I just soiled myself.....and I couldn't be happier.

[drbanner]

No, I don't buy that. I don't think CGC should have to "advertise" the fact that they make mistakes sometimes. I think a willingness to review a book where the customer feels a mistake was made is enough.

 

I agree with Scott on this one. Keep in mind that it likely was Borock who was the original grader on this book anyways.

You CGC apologist you, let's get him boys!!

[divad]

 

OK, so let’s recap here…

 

We have Mr Schmell’s FF #1 listed on his site at a cool half-mil…9.6 with Off-White pages. This has been in his possession for close to ten years and in a slab for over five years.

 

You’d think that, after having the book in plastic for more than five years, and being convinced that the page quality was actually Off-White to White, an experienced seller like Mr Schmell would have covered all the bases before listing the book for sale? Apparently not.

 

A couple of days after the book is linked here, and a (facetious) comment is made regarding it needing White Pages to justify the price, it is whisked off to Sarasota and processed through a tier/submission process that hasn’t previously existed…it’s apparently called a ‘Page Quality Review (Because You Were Tough On PQ Back In 2000) But Not A Grade Review (Because You Were A Bit Loose On This Back In 2000)’.

 

Now, the book is either removed from the inner well (in which case it surely needs to be regraded, despite the option box Mr Schmell ticked?) or the page quality is gauged without removal (in which case CGC employees possess X-ray vision), but either way, most surprisingly, it jumps all the way up from Off-White straight to White…do not pass go, do not collect $200. This was actually better than Mr Schmell had previously publicly claimed, but coincidentally was what this board suggested it needed to justify the price tag.

 

The book retained its serial number (presumably because Mr Schmell also ticked the box on the submission form that gives this option, the ‘Please Ensure We Lose The Paper Trial On This Puppy’ box) and a new scan appears on his web-site of the new, improved FF #1, but without any disclosure regarding its recent history.

 

Now, given all of this (and the past and present monumental [embarrassing lack of self control]-ups)…how in god’s name can anyone…anyone…maintain support for, or belief in, either CGC, or their inner circle of cronies? It is totally beyond me how anybody can think this is anything other than rampant nepotism, designed not to preserve the ‘long-term health of the hobby’, but rather to squeeze the last red cent out of some poor schmuck and further line the pockets of someone who deserves nothing.

 

It is further evidence that, providing you know the Secret Squirrel Club handshake, CGC has no processes or standards, other than those you demand (remember Mr Schmell’s on-site box of goodies?). If you know which type of wine to bring to Sarasota as a present for Mr Borock, CGC are guardians of nothing other than your bank balance.

 

But then again, as bed partners, Mr Schmell and CGC are perfectly suited to each other, because Mr Schmell has the book listed on his site without any disclosure of the under-the-table improvement it recently obtained.

 

So, we’re the enemies of the hobby, the people who are destroying its future and spoiling things for the innocent collector? Give me a break! All we’re asking for is a level playing field for dealers and collectors alike, transparency and clearly defined standards from the premier grading company in the industry, and disclosure as to precisely what we’re buying.

 

How is that anything other than beneficial to the health of the hobby?

 

On the other side of the coin, the self-appointed ‘guardians’ of the industry have yet again proved themselves to be entirely committed to the playing of the system to the benefit of their bestest chums. At the same time, the Lauterbachs, Ewert, Schmells, Nelsons and Heritages of this world are deliberately and wilfully misleading (at very best) every poor they can get their claws into.

 

BTW, whilst we’re on the subject of Mr Schmell and his ‘custom’ CGC submissions, we’re all still waiting for the ‘evidence’ that he had promised would clear him of all charges relating to the ‘Trim JIM’. With all the cracking, pressing, resubbing, driving to Sarasota with a chilled bottle of Chardonay in the trunk and pimping the ‘8th Best Marvel Collection Of Strange Tales Between #131 and #144’ in the Marketplace, I understand he’s been rather busy, but even so…eight months?

 

It’s a good job that Mr Schmell’s turn-around time on CGC resubs isn’t quite so lengthy….

[FFB]

What is surprising to me is the level of negative posts I've seen in this thread. I can't believe the almost hateful tones in some posters' words. If they are directed toward me for re-submitting a book for a review that is absurd. If they are aimed at CGC for not fully explaining their services that is another thing, but all you have to do is call and ask, like I did, and they will tell you everything you would want to know.

 

Where's the fun is calling and actually getting an answer? Ever-present fear-mongering, speculation, and loathing rules the day!

 

Careful now -- you don't want to be branded as a "tainted teet" [sic] sucker.

[greggy]

Doug's past is a seperate issue that has nothing to do with this book.

 

I'm not personally aware of any large business on this planet that dosen't give out "perks" to major clients, nor am I aware of any large business that makes all of its "inner workings" completely transparent for all to see. Why should CGC be the exception, and why does it upset everyone so much?

 

 

Because in this case, the rich get richer. I am fine with CGC treating their best clients better. But where that line is drawn is what bothers me.

 

Who gets the perks, and what are those perks?..Since those perks come down to more cash for the submitter. It is not the same as a company giving away tickets to a Football game, or taking a client out to dinner.

 

CGC is based on being unbiased. Preferential treatment of BSD's is anything BUT unbiased.

 

Ze-

 

How do you know the page quality review is limited solely to BSDs? Have you (or has anyone else here) ever asked CGC to review page quality on a book where you knew they got it wrong? If I know Steve Borock at all (and I think I do), if someone called up and politely explained that they had seen the interior pages before slabbing and that CGC had made a mistake on page quality, Steve would say "OK, if you feel strongly about it, send me the book and I'll take a look at it -- no promises, but I'll take a look at it." For a book like Doug's FF#1, it sounds like it was graded when CGC was notoriously harsh on page quality and so a bump shouldn't be surprising. If you look at the OWL card on page quality, the "Off White" designation is really light. (According to the OWL card, the page quality shown on the card was supposed to be the darkest PQ allowed at each level.) I think that CGC was initially so hard on page quality because they were following the OWL card more closely than they do now. What shows up on the OWL card as "Off White" is actually pretty close to what I've seen in books with White pages from CGC over the last couple of years.

 

This is someone else's scan and the colors are off from the OWL card I have at home (off white looks a bit lighter on my card at home), but here's the OWL card. For obvious reasons, it is obsolete and no longer used widely in the hobby:

 

 

Now, on the other hand, if the person called Steve B. and started up the phone call rudely by saying "You sumperson_without_enough_empathyes blew it on the page quality on this book and I demand that you change it right now! blah blah blah" then of course that person is going to get the "Sorry, all grades are final" speech.

 

So who has asked for and been refused a page quality review?

I can vouch that a few years ago, I mentioned to Steve that I thought that my Batman 238 CGC 9.2 deserved better than OW pages. It was before SD and he did tell me to bring it down for him to review. However, I decided not to because I ultimately felt that it didn't matter and that I got some "gifts" on PQ on some other books. So, it is possible.

[Silver Surfer]

No, I don't buy that. I don't think CGC should have to "advertise" the fact that they make mistakes sometimes. I think a willingness to review a book where the customer feels a mistake was made is enough.

 

I agree with Scott on this one. Keep in mind that it likely was Borock who was the original grader on this book anyways.

You CGC apologist you, let's get him boys!!

 

Cr@p I'm out of here.

[drbanner]

I can vouch that a few years ago, I mentioned to Steve that I thought that my Batman 238 CGC 9.2 deserved better than OW pages. It was before SD and he did tell me to bring it down for him to review. However, I decided not to because I ultimately felt that it didn't matter and that I got some "gifts" on PQ on some other books. So, it is possible.

 

 

I also have a confession to make.

 

I once called CGC and asked them to hold off sending me back some books so I could save a few bucks on shipping and have them sent with my next batch...and even though that service isn't offered in print on their website, THEY AGREED!!

[topofthetotem]

I can vouch that a few years ago, I mentioned to Steve that I thought that my Batman 238 CGC 9.2 deserved better than OW pages. It was before SD and he did tell me to bring it down for him to review. However, I decided not to because I ultimately felt that it didn't matter and that I got some "gifts" on PQ on some other books. So, it is possible.

 

 

I also have a confession to make.

 

I once called CGC and asked them to hold off sending me back some books so I could save a few bucks on shipping and have them sent with my next batch...and even though that service isn't offered in print on their website, THEY AGREED!!

That's cuz your just another BSD scumbag

[skybolt]

I once called CGC to have them videotape the entire process for grading my books. The DVD version can be purchased on Amazon.com for $14.99. It includes in depth interviews with the CGC staff, outtakes with Newt dropping a couple of my books on the floor while giggling, and behind the scenes footage of how the encapsulation process works. It should also be noted that the DVD version does not include deleted scenes for restroom breaks or where Borock disappeared to that one Tuesday afternoon.

[drbanner]

I can vouch that a few years ago, I mentioned to Steve that I thought that my Batman 238 CGC 9.2 deserved better than OW pages. It was before SD and he did tell me to bring it down for him to review. However, I decided not to because I ultimately felt that it didn't matter and that I got some "gifts" on PQ on some other books. So, it is possible.

 

 

I also have a confession to make.

 

I once called CGC and asked them to hold off sending me back some books so I could save a few bucks on shipping and have them sent with my next batch...and even though that service isn't offered in print on their website, THEY AGREED!!

That's cuz your just another BSD scumbag

 

[nik]

[nearmint]

A few months ago, I decided to make a grilled cheese sandwich. I took one bite out of it, and it was the best, most amazing grilled-cheese sandwich ever made. I didn't take another bite, but immediately sent it to CGC to get slabbed. Unfortunately, they gave it a cheddar cheese designation, while I'm certain I used American.

 

I'm sending it in for a cheese review, and when I get the sandwich back, I'll post the results in this thread.

[Red Hook]

Sounds to me like you've suffered a meltdown.

 

 

[nearmint]

Actually, I'm just damn hungry, and that pic isn't helping matters!

[PedigreeMan]

What else can one get "reviewed" by CGC?

Grades?

A PLOD?

Trimming?

 

Who else has used this service?

Comiclink?

Lauterbach?

Ewert?

 

Geez, do you guys need everything spoon fed to you? Put down the bongs and think for a change, eh?

[FFB]

What else can one get "reviewed" by CGC?

Grades?

A PLOD?

Trimming?

 

Who else has used this service?

Comiclink?

Lauterbach?

Ewert?

 

Geez, do you guys need everything spoon fed to you? Put down the bongs and think for a change, eh?

 

I think it's great that CGC will, in good faith, review any of the above for any customer who feels strongly that CGC got it wrong the first time. The fact that some dealers have done this doesn't mean that anyone else couldn't do the same. I really don't see why you have such a problem with this.

[PedigreeMan]

What else can one get "reviewed" by CGC?

Grades?

A PLOD?

Trimming?

 

Who else has used this service?

Comiclink?

Lauterbach?

Ewert?

 

Geez, do you guys need everything spoon fed to you? Put down the bongs and think for a change, eh?

 

I think it's great that CGC will, in good faith, review any of the above for any customer who feels strongly that CGC got it wrong the first time. The fact that some dealers have done this doesn't mean that anyone else couldn't do the same. I really don't see why you have such a problem with this.

 

Because the unchanged serial number seriously draws into question whether these books are actually being broken out of their slabs and "reviewed" as opposed to simply having their labels changed.

 

And all of this is based on what? Someone's word? What part of independent third party grading service are we forgetting here?

[Davenport]

What else can one get "reviewed" by CGC?

Grades?

A PLOD?

Trimming?

Reading through this thread I couldn't help thinking.......

 

wouldn't it've been great if that FF #1 had been mistakenly mixed in with the other CGC "Review" going on, got confiscated, and CGC cut a half million dollar check from Brulato's account to hand to Mr. Schmell......And before he could finishing screaming "What the f__ing f__k is THIS!?!?".... that FF #1 was on it's way to a Children's charity?

 

[uclapeterg]

 

No, I don't buy that. I don't think CGC should have to "advertise" the fact that they make mistakes sometimes. I think a willingness to review a book where the customer feels a mistake was made is enough.

 

I wasn't thinking of it as a mistake.

 

Anyway, now that more of the general public knows that they offer it....it should develop into another tidy income stream.

 

Exactly, unless they don't want people to know about it.

[uclapeterg]

My senior year, I took advanced physics.

 

JK, Scott. I took a lot of AP classes back in high school.

[OldGuy]

vague evidence that could be taken any number of ways.

 

That's the nicest way I've ever heard someone say [embarrassing lack of self control] (BS).