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

[THE_BEYONDER]

Why not let them defend themselves?

 

I like to think they're busy grading comic books. Even if they are reading the thread, I wouldn't expect anyone in the company below Stevie B. to be in a position to comment about missed trim jobs, etc.

 

I understand that. I just wish Steve would start coming on here more often. I miss the days when he was posting somewhat regularly on these boards, and seemed alot more accessible. I know I can PM him and/or call him at CGC...but I felt more 'in touch' with CGC when Borock would chat with us on the open forum.

[nearmint]

I just wish Steve would start coming on here more often.

 

Me too.

[COI]

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?

 

Andrew, the issue of the unchanging serial number points to something much deeper than a simple perk (i.e. getting a bump in the grading line, getting a "from the collection of" designation, getting your own grading scale) or the need to keep a "secret recipe" (i.e. grading standards) hidden. Rather, it implies that the CGC submission procedure that has been 100% transparent from day one (and most definitely needs to be in order for there to be any confidence in a third party grading company -- or are you all forgetting CGG/PGX/FOO/BAR/whatever it's called today) can be bypassed.

 

No new serial number means no anonymous mylar-ing and no anonymous barcoding, right? Does it also mean no anonymous pre-graders? Heck, was the book even broken out of the slab?

 

This goes directly to CGC's core business, Andrew, and as such is very fair game.

 

Alan

 

I understand Alan, and I can't disagree with your post.

 

Call me cynical, but I never believed that CGC was or could be 100% impartial because of the microscopic segment of the population that has any use of CGC's services. In other words, this hobby is just too damned small and too damned lucrative, and I never believed the "impartial" hype. Many of you probably think this is hindsight talking, but it isn't. As much as I despise his practices, I never dismissed Dupcak's ramblings about the "inner circle" as complete garbage, because some if it just made too much sense to be ignored.

 

Anwyay, the point is that now we have proof. Now you are all aware of the fact that CGC is not as impartial as they claim to be. What I don't understand is the continued protesting everytime a new piece of evidence pops up that reinforces what we already know. At some point you have to figure out a way to collect comfortably and let the matter rest. BSD's are going to keep doing what they're doing, the masses are(seemingly) going to keep buying what the BSD's are selling, and CGC's going to remain quite. It is what it is, and the only power each of us have is over our own decisions as to where we're going to go with our collecting, in light of the information we now have.

[Mushroom]

Anwyay, the point is that now we have proof. Now you are all aware of the fact that CGC is not as impartial as they claim to be. What I don't understand is the continued protesting everytime a new piece of evidence pops up that reinforces what we already know. At some point you have to figure out a way to collect comfortably and let the matter rest. BSD's are going to keep doing what they're doing, the masses are(seemingly) going to keep buying what the BSD's are selling, and CGC's going to remain quite. It is what it is, and the only power each of us have is over our own decisions as to where we're going to go with our collecting, in light of the information we now have.

 

When all is said and done andrew, what you say here is reality. I am a Covey child and his main tenant was "you cannot be concerned with anything outside of your own area of influence...."

 

Having agreed with you on that, I honestly believe that some of the board members do believe that they can make a difference and that hobby and CGC change is within their area of influence and therefore whilst they believe that, then these threads will continue to operate and I have to say I will continue to support their desire for change (even though I have found my own way to collect comfortably).

[Nostalgic Attic]

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.

 

Regarding CGC Reviews: Four years ago or so, I submitted a high dollar book which I had purchased off ebay as "guaranteed unrestored" (no, not from comic keys) and submitted it to CGC and guess what? PLOD! Long story short...I called the seller and again he reiterated that it was not restored and he was the original owner, yada, yada.... I called CGC and explained the scenario.They said to fill out a submission form with the explaination and they would take a look at it. The book, as you might guess, was determined to have been restored and the original seller never made good on his "guaranty". I don't recall if the bar cod was changed. I suppose that CGC has had many requests like this, and performs reviews on certain aspects of books all the time. At the time, I was, and probably still am a small time submitter of books, and I thought they gave me great personalized, professional attention. I was very impressed with their service.

 

Regarding the bar code: It's possible CGC has an internal policy that they ammend the grader's notes on these "reviews" rather than create a new bar code. This may or may not be a good policy, but I'm sure if someone called them, they could shed some light on that reasoning.

 

Regarding some of the things being said about Doug: He has exhibited the highest degree of professionalism in my dealings with him. And has gone out of his way to make sure I was satisfied.

 

Sorry if none of this fits into any of the conspiratorial theories bouncing around in this thread thought I should add this into the mix.

[FFB]

Why not let them defend themselves?

 

I like to think they're busy grading comic books. Even if they are reading the thread, I wouldn't expect anyone in the company below Stevie B. to be in a position to comment about missed trim jobs, etc.

 

I understand that. I just wish Steve would start coming on here more often. I miss the days when he was posting somewhat regularly on these boards, and seemed alot more accessible. I know I can PM him and/or call him at CGC...but I felt more 'in touch' with CGC when Borock would chat with us on the open forum.

 

Why don't you call Steve and ask him why he doesn't post as much on the boards anymore, and why the rest of the guys don't either. This ain't the friendly place it once was. It "used to be" that Steve could come on here and have a rational discussion with people and express his views without being jumped on by the swarming hordes. If people disagreed with him, they generally did so in a respectful manner the way that they would if they were having a conversation with him in person. Over the last year or so, however, it seems like every time he comes here to respond to something many of the responses are angrier, more accusatory ("Oh yeah, what a great spin job that answer was!!!"), and less respectful. If he leaves something out of his response, rather than asking him in a civil manner to address the issue, people accuse him of having ducked the issue, being a master of spin, having something to hide and blah blah blah. There's little incentive for him to post here when he knows that he's just going to get jumped on. It's easier to talk to people on the phone or in person because, for whatever reason, people act more like grownups when they're actually talking to someone rather than posting from behind a computer.

[PedigreeMan]

How does a new serial number prevent the same bad thing from happening? I don't see the correlation between "same serial number" and "special favors." What if CGC had issued a new serial number instead of keeping the old one? Would that necessarily mean that they treated the book itself differently when reviewing the page quality?

 

(Sometimes I wonder if I'm speaking Esperanto here.)

 

For the third time: A new serial number would mean that the book had gone through the transparent submission process of becoming an anonymous book with only a barcode (the serial number) to identify it. This also means it would have been handled and examined by pre-graders in rooms with cameras, and ultimately finalized in a manner that maintains anonymity. Ya know, like a real submission.

 

The fact that the serial number hasn't changed gives strong evidence that the entire submission process was bypassed, and that the book simply ended up on Borock's (or whomever's) desk with a "PQ review" (or whatever) note attached to it. Now, I freely admit that a change in page quality is rather benign, but what else can be "reviewed?" And if the normal chain of handling has been bypassed, how accurate is this review in the first place?

 

No it doesn't. A new serial number means that they gave the book a new serial number. You are simply assuming that a new serial number means that it went through the process. The Jason Ewert review books are all getting new serial numbers and I know that those aren't going through the entire regrading process. They're just being checked for trimming and then being reholdered with a new label and serial number.

 

While news that the Ewert re-checks are not going through the full grading process is a bit disturbing, the fact that these books are still getting new serial numbers points to their going through some part of the normal CGC process. Doug's FF #1 points to some sort of greater "short circuit" in the process that just ain't sitting right with me, all revolving around the fact that despite his saying he filled out a new submission form for this "review," the book itself doesn't seem to reflect it.

 

Since you seem to know the behind the scenes stuff of the Ewert re-checks, Scott, would you care to fill us in on the details? For instance, do they go through the receiving department or are they sent in with an "ATTN: Steve Borock" on the mailing label? Do you need to send them in with a new submission form or can they just be sent in "as-is?"

 

In the end, though, I feel that your explanation of the "review" process just being a way for CGC to correct their mistakes is a bit too simplistic. You make it sound like when Burger King forgets cheese on your Whopper and you cut in front of everyone to flag down a kid behind the counter to fix it. CGC has always prided itself on its transparent and rigid system of getting a book graded, and I'm not quite ready to accept that mistakes (especially ones on books that the owner is "selling" for $500k) should be treated and corrected so casually.

 

Alan

[FFB]

How does a new serial number prevent the same bad thing from happening? I don't see the correlation between "same serial number" and "special favors." What if CGC had issued a new serial number instead of keeping the old one? Would that necessarily mean that they treated the book itself differently when reviewing the page quality?

 

(Sometimes I wonder if I'm speaking Esperanto here.)

 

For the third time: A new serial number would mean that the book had gone through the transparent submission process of becoming an anonymous book with only a barcode (the serial number) to identify it. This also means it would have been handled and examined by pre-graders in rooms with cameras, and ultimately finalized in a manner that maintains anonymity. Ya know, like a real submission.

 

The fact that the serial number hasn't changed gives strong evidence that the entire submission process was bypassed, and that the book simply ended up on Borock's (or whomever's) desk with a "PQ review" (or whatever) note attached to it. Now, I freely admit that a change in page quality is rather benign, but what else can be "reviewed?" And if the normal chain of handling has been bypassed, how accurate is this review in the first place?

 

No it doesn't. A new serial number means that they gave the book a new serial number. You are simply assuming that a new serial number means that it went through the process. The Jason Ewert review books are all getting new serial numbers and I know that those aren't going through the entire regrading process. They're just being checked for trimming and then being reholdered with a new label and serial number.

 

While news that the Ewert re-checks are not going through the full grading process is a bit disturbing, the fact that these books are still getting new serial numbers points to their going through some part of the normal CGC process. Doug's FF #1 points to some sort of greater "short circuit" in the process that just ain't sitting right with me, all revolving around the fact that despite his saying he filled out a new submission form for this "review," the book itself doesn't seem to reflect it.

 

Since you seem to know the behind the scenes stuff of the Ewert re-checks, Scott, would you care to fill us in on the details? For instance, do they go through the receiving department or are they sent in with an "ATTN: Steve Borock" on the mailing label? Do you need to send them in with a new submission form or can they just be sent in "as-is?"

 

In the end, though, I feel that your explanation of the "review" process just being a way for CGC to correct their mistakes is a bit too simplistic. You make it sound like when Burger King forgets cheese on your Whopper and you cut in front of everyone to flag down a kid behind the counter to fix it. CGC has always prided itself on its transparent and rigid system of getting a book graded, and I'm not quite ready to accept that mistakes (especially ones on books that the owner is "selling" for $500k) should be treated and corrected so casually.

 

Alan

 

I keep coming back to the notion that many of these questions you and others have could almost certainly be answered with a phone call. 1-877-NM-COMIC. Ask for a gentleman named Steve. Try it! That's how I get my answers when I really want them! And I am not a BSD and never was!

 

Seriously, have you guys noticed that every once in a while, someone who is genuinely looking for information will pick up the phone and call CGC -- and when they do, they usually GET the information they're looking for? Stunning!

[drbanner]

Why not let them defend themselves?

 

I like to think they're busy grading comic books. Even if they are reading the thread, I wouldn't expect anyone in the company below Stevie B. to be in a position to comment about missed trim jobs, etc.

 

I understand that. I just wish Steve would start coming on here more often. I miss the days when he was posting somewhat regularly on these boards, and seemed alot more accessible. I know I can PM him and/or call him at CGC...but I felt more 'in touch' with CGC when Borock would chat with us on the open forum.

 

Why don't you call Steve and ask him why he doesn't post as much on the boards anymore, and why the rest of the guys don't either. This ain't the friendly place it once was. It "used to be" that Steve could come on here and have a rational discussion with people and express his views without being jumped on by the swarming hordes. If people disagreed with him, they generally did so in a respectful manner the way that they would if they were having a conversation with him in person. Over the last year or so, however, it seems like every time he comes here to respond to something many of the responses are angrier, more accusatory ("Oh yeah, what a great spin job that answer was!!!"), and less respectful. If he leaves something out of his response, rather than asking him in a civil manner to address the issue, people accuse him of having ducked the issue, being a master of spin, having something to hide and blah blah blah. There's little incentive for him to post here when he knows that he's just going to get jumped on. It's easier to talk to people on the phone or in person because, for whatever reason, people act more like grownups when they're actually talking to someone rather than posting from behind a computer.

 

The reception poor old Newt received on here when he tried to "chat" about some of these issues perfectly illustrates why Steve doesn't post here anymore. He can no longer chit-chat about any of these issues without the inquisition bearing down on him, and his every word taken literally and scrutinized into perpetuity...sounds like a real barrell of monkeys for him, huh?

[FFB]

The reception poor old Newt received on here when he tried to "chat" about some of these issues perfectly illustrates why Steve doesn't post here anymore. He can no longer chit-chat about any of these issues without the inquisition bearing down on him, and his every word taken literally and scrutinized into perpetuity...sounds like a real barrell of monkeys for him, huh?

 

Totally! How do I get THAT job?!

 

[PedigreeMan]

Oh yeah, one other thing I'd like to add about all this talk on "conspiracy theories" and "negativity" and "anti-this" and "anti-that":

 

There seems to be a strong belief nowadays that simple opposition to a group or position -- or even the simple asking of so-called "tough" questions of said groups or of the people that hold the opposing positions -- has to come with some sort of shrill or accusatory or hostile bent. You see this every day in the political realm (talk shows, newspapers, blogs, etc.) despite there being many, many rational, calm people engaging in these types of discussion.

 

Perhaps if everyone stopped listening with a negative ear, they would find there was more room for productive discussion and stop having to use the "this has turned into a hostile environment" excuse whenever they come across a topic that they wish to (or even should) comment on.

 

I can honestly say I'm kewl through all of this, and really just want some things cleared up. How about the rest of yas?

[FFB]

Stop listening with a negative ear? OH NO YA DIDN'T!!!!

 

Best one I've heard all day.

[PedigreeMan]

I keep coming back to the notion that many of these questions you and others have could almost certainly be answered with a phone call. 1-877-NM-COMIC. Ask for a gentleman named Steve. Try it! That's how I get my answers when I really want them!

 

Maybe some of us already have the answers we seek?

 

Maybe all of this is simply a matter of engaging in a Socratic-like dialogue to not only disburse the information, but to also toss it around with the masses to perhaps get them thinking long and hard about some of these issues?

 

Maybe getting an answer from "on high" would shut all of that down and turn the light off on the dark corners of this hobby?

 

 

"Calculating" Alan

[FFB]

I keep coming back to the notion that many of these questions you and others have could almost certainly be answered with a phone call. 1-877-NM-COMIC. Ask for a gentleman named Steve. Try it! That's how I get my answers when I really want them!

 

Maybe some of us already have the answers we seek?

 

Maybe all of this is simply a matter of engaging in a Socratic-like dialogue to not only disburse the information, but to also toss it around with the masses to perhaps get them thinking long and hard about some of these issues?

 

Maybe getting an answer from "on high" would shut all of that down and turn the light off on the dark corners of this hobby?

 

 

"Calculating" Alan

 

Well then, to borrow one of your questions to me, would you care to share all of the details you're hiding from everyone?

[PedigreeMan]

Stop listening with a negative ear? OH NO YA DIDN'T!!!!

 

Best one I've heard all day.

 

Okay, I have to admit, I "heard" that one with a negative ear.

 

But I still love ya, Scott. (In that manly, Viking way. Let's go rape and pillage.)

[joe_collector]

What started out as a infantile joke title has turned into a monster thread that causes everyone to log into Comics General and read:

 

I SOILED MYSELF... AND I COULDN'T BE HAPPIER

 

Every single day.

[PedigreeMan]

I keep coming back to the notion that many of these questions you and others have could almost certainly be answered with a phone call. 1-877-NM-COMIC. Ask for a gentleman named Steve. Try it! That's how I get my answers when I really want them!

 

Maybe some of us already have the answers we seek?

 

Maybe all of this is simply a matter of engaging in a Socratic-like dialogue to not only disburse the information, but to also toss it around with the masses to perhaps get them thinking long and hard about some of these issues?

 

Maybe getting an answer from "on high" would shut all of that down and turn the light off on the dark corners of this hobby?

 

 

"Calculating" Alan

 

Well then, to borrow one of your questions to me, would you care to share all of the details you're hiding from everyone?

 

If one views the dissemination of information as a scale rather than a clear-cut "hold" versus "tell," one would see that I've shared quite enough already, thank yew veddy much.

[buttock]

But I still love ya, Scott. (In that manly, Viking way. Let's go rape and pillage.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[buttock]

What started out as a infantile joke title has turned into a monster thread that causes everyone to log into Comics General and read:

 

I SOILED MYSELF... AND I COULDN'T BE HAPPIER

 

Every single day.

 

Even better, when you're looking at the CGC forum list and it's the most recent thread with a post, it just says, "I just soiled myself.."

[joe_collector]

What started out as a infantile joke title has turned into a monster thread that causes everyone to log into Comics General and read:

 

I SOILED MYSELF... AND I COULDN'T BE HAPPIER

 

Every single day.

 

Even better, when you're looking at the CGC forum list and it's the most recent thread with a post, it just says, "I just soiled myself.."

 

No joke, and I read that and think I'm on some old folks site where they're talking about the benefits of Depends.