide guidelines, more or less." A quick review of the OS Grading Guide and a handful of CGC slabs will show that this isn't strictly true. A full "white paper" on how CGC views a given defect would help reassure people that CGC's grade designations are not moving targets.

 

Oh, and I'd probably have a couple of stiff drinks, too

[heartened]

If I were Borock I would do nothing........the company is making money, the loudest opponents to the model all yell in his own backyard (keep your friends close to you........keep your enemies closer), slabs keep going up in price, they have a constant stream of tweaks that sustains the re-slabbing ethos, they support grade upgrades, they have their own chop shop and they have big friends in the hobby.

 

Why change anything?????

 

Why? Because as a company you need to think long-term if you want to stay profitable over time.

[Silver Surfer]

I would think that if the top of the book has been trimmed the edge would look completely different from from the bottom if viewed under some kind of microscope, no? Bottom edge would show the age and yellowing after 30 years of storage and the freshly trimmed edge might not have the same sort of oxidized look to it? Maybe the inks would look fresher under close examination? I wish we had a resto/paper expert who could comment on this.

[drbanner]

Thus, CGC is expected to (1) be lenient with grades, (2) be lenient with upgrading books, and (3) be lenient with what's considered restoration. CGC is simply living up to submitters' expectations.

 

The prices garnered by CGC books pretty much confirm that buyers don't believe CGC is lenient with grades, and based on my personal experience of collecting high grade books before CGC came around, I agree. In fact, I doubt you'll find many on here that view CGC's grading as "lenient" (outliers notwithstanding), regardless of whether or not they agree with CGC's policies on restoration, their relationship with Heritage, with PCS, etc.,.

 

CGC's handling and identifying restoration (pressing is not restoration, and GA books with slight resto getting Blue Labels) can certainly be considered lenient, but they are not lenient with grades.

 

I'm not really sure what you mean by "(2) be lenient with upgrading books"?

 

When a book is re-submitted, what per cent receive the same grade vs. a lower grade vs. a higher grade? If CGC's supplied this information, you might see something interesting.

 

I have re-submitted a few books, and they all came back in the same grade!!

 

Resubmits are either books that the submitter feels look better than the grade they received the first-time through (like mine!), or are books that have been worked on (pressed, dry-cleaned) such that they actually are in a higher grade the 2nd time around. As such, I would expect to see a higher percentage of re-submits come back with higher grades than lower grades since people aren't going to re-submit books they feel are over-graded!

 

However, I don't believe the act of re-submittal in and of itself has any bearing on the re-grade, since the graders have no idea whether or not the book has been graded once, twice, or never.

[mica]

FU Mica!

Fond Undertakings to you as well.

I received your love letter and have replied

P.S. I jogged this morning.

[Mushroom]

If I were Borock I would do nothing........the company is making money, the loudest opponents to the model all yell in his own backyard (keep your friends close to you........keep your enemies closer), slabs keep going up in price, they have a constant stream of tweaks that sustains the re-slabbing ethos, they support grade upgrades, they have their own chop shop and they have big friends in the hobby.

 

Why change anything?????

 

Why? Because as a company you need to think long-term if you want to stay profitable over time.

 

They do think long term....

 

Change label colours

Drop information

Don't declare grading criteria

Support clean and press

Special deals for BSD's (wizard first)

A production line to make Henry Ford jealous "heritage to friessen to cgc to Heritage to friessen to cgc to Heritage ad infinitum"

Paper requiring change in 7 years

 

I think their profitability is guaranteed. By the way that is the only thing they guarantee.

[divad]

So who is left? I can't think of anyone. Filling this spot isn't like putting an ad in the paper for a forklift operator.

 

Well, you just need to think "outside the box" . . . comics don't necessarily need to be on their resume, just paper conservation and restoration

 

I disagree. You need someone who is familiar with how restoration looks on a specific type of paper (groundwood pulp interiors and the highly calendared cover stock used on GA and SA books) in order to maximize their chances of spotting the most well hidden work.

 

This really surprises me

[divad]

IMO, CGC should

- implement a scanning process that captures images of all books submitted and has some ability to use OCR technology to identify very similar books

 

- incorporate a system by which every book submitted to CGC has a serial number stamped somewhere inside. This serial number would be stamped in ink that's only visible under UV light or etc., so as not to harm the aesthetic qualities of the book. Each such stamp would be in the same place, so checking to see if a book is a resub becomes a 5-second process. If the book in question IS a resub, and is not acknowledged as such by the submitter, CGC can then search its dbase for both visual and text-based info pertaining to the book in question.

 

- CGC should also make full disclosure re: exactly what its definition of restoration is (this would also give CGC an opportunity to redefine its definition of resto based on new procedures put in place, changes in the marketplace, etc.) *I don't care if CGC's definition of resto changes moderately over the years, as long as they disclose the definition publicly and note all forms of resto, both those that warrant a PLOD and those that are acceptable by their definition, on the label.

 

- CGC should make full disclosure re: its grading policy while they're at it. Today, we have only vague assurances that "we at CGC follow the OS Grading Guide guidelines, more or less." A quick review of the OS Grading Guide and a handful of CGC slabs will show that this isn't strictly true. A full "white paper" on how CGC views a given defect would help reassure people that CGC's grade designations are not moving targets.

 

All good suggestions Garth!

 

deaf ears however?

[Darthdiesel]

deaf ears however?

 

 

What'd you say?

[Ron_Nasty]

Hire Hammer.

[Red Hook]

And while you're at it, hire Jason!

[Ron_Nasty]

Jason & Hammer.

 

sounds like a law firm.

[FFB]

Jason & Hammer.

 

sounds like a law firm.

 

Sounds more like a WWF tag-team.