No QC and bad customer service spells disaster for CBCS10125
 I'll probably wake up constipated.
|
Pre_Coder private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Musicmansell78 Our very own signatures are never identical,.. there is always a fingerprint difference. And it is my understanding that Stan (in his later years) needed guidance in signing his own name. |
||
| Post 26 • IP flag post | ||
 COLLECTOR
|
dielinfinite private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Musicmansell78 Yes, because independent verification is rarely a 100% thing. It’s great that you know it’s 100% legit but coming to the same conclusion through other means isn’t necessarily a simple or straightforward thing, especially given a signature with as many permutations, variations, and as regularly forged as Stan Lee’s | ||
| Post 27 • IP flag post | ||
 I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Musicmansell78 It speaks volumes that they wouldn't verify it. The easy thing to do is to just say "sure, looks legit" and throw the company name (and reputation) on it by vsp/slabbing the book. Clearly they weren't 100%, so the book gets no endorsement. To me, that's the actions of a good company. |
||
| Post 28 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Then put a big disclaimer stating what the technology used to verify signatures is and the fact that it will not always be able to verify a signature as legit. I am sorry, but 3 things a customer wants in signature verification that if you are going to offer the service, you should be able to provide: 1. The ability to tell if a signature is fake or not 2. Whose signature it is 3. The proper spelling of their name To me those would be the basics, and so far they have not passed any of these 3. |
||
| Post 29 • IP flag post | ||
|
I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
| not sure why they have to disclose any technology...could very well be proprietary and dont want competitors knowing. EDIT: I do think signature verification is a known or disclosed science anyway. I think you make assumptions about what verification is. it's not black and white. it's not true or false. Its, yes we believe this signature to be true based on what we see or there isn't enough here for us to say it's true. For us to put our name and reputation on. Correct spelling; no one will argue that. |
||
| Post 30 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by GAC OK, then post a disclaimer stating that, as a lot of people feel if you charge to verify a signature that we know is legit, and you can't do it, why should I pay you then? You don't have to state the tech used specifically, but say, "Our state of the art programs used sophisticated algorithms to scan and verify signatures, but there is a chance the signature can be unverifiable." Don't forget #2, some people send in a book to get a signature verified they know is legit, and when they have to call CBCS because they are trying to verify the wrong guy, and it was clearly labelled on the submission form who they should be looking at to verify, that falls on the company as well. Especially when they are trying to verify the signature for a guy who had nothing to do with the book. This happened on my 4 Kids Walk Into a Bank SDCC edition where they were trying to look up and verify a guy who had nothing to do with the publication. |
||
| Post 31 • IP flag post | ||
|
I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
| The #2 thing, yes of course, verify the right sig for the right book. When you pay for verification you're not paying for a positive signature. You're paying for the process of verifying a signature that you hope results in a positive ID. The fact that you saw Stan Lee sign your book makes you think it's a slam dunk 100% positive sig....and if a CBCS AW was there you'd get the yellow label for sure, but CBCS was not there to witness so the VSP process comes into play. The same verification work is done whether the result is positive or inconclusive. CBCS VSP is not selling positive ID sigs...they're selling a verification service. That being said; I get the frustration when you see Stan signing your book and the vsp sig fails. |
||
| Post 32 • IP flag post | ||
 -Our Odin-Rest in Peace |
Jesse_O private msg quote post Address this user | |
| If you go to the Beckett website, you will see what they do. Here is the pertinant paragraph: Quote: Originally Posted by Beckett If you google Pro-Scope or VSC machine along with signature verification, you can find out more about the machines they use. In short, they are forensic machines that are used by federal and state agencies among other places. |
||
| Post 33 • IP flag post | ||
|
I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Maybe a disclaimer might help but I can say that I never assumed my VSP sigs would automatically be positively verified. I knew there was a chance it wouldn't pass. I'm not trying to be a smart @ss but I assumed everyone thought this way. | ||
| Post 34 • IP flag post | ||
|
I don't believe this....and I know you don't care that I don't believe this.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
| if any of my posts are inaccurate or out of line, please correct/educate me. | ||
| Post 36 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by GAC Not at all man. I appreciate any responses to this. Even the ones earlier from guys trying to call me out thinking I had posted this before. It actually shows it is a legitimate issue that others have posted about, and one I think should be discussed and put out there so people know. Thanks as well to @Jesse_O for the info. I actually looked all that stuff up when this issue arose, so I understand the tech/services used, and that it can be unable to verify certain sigs. To me, I would see that as a problem with the tech/services being used, when I know there are legitimate complaints out there from multiple sources, that it can not identify an individual's signature (in this case Stan Lee)after a certain point because it becomes too varied for the system to be able to verify. Until I could fix the issue, I would issue a statement or disclaimer stating the situation so as not to have customers upset, and to save time. At the end of the day, I can live with that part of it, and know in the future there is no need to try and send Stan sig books in. It still does not excuse the other issues which are concerning. Not knowing the right person involved in a publication, or how the name is spelled, and repeated mistakes after contacting customer service and sending the book in to be corrected. |
||
| Post 37 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Drogio private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Stans sig was basically drawing scribbles in his final days. I wouldn’t be surprised because of his rapid decline that he has a higher than normal rejection ratio because it was so inconsistent and erratic book to book. They need many examples of the signature over and over, repeatedly very similar, to verify anything as legit beyond reasonable doubt. I have a book that may have been his last private signing sessions...i wouldn’t believe it was his if it wasn’t witnessed (yellow label). |
||
| Post 38 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Drogio At the end of the day, I can live with that part of it, and know in the future there is no need to try and send Stan sig books in. It still does not excuse the other issues which are concerning. Not knowing the right person involved in a publication, or how the name is spelled, and repeated mistakes after contacting customer service and already sending the book in once to be corrected. |
||
| Post 39 • IP flag post | ||
 I’m not an ant. I’m a rootin tootin Hornet!
|
Zombie_Head private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I agree they can’t verify a 100% real Stan Lee autograph same thing happened to me. It’s an ongoing problem for them. They shouldn’t charge on a Stan Lee book unless it passes since there data base is out of date and can’t tell the difference. I had Stan sign a book in 2012 and it failed. I don’t care what kind of machine they use they are wrong or the person doesn’t know what they are doing with the machine. I would never send a Stan Lee book in for a verification ever. | ||
| Post 40 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
etapi65 private msg quote post Address this user | |
If I had not had this witnessed, no way it passes verification. Nature of the beast in Mr. Lee's career...dude was in his 80s-90s and signing thousands of comics a year; and incredible feat. I got a poster signed at the exact same sitting, that sig looks completely different from this one. Even has the sticker from Stan Lee collectibles and was only available for the package I got, but as I collector I wouldn't buy it so I expect it's essentially worthless.   As far as label mistakes, they need better QA/QC. but this too is not unique to CBCS, nor is poor customer service. Like this yellow label where they literally left off the person who signed the comic.  Not saying you do not have a complaint. Not saying you shouldn't complain. I'm just not sure it rises to the level of no one should ever trust CBCS (which you're saying no one should trust Beckett sig verification, which is insane with their reputation), but instead you're only using CGC from now on. They both make regular mistakes, they both have issues with product services (talk to the artist Buzz sometime about his experience with CGC), they both need to do better. |
||
| Post 41 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
comic_book_man private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Musicmansell78 well, you arent wrong. Signature verification is kinda BS since there are many situations or circumstances that would put a signature outside the norm thus being invalid. So, I kind of agree. I mean they basically just push a button that scans it into a database and if the markers don't add up it's a fail. Otherwise, yes lately their customer service has been questionable at best. Same experience for me in the last 6 months. Misspelled signers definitely an issue. Shouldn't happen ever, let alone twice. I hope CBCS hears your call, there have been many lately left unaddressed. |
||
| Post 42 • IP flag post | ||
 Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Musicmansell78 I find it funny that you assumed an un-witnessed signature would be automatically verified. A disclaimer? Really? A mispelled name? Big Deal! You're just a dude who didn't get the results that he wanted and now your going to try to use social media to punish those who attempted to service you and couldn't. Sounds very Millenial. I absolutely despise this type of behavior, cannot condemn it harshly enough. Go pound sand. |
||
| Post 43 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by EbaySeller Sorry you feel that way. I'm 41 bud. No millenial here. And yes when I spend thousands of dollars on getting comics verified I expect the company to be able to do the 3 things listed above. It's not being unreasonable, it is letting people know what to expect. I will not be using CGC either. And if you read the post, you will notice, I did not go crying to social media after one mistake, but after several, including a repeated mistake that was not resolved. If this book is going to sit on my shelf as a commemorative piece to those that worked on the show, their names should be spelled correctly. |
||
| Post 44 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
TheMadTitan private msg quote post Address this user | |
I’ve had 5 Stan Lee signed books graded by CBCS (red label) in the past 2 yrs. These signatures were obtained at Dallas comic con from 2013 through 2016. One book was previously graded book by cgc ten yrs ago, I cracked the case, pressed the book, had it signed by Stan, and it graded from a 7.0 to a 7.5. CBCS has been able to verify every signature I’ve submitted to date. I’ve been satisfied with the 150 books I've recently submitted and the expected grades have been within 1 to 1.5 of what I determined prior to submission. I’ve had a positive experience with CBCS to date and I plan to submit many more.   |
||
| Post 45 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by etapi65 Thank you for the response. No worries, I am not using CGC, and had no plans to use them from now on. I know mistakes can happen, and that is why I didn't say anything after the first few. As far as not trusting the service, I come back to the fact they were trying to look up a name that had nothing to do with the book. If you are going to be an authority in signature verification you should know what the person's name is, and how to spell it. How can you verify a signature when you don't know how it is spelled, let alone have the right name? And then to repeat the error after contacting customer service management specifically about the names? It is hard for me personally to put trust behind that. |
||
| Post 46 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by TheMadTitan |
||
| Post 47 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Musicmansell78 The grade change on the re-slab is not a legitimate complaint. That can happen inside and outside the slab. The inability to verify the signature is not a legitimate complaint. The attempt was made, it came up fail. So we are left with Miss-recognizing a signature (presumably of a cast member?) and misspelling the name of a cast member on the label. Without knowing, I'm guessing neither one are signatures that are commonly verified? Does that really warrant this thread title?: No QC and bad customer service spells disaster for CBCS No, it doesn't. That's why I say this is really all about your disappointment at not getting the results you wanted on the Stan Lee signatures, and your need to punish someone. I understand your disappointment, but there is no one to blame. As others have said, failing to verify does not put the company's integrity or professionalism in question, ironically it does the opposite and makes me more confident than before in the signature verification program. |
||
| Post 48 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| The grade change on the re-slab is not a legitimate complaint. That can happen inside and outside the slab. The inability to verify the signature is not a legitimate complaint. The attempt was made, it came up fail. So we are left with Miss-recognizing a signature (presumably of a cast member?) and misspelling the name of a cast member on the label. Without knowing, I'm guessing neither one are signatures that are commonly verified? Does that really warrant this thread title?: No QC and bad customer service spells disaster for CBCS No, it doesn't. That's why I say this is really all about your disappointment at not getting the results you wanted on the Stan Lee signatures, and your need to punish someone. I understand your disappointment, but there is no one to blame. As others have said, failing to verify does not put the company's integrity or professionalism in question, ironically it does the opposite and makes me more confident than before in the signature verification program. |
||
| Post 49 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Read the thread. You are making a lot of assumptions. I already stated it was a completely separate book where the writers name was a pretty well known guy named Matthew Rosenberg. He has written some titles like The Punisher and X-Men. He was one of only 3 main guys to work on the book I submitted, and yet they were trying to verify the signature for someone completely different, and who had no affiliation with the publication. The fact the names were misspelled on a different book was disappointing yes, but I didn't say anything until after contacting the highest authority I could through customer service who assured me he would handle the fix personally. I returned the book and it came back again with one of the 2 same names misspelled. Since that was the highest manager at customer service and he was unable to remedy the mistake, I posted up here. Headline is justified in the fact it was a repeated spelling error that "spells disaster for CBCS' and me ever doing business if this is what is to be expected. Sorry you didn't get it. |
||
| Post 50 • IP flag post | ||
 Thank you sir. May I have another?
|
Siggy private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by EbaySeller Fixed that for you. |
||
| Post 51 • IP flag post | ||
|
Thank you sir. May I have another?
|
Siggy private msg quote post Address this user | |
| If I had to subject my books to the all too-well-known risks of shipping again because of a reoccurring error, only to learn I need to do it again because the same error occurred again, I'd be effing pissed off. | ||
| Post 52 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Siggy Thank you. |
||
| Post 53 • IP flag post | ||
|
Masculinity takes a holiday.
|
EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Siggy But here's the thing: The OP indicates spending thousands of dollars with CBCS. If that's the case, then the demise of the company and subsequent hit to the brand would presumably have a negative impact on Tens of Thousands of dollars in comics for him alone. It would hurt him, me and presumably you as well as millions of dollars worth of CBCS graded comics. So why the ramped-up rhetoric over label misspellings in a public forum? I understand disappointment and frustration but how can people allow emotion to cause them to work so blatantly against their own best interest? These are public comments that can be found by potential customers. The demise of CBCS would be very disruptive and expense for me and most of us on this forum. When you post comments like the one below, you aren't predicting demise, you are encouraging it: Their grading is subjective at best, they have terrible customer service that offers no answers other than, "We will solve the issue," which they have proven themselves incapable of doing. Save your money, these guys are no experts. It's fine to voice complaints and advocate for improvements. But when you go to extremes like this with inflamatory rhetoric you are no longer an ally, you are an adversary. Why treat him as anything else? So now he's saying not going to use CBCS anymore and encouraging others to do the same. Also not going to use CGC. Well good luck with plan C. It was a misspelling of a name on a label! Yes twice. Even three times. Frustrating and disappointing to be sure. But don't burn down the apartment building to force the landlord to make improvements...we all have to live here! |
||
| Post 54 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Musicmansell78 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @EbaySeller I get it man. Honestly though, if a friend were to ask me if they should send their book in, I feel like I would tell them about my experiences, and that they can make their own choice, but I personally won't be getting books verified anymore, and would recommend saving the money. My confidence is a bit shaken. | ||
| Post 55 • IP flag post | ||
This topic is archived. Start new topic?