So what's the deal with the ads on the headers and footers now?

[nearmint]

Right, but isn't it a similar conflict of interest for Overstreet to accept ads from Metropolis when Steve owns the run of Pep Mile Highs(among tons of other books), or from Dave Anderson who owns the nicest copies of the some of the biggest keys? The possibility of that ad revenue affecting how Overstreet determines the value of the mentioned books is just as great as CGC's ad revenue affecting how they grade books or detect resto. Isn't impartiality the core of Overstreet's business, as well? To me, it's the same thing.

 

One's a yearly publication...the other is an ongoing grading service for profit. It's apples and oranges. It's kinda silly to compare the two...

 

Regardless, I don't think anyone has considered Overstreet "impartial" in many many years...if ever...and their business model doesn't have the dependence on "impartiality" that a third company grading company needs to survive...

 

Jim

 

It's not apples and oranges at all. What does the fact that Overstreet publishes yearly have to do with anything? As for impartiality, there are as many people that would argue that CGC isn't impartial as those who would argue that Overstreet isn't impartial. It's apples and apples. Whether you think it's silly or not.

[jimm94]

I think you're probably reading too deeply into it. My guess is that anyone could become a "featured partner" if they sign up for the right ad package. CGC gets a lot of eyes here, so it makes perfect sense for them to help defray some of the expenses related to hosting this forum by selling some ad space. The ads, and their content, don't bother me at all.

[Aman619]

it was an advertsiment for "presssing services". after all we have been thru, Im surprised you are not the least bit surprised noone was, well, surprised to see it at the top of the page . capische?

[awe4one]

It's not apples and oranges at all. What does the fact that Overstreet publishes yearly have to do with anything? As for impartiality, there are as many people that would argue that CGC isn't impartial as those who would argue that Overstreet isn't impartial. It's apples and apples. Whether you think it's silly or not.

 

Overstreet is a one-time yearly PUBLICATION covering comic prices. CGC is a year round GRADING COMPANY that affects grading. Until their business plans/outlines cross, and they haven't yet, then a comparison would become valid.

 

Bottomline...Overstreet business model doesn't rely on or need the appearance of "impartiality" as much as CGC does on a daily basis thus a comparison isn't valid. And due to CGC's influence on the hobby (only the naive believe OSPG has any significant impact on the hobby these days), they are under the spotlight...whether right or wrong...

 

Jim

[awe4one]

it was an advertsiment for "presssing services". after all we have been thru, Im surprised you are not the least bit surprised noone was, well, surprised to see it at the top of the page . capische?

 

As has been noted here lately by many posters (at least those caring about the matter AND still posting here), the prevalence of pressing in the hobby and CGC's repeated policy regarding it makes the existence of such an ad on the Forum more expected than not. It just elicits a and more than anything...

 

Doesn't make it right, or something a grading company wants to be associated with, but it is what it is and CGC has made their bed in regards to the policy...

 

Jim

[nearmint]

It's not apples and oranges at all. What does the fact that Overstreet publishes yearly have to do with anything? As for impartiality, there are as many people that would argue that CGC isn't impartial as those who would argue that Overstreet isn't impartial. It's apples and apples. Whether you think it's silly or not.

 

Overstreet is a one-time yearly PUBLICATION covering comic prices. CGC is a year round GRADING COMPANY that affects grading. Until their business plans/outlines cross, and they haven't yet, then a comparison would become valid.

 

Bottomline...Overstreet business model doesn't rely on or need the appearance of "impartiality" as much as CGC does on a daily basis thus a comparison isn't valid. And due to CGC's influence on the hobby (only the naive believe OSPG has any significant impact on the hobby these days), they are under the spotlight...whether right or wrong...

 

Jim

 

We're going to have to agree to disagree. I can't agree that Overstreet's success doesn't rely on the appearance of imparitiality as much as CGC's.

 

Regardless, I don't believe ads in either Overstreet or here on the boards are going to affect their bottom line one bit. I understand that you're bothered by it, but you'd be naive to think that enough people are bothered enough to affect any kind of change.

[awe4one]

It's not apples and oranges at all. What does the fact that Overstreet publishes yearly have to do with anything? As for impartiality, there are as many people that would argue that CGC isn't impartial as those who would argue that Overstreet isn't impartial. It's apples and apples. Whether you think it's silly or not.

 

Overstreet is a one-time yearly PUBLICATION covering comic prices. CGC is a year round GRADING COMPANY that affects grading. Until their business plans/outlines cross, and they haven't yet, then a comparison would become valid.

 

Bottomline...Overstreet business model doesn't rely on or need the appearance of "impartiality" as much as CGC does on a daily basis thus a comparison isn't valid. And due to CGC's influence on the hobby (only the naive believe OSPG has any significant impact on the hobby these days), they are under the spotlight...whether right or wrong...

 

Jim

 

We're going to have to agree to disagree. I can't agree that Overstreet's success doesn't rely on the appearance of imparitiality as much as CGC's.

 

Regardless, I don't believe ads in either Overstreet or here on the boards are going to affect their bottom line one bit. I understand that you're bothered by it, but you'd be naive to think that enough people are bothered enough to affect any kind of change.

 

Just to be clear yet again...I'm not bothered by the ads per se. The spotlighting of CGC customers as "Partners" is the problem in my opinion. Implies an association...and one that's not helpful to CGC's appearance of impartiality...

 

Jim

[esquirecomics]

Im surprised noone has ben upset about Matt Nelsons banner advertising restoration and pressing. I know its an old battle weary subject, but its still a first...

Why? CGC aren't anti-restoration, so why shouldn't they permit Matt to advertise to the extent they let any other dealer or comic-related business to advertise? Are you saying Susan and Tracey and others wouldn't be allowed to advertise their restoration and/or pressing services either?

 

I agree. There is nothing wrong, regardless of how any of us feel about pressing or restoration, in having Matt pay for advertising on CGC's website. I'm sure if either Susan or Tracey wanted to take out an ad CGC would permit it.

 

What I do take issue with is that CGC is openly choosing sides, which I do not feel is impartial, in promoting Matt's services in its FAQ.

 

I can't imagine that CGC would so brazenly promote a particular comic book dealer simply because CGC staff personally believed that dealer's prices, grades or inventory were better than the rest.

 

I have expressed my concern with what I feel is a demonstration of improper bias and I would encourage others to do the same. This has nothing to do with Matt, pressing or restoration. It has to do with CGC not only remaining independent and impartial but also ensuring the public perception of both exists.

[Shield]

I just look at it like this - say a panel of dog show judges had advertisements for a specific dog food or shampoo on their website. Wouldn't that make you think a little bit?

What if PGX had ads promoting Mr. Leder's Ebay Auctions on their site? Still completely impartial?

[Davenport]

 

I agree. There is nothing wrong, regardless of how any of us feel about pressing or restoration, in having Matt pay for advertising on CGC's website. I'm sure if either Susan or Tracey wanted to take out an ad CGC would permit it.

 

Reading through this thread is confusing.

 

I thought the banners were restricted: "Banner ads are available to CGC Authorized Member Dealers."

 

and...

 

"For serving as a submission center, Authorized Member Dealers receive a rebate on all books submitted through them."

 

So, does it cost to become a Member Dearler, and then you're in the shared revenue loop? Plus you can banner your ad on CGC's website for a fee?

 

Whatever it is it doesn't seem to fit with:

http://www.cgccomics.com/about/history.asp

 

"In this way, CGC can remain completely impartial, having no vested interest other than a commitment to serving clients through accurate and consistent grading."

 

It's that "vested interest" part, where the "Consumer Reports" no-ads mentioned earlier seems like a better method to appear independent.

[jbud73]

Im surprised noone has ben upset about Matt Nelsons banner advertising restoration and pressing. I know its an old battle weary subject, but its still a first...

Why? CGC aren't anti-restoration, so why shouldn't they permit Matt to advertise to the extent they let any other dealer or comic-related business to advertise? Are you saying Susan and Tracey and others wouldn't be allowed to advertise their restoration and/or pressing services either?

 

I agree. There is nothing wrong, regardless of how any of us feel about pressing or restoration, in having Matt pay for advertising on CGC's website. I'm sure if either Susan or Tracey wanted to take out an ad CGC would permit it.

 

What I do take issue with is that CGC is openly choosing sides, which I do not feel is impartial, in promoting Matt's services in its FAQ.

 

I can't imagine that CGC would so brazenly promote a particular comic book dealer simply because CGC staff personally believed that dealer's prices, grades or inventory were better than the rest.

 

I have expressed my concern with what I feel is a demonstration of improper bias and I would encourage others to do the same. This has nothing to do with Matt, pressing or restoration. It has to do with CGC not only remaining independent and impartial but also ensuring the public perception of both exists.

 

IMO Mark many are still living in a dream world with respect to CGC and impartiality. CGC has demonstrated the consistent practise of taking stances in the hobby that fit their business model, rather than seeking consensus and the provenance of impartiality. With this in mind any attempt to assign impartial / arbitration status to them is simply and IMO indefensible.

[tth2]

What I do take issue with is that CGC is openly choosing sides, which I do not feel is impartial, in promoting Matt's services in its FAQ.

 

I can't imagine that CGC would so brazenly promote a particular comic book dealer simply because CGC staff personally believed that dealer's prices, grades or inventory were better than the rest.

 

I have expressed my concern with what I feel is a demonstration of improper bias and I would encourage others to do the same. This has nothing to do with Matt, pressing or restoration. It has to do with CGC not only remaining independent and impartial but also ensuring the public perception of both exists.

Hadn't looked at the FAQs so I hadn't been aware of the reference to Matt there. You're certainly right that that is a different ballgame altogether. If they had listed several pressing services, I guess I would have less problem with it, but listing Matt as the sole reference is terrible. It's like he's been named as "The Official Presser of the Comic Guaranty Corporation" or something.

[Davenport]

It's like he's been named as "The Official Presser of the Comic Guaranty Corporation" or something.

Or the "Prefered Conservation Service of the Comic Guaranty Corporation"

...or "PCS" for short.

[Aman619]

sounds like this would be a good item for the agenda at the next Laissons Committee phone call. Let them discuss and see if CGC sees anything that needs to be changed... or not. Whether there is an "appearance of partiality"

[drice6900]

IMO Mark many are still living in a dream world with respect to CGC and impartiality. CGC has demonstrated the consistent practise of taking stances in the hobby that fit their business model, rather than seeking consensus and the provenance of impartiality. With this in mind any attempt to assign impartial / arbitration status to them is simply and IMO indefensible.

 

Excellent post.

[awe4one]

IMO Mark many are still living in a dream world with respect to CGC and impartiality. CGC has demonstrated the consistent practise of taking stances in the hobby that fit their business model, rather than seeking consensus and the provenance of impartiality. With this in mind any attempt to assign impartial / arbitration status to them is simply and IMO indefensible.

 

I'm of the mind that CGC doesn't realize how their actions are being received by comicdom at large. Most of their feedback comes from those who have a stake in the slabbed market and their will opinions reflect this. As far as they are concerned the CGC "impartiality" angle remains solid when in fact the argument for them remaining impartial long left the gate a year or so ago...

 

Jim

[Red Hook]

Im surprised noone has ben upset about Matt Nelsons banner advertising restoration and pressing. I know its an old battle weary subject, but its still a first...

 

I'm not surprised at all. Matt will advertise his pressing services but won't tell you which of the books he's selling on Ebay are pressed.

 

That tells me all I need to know about how he approaches his business.

 

 

Red

[Architecht]

But should he be described as a "Featured Partner"? I don't see any of the other advertisers given that designation. I have a problem with it because of the special status afforded a restorer, one who also happens to sell CGC slabs on eBay, than the advertising per se...

 

Jim

 

That's just some clean up on the banner ads. The terminology we use is featured partner and it should be applied to all ads. It is, for instance, on the main site. Just needs some tweaking in the ads database.

[Architecht]

 

And by the way, let's put some perspective on this. The business is built and maintained on the consistency of the grading process, and CGC is unparalleled in its expertise and quality in providing that service. The banner advertising is nothing but a minor way to defray the costs of providing you folks online resources that are beneficial to the community while helping customers to connect with resources.

 

I understand asking the question, but let's not beat this topic to death. Move on please.

 

Thanks,

Arch