Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
CBCS Comics
Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »

Verified now yellow labels?12314

It was a one trick pony show but always hilarious. GAC private msg quote post Address this user
@CaptainCanuck ha!! very true! đź‘Ť
Post 76 IP   flag post
Moderator Jesse_O private msg quote post Address this user
There are a few things about witnessing and verification that I want to point out.

For CBCS, a witness (not a facilitator) has to pass a background check by CBCS. I do not know the extent of the check, but I do know that they have continuously tightened the check and requirements over the years. From what I heard, last year was tougher for people to get oked compared to previous years. If CBCS is attending the con, they generally do not allow people to self witness. These are typically granted for cons that CBCS is not at.

As to the validity of witnessed signatures, I've heard horror stories of neglect and outright abuse of the system (mostly concerning CGC). This has to do with human nature more than anything else. There are people who will break any rule that they find inconvenient. And, there are people who will try to scam the system just to see if it can be done. What happens to these people is what concerns me. From what I have seen and heard, CGC simply doesn't care (surprise, surprise).

In my opinion, acceptance of witnessed or verified signatures requires a certain amount of trust. That's what it comes down to. I trust the verification method used by Beckett. It really isn't that hard to study up on. A half hour or less of digging on the net should convince any person, open to signature verification, of the validity of their system.

For witnessed signatures, you either trust the company to be honest or you don't. As far as I am concerned, CGC lost my respect and trust a few years ago. Their product is flawed but the grading is usually accurate. However, their recent and current policies and practices are nothing short of mafia mentality. CBCS is not perfect, but I'll take honesty over corruption any day of the week.

And yes, this where my bias for CBCS really shows. CGC's utter refusal to listen to the concerns of their clientele ticks me off. They have done nothing, for years, about newton rings. I found out that "puddling" could be EASILY solved, but CGC doesn't care about it. I have heard of many instances of very questionable business practices by them. I'm not at liberty to share details of any of this, because the people involved are concerned about backlash from CGC. Sorry for the rant, but not really.
Post 77 IP   flag post
Thank you sir. May I have another? Siggy private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
so by that thinking ..if its marvel it should have one color and dc another..if its silver age, one color and modern another.....it appears that the rationale is expect the label color to somehow magically replace the effort to read and utilize a label for its intended purpose.

taking that to an interesting end result, suppose each book used a white label, but then had a series of color bars for its various traits, like a medical chart. Purple stripe means restoration, orange a signature, with a black bar in the orange , means witnessed, white within the orange means verified, blue means DC, green marvel, etc etc etc...….why not just do away with labels and give each book a simple colored bar code


I'm completely in favor of a differentiating mark, whatever it may be, letting me know at a glance the slab is, or is not what I'm looking for. Looking at a wall at a convention and seeing the red label informed me right then and there to look further. It may also have given someone looking for VSP books a shining beacon.

Now, unless the seller separates them or in some other way informs buyers, we could be spending more time than we want looking through stock, and that still feels like keyword spamming, just from another source.

Would Green have been an acceptable change? I definitely feel it looks better on a label than Red.
Post 78 IP   flag post
Collector mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CatmanAmerica
(A bunch of very good points which I will now contest. )
.


I think you're wrong. To say there is no difference is just lying to yourself to justify books you have.

Verified signatures are great. Good stuff. VERY helpful for artists that have passed on, or that won't sign for witnesses etc. I won't ever argue against that, and I haven't' done that once. They absolutely, 100% have their place. THey're also considerably less dependable, and they are a second-place option for when you can't get a witnessed signature. Any argument against that is clearly self-serving. Let's not forget that CBCS verified a PRINTED signature in a book, and a book that was KNOWN to be on the no-no list by the artist. How the hell do you even do that?

These are TWO DIFFERENT PRODUCTS. End of story. Like two different flavours of tea. They are not the same thing, and to essentially label them as such shows a desperate need by CBCS to pander to the collectors to try and make the verified signature as esteemed as the witnessed one. They are essentially saying they are the same thing.

They are NOT. And the collecting community agrees with me 100%. Know how I know that? Because a verified signature book doesn't sell for as much as the witnessed one. Assuming there are two options, the witnessed one sells for more.

Bringing up the legal details about witness liability etc...great, but not the point. I agree that there are issues with both, and errors can happen in both scenarios. That's not my point either. I will point out that CBCS is considerably more lenient with their authorizations of witnesses, vs CGC.

The point is these are two different products from a company and they're attempting to label them as the same thing. At this point, why not dispense with multiple labels at all? Everybody gets blue, with a small mark to cite the difference.


I mean FFS you can practically see in your head EXACTLY how this went when the decision was made.


Guy 1: People love yellow labels, but we make more money on the reds. But people hate the red.
Guy 2: Ok, let's ditch the red, use yellow for that too, that way they're both the yellow that everyone loves
Guy 1: Sweet. Lunchtime.



A decision like this really makes me wonder about CBCS in the future. It just reeks of a desperate move to help push the verified program through cheap tactics.
Post 79 IP   flag post
Collector mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user
Look this is my point:

IGNORE THE DESIGN, just pay attention to the colors. Ditches the red, clear difference between verified and witnessed, both are desirable.

THATS how this should have been done. No sneakiness, no sly marketing techniques. Just make each unique but attractive.







Post 80 IP   flag post


It was a one trick pony show but always hilarious. GAC private msg quote post Address this user
I've got no issues with yellow or red for that matter...but I thought grey/silver would have been perfect. I guess because grey is for Pedigree that option was out. But I fully understand why they went with yellow.
Post 81 IP   flag post
Masculinity takes a holiday. EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by mediaslave
THATS how this should have been done. No sneakiness, no sly marketing techniques. Just make each unique but attractive.


Perfection is the enemy of Good Enough. I like your designs just fine, but I still would have chosen the option that does reduces the number of label colors. Every time you add a label color there is a public education period involved, and opportunity criticism. And then of course there will be the occasional slip-up of putting the wrong signature type in the wrong label. If I'm making a business decision I like making it all one color and just varying the printed words.
Post 82 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by mediaslave
Quote:
Originally Posted by CatmanAmerica
(A bunch of very good points which I will now contest. )
.


I think you're wrong. To say there is no difference is just lying to yourself to justify books you have.

Verified signatures are great. Good stuff. VERY helpful for artists that have passed on, or that won't sign for witnesses etc. I won't ever argue against that, and I haven't' done that once. They absolutely, 100% have their place. THey're also considerably less dependable, and they are a second-place option for when you can't get a witnessed signature. Any argument against that is clearly self-serving. Let's not forget that CBCS verified a PRINTED signature in a book, and a book that was KNOWN to be on the no-no list by the artist. How the hell do you even do that?

These are TWO DIFFERENT PRODUCTS. End of story. Like two different flavours of tea. They are not the same thing, and to essentially label them as such shows a desperate need by CBCS to pander to the collectors to try and make the verified signature as esteemed as the witnessed one. They are essentially saying they are the same thing.

They are NOT. And the collecting community agrees with me 100%. Know how I know that? Because a verified signature book doesn't sell for as much as the witnessed one. Assuming there are two options, the witnessed one sells for more.

Bringing up the legal details about witness liability etc...great, but not the point. I agree that there are issues with both, and errors can happen in both scenarios. That's not my point either. I will point out that CBCS is considerably more lenient with their authorizations of witnesses, vs CGC.

The point is these are two different products from a company and they're attempting to label them as the same thing. At this point, why not dispense with multiple labels at all? Everybody gets blue, with a small mark to cite the difference.


I mean FFS you can practically see in your head EXACTLY how this went when the decision was made.


Guy 1: People love yellow labels, but we make more money on the reds. But people hate the red.
Guy 2: Ok, let's ditch the red, use yellow for that too, that way they're both the yellow that everyone loves
Guy 1: Sweet. Lunchtime.



A decision like this really makes me wonder about CBCS in the future. It just reeks of a desperate move to help push the verified program through cheap tactics.
The answer quite simply is that it did not happen. The book was purchased by a board member who did the entire thing on video and confirmed the inside signature was indeed printed . Steve Borock himself looked into the entire affair and was able to determine that someone had accidentally marked the wrong box on the form, which allowed the book to receive the incorrect label, if I understood correctly. It was a simple mistake , that was quickly and easily explained. Bottom line is the printed signature was not verified, it was human error in the I believe, the form or paperwork. I cannot remember the exact specifics, but I do know I watched this entire thing carefully.
I think if someone is going to challenge a companys credibility and do so publicly that the facts should be well established prior to doing so, to avoid possible legal ramifications. Just saying....
Post 83 IP   flag post
Masculinity takes a holiday. EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by mediaslave
Guy 1: People love yellow labels, but we make more money on the reds. But people hate the red.
Guy 2: Ok, let's ditch the red, use yellow for that too, that way they're both the yellow that everyone loves
Guy 1: Sweet. Lunchtime.



A decision like this really makes me wonder about CBCS in the future. It just reeks of a desperate move to help push the verified program through cheap tactics.


In my experience the one you should worry about is the business owner who cannot bring himself to make no-brainer decisions like this. They are the ones who will debate and rationalize themselves right out of business. I've been a part of it more than once.
Post 84 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
So I guess the entire thing hinges on color...but what about those who are color blind and for whom red and green for instance appear the same? What about people who are blind and cannot see the colored label?
Post 85 IP   flag post
Collector mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
If I'm making a business decision I like making it all one color and just varying the printed words.


Then you would fail horribly in marketing, product design and consumer choice.

You'd make all flavours of a similar item the same color? (say like gum, juice, pop etc..). Lemme know how that goes

This isn't complicating things; its about clarifying them. Two products with yellow labels is confusing to the consumers and muddies the product offered through cheap affiliation tricks.
Post 86 IP   flag post
It was a one trick pony show but always hilarious. GAC private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
So I guess the entire thing hinges on color...but what about those who are color blind and for whom red and green for instance appear the same? What about people who are blind and cannot see the colored label?


Seeing as @mediaslave appears to be making this all a out colour....this is a great point.
Post 87 IP   flag post
I live in RI and Rhode Islanders eat chili with beans. esaravo private msg quote post Address this user
It’s really just the KISS method. CBCS labels will now be either blue (not signed) or yellow (signed). How do you know if a blue label is restored or conserved - it says so on the label. How do you know if the signature is witnessed or verified - you guessed it, it says so on the label.

Then again, I have a blue label CGC slab that the label says “Name written on cover in marker.” Why, because there is a unverified Neal Adams signature on the book’s cover. So I guess a CGC blue label can also mean signed, but not verified or witnessed. And don’t even get me started on green and/or purple labels.
Post 88 IP   flag post
If I could, I would. I swear. DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user
@mediaslave How many books have you submitted to CBCS for verification, to have signatures witnessed, or just submitted for a blue label?
Post 89 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
I am interested in seeing some evidence to support a verified signature sells for more than a witnessed signature...consistently. You would need two identical books, with identical page quality, and identical signatures as well to suggest they are perfectly same. Then offering both for sale, documenting that each and every single time the witnessed book outsells the verified.
Subtle nuances in the books, the signatures or even the quality of the case itself are all possible reasons the results might become compromised.
While it would seem to stand to reason by assumption, that someone would value a witness signature over a verified, from what I have read today there is potential reason to imply some witnessed signatures are compromised....and knowing firsthand the steps involved in verification gives me great and respect for the process. It almost feels like the two methods would achieve parity on such a playing field.
Regardless, I think it near impossible to attempt to document a factual and non biased evidence for the assertion that witnessed signatures always bring more than verifieds…..unless I am not understanding the base argument
Post 90 IP   flag post
Masculinity takes a holiday. EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by mediaslave
You'd make all flavours of a similar item the same color? (say like gum, juice, pop etc..). Lemme know how that goes


C'mon now, we're having a good debate and I admire your willingness to defend your position against tough odds. But this is clearly a Straw Man version of my position. And this debate is not about giving the consumer choices.
Post 91 IP   flag post
Collector mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrWatson
@mediaslave How many books have you submitted to CBCS for verification, to have signatures witnessed, or just submitted for a blue label?


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrWatson
@mediaslave How many books have you submitted to CBCS for verification, to have signatures witnessed, or just submitted for a blue label?


About 50. Only 1 verified. Sending in about a dozen soon though.
Post 92 IP   flag post
Collector mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
I am interested in seeing some evidence to support a verified signature sells for more than a witnessed signature...consistently. ..


Regardless, I think it near impossible to attempt to document a factual and non biased evidence for the assertion that witnessed signatures always bring more than verifieds…..unless I am not understanding the base argument



Lets see it. I have never once seen that to be the case.
Post 93 IP   flag post
Collector mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by EbaySeller
And this debate is not about giving the consumer choices.


No, you're right. It's about being transparent to the consumer in the product that they are buying, which has been EXACTLY what I have been saying all along. And by making those two very separate and distinct products the same color, they are doing the opposite of that.
Post 94 IP   flag post
Collector Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by mediaslave
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
I am interested in seeing some evidence to support a verified signature sells for more than a witnessed signature...consistently. ..


Regardless, I think it near impossible to attempt to document a factual and non biased evidence for the assertion that witnessed signatures always bring more than verifieds…..unless I am not understanding the base argument



Lets see it. I have never once seen that to be the case.
ah then it shouldn't be hard for you to demonstrate the evidence for your side of the assertion then, since it never happens the other way. I had hoped you could provide it, thanks
Post 95 IP   flag post
Masculinity takes a holiday. EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by mediaslave
It's about being transparent to the consumer in the product that they are buying, which has been EXACTLY what I have been saying all along.


But how could the CBCS consumer not know what product they are buying? When they submit the book for verification they specify it on the order form. I'm being intentionally obtuse, of course we're not talking about the CBCS submitter, are we? The consumer you are referring to is some future buyer down the road (assuming the submitter chooses to sell the book). The consumer you are defending is not the one spending money with CBCS. As long as they're not doing anything unethical like inflating grades or ignoring restoration or verifying bad signatures, I don't see how CBCS has a responsibility to a potential secondary buyer.
Post 96 IP   flag post
Captain Corrector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
.
Let me play the Devil’s advocate for a moment.

If verified signatures were on par with witnessed signatures, there wouldn’t be any witnessed signature program. Everyone would just submit their books to be verified.
Post 97 IP   flag post
I live in RI and Rhode Islanders eat chili with beans. esaravo private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
.
Let me play the Devil’s advocate for a moment.

If verified signatures were on par with witnessed signatures, there wouldn’t be any witnessed signature program. Everyone would just submit their books to be verified.


But it's a lot more expensive to get a signature verified than witnessed.
Post 98 IP   flag post
Collector mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
ah then it shouldn't be hard for you to demonstrate the evidence for your side of the assertion then, since it never happens the other way. I had hoped you could provide it, thanks



Are you kidding me? Go on eBay, look up past sales. Pretty obvious to see which company and product gets better resale, and the hierarchy of the labels.

Witnessed > Verified > Blue > Restored. Who doesn't know this?


Slot in various others in between, like pedigree etc. No idea where they go.


You are the one that made an outlandish claim. The onus is on you to prove it.
Post 99 IP   flag post
Masculinity takes a holiday. EbayMafia private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by esaravo
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
.
Let me play the Devil’s advocate for a moment.

If verified signatures were on par with witnessed signatures, there wouldn’t be any witnessed signature program. Everyone would just submit their books to be verified.


But it's a lot more expensive to get a signature verified than witnessed.


How about the risk of failure? The $25 is the least of my worries when I submit. But yeah, combine the $25 and the risk of failure, and Verified is absolutely the hardest way the get a signature authenticated. Witnessed is the easy and inexpensive way. Most artists do have a surcharge for witnessed, never seen it at $25 though.
Post 100 IP   flag post
Collector mediaslave private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
The answer quite simply is that it did not happen. The book was purchased by a board member who did the entire thing on video and confirmed the inside signature was indeed printed . Steve Borock himself looked into the entire affair and was able to determine that someone had accidentally marked the wrong box on the form, which allowed the book to receive the incorrect label, if I understood correctly. It was a simple mistake , that was quickly and easily explained. Bottom line is the printed signature was not verified, it was human error in the I believe, the form or paperwork. I cannot remember the exact specifics, but I do know I watched this entire thing carefully.
I think if someone is going to challenge a companys credibility and do so publicly that the facts should be well established prior to doing so, to avoid possible legal ramifications. Just saying....



OR, and I'm just throwing this out there, they got busted and came up with a good cover story.

We'll never really know either way to be honest. And I can appreciate that everyone makes mistakes, they are only human. But it happened.

The only thing that would be worse is if somebody purposefully tested them with fake sigs and passed.
Post 101 IP   flag post
Captain Corrector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by esaravo
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
.
Let me play the Devil’s advocate for a moment.

If verified signatures were on par with witnessed signatures, there wouldn’t be any witnessed signature program. Everyone would just submit their books to be verified.


But it's a lot more expensive to get a signature verified than witnessed.

I see. I’ve only had a signature witnessed a handful of times. However, I believe I had to pay the witness in addition to the cost of the signature. Could have amounted to about $25 (or more).

Additionally, that’s why I said “on par”. If verified signature program was “on par” with witnessed, there would be no risk of a legit signature failing verification.

Just sayin.
Post 102 IP   flag post
Captain Corrector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
Post 103 IP   flag post
SpongeBob Comics #1 sells for $991! Joosh private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by mediaslave
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town
The answer quite simply is that it did not happen. The book was purchased by a board member who did the entire thing on video and confirmed the inside signature was indeed printed . Steve Borock himself looked into the entire affair and was able to determine that someone had accidentally marked the wrong box on the form, which allowed the book to receive the incorrect label, if I understood correctly. It was a simple mistake , that was quickly and easily explained. Bottom line is the printed signature was not verified, it was human error in the I believe, the form or paperwork. I cannot remember the exact specifics, but I do know I watched this entire thing carefully.
I think if someone is going to challenge a companys credibility and do so publicly that the facts should be well established prior to doing so, to avoid possible legal ramifications. Just saying....



OR, and I'm just throwing this out there, they got busted and came up with a good cover story.

We'll never really know either way to be honest. And I can appreciate that everyone makes mistakes, they are only human. But it happened.

The only thing that would be worse is if somebody purposefully tested them with fake sigs and passed.


I am that board member who live-streamed the case cracking on Facebook. Steve Borock explained to me how it happened and apologized. As stated above it was a clerical error; the verification of the printed sig on inside front cover failed. The physical evidence being the label held no notation as to the signature location. All books with signatures not on outside cover have notation of signature location. This book has default base notation. CBCS made right by me so it’s all good.

BTW, I like the yellow label, it’s a good move for CBCS.
Post 104 IP   flag post
I'd like to say I still turned out alright, but that would be a lie. flanders private msg quote post Address this user
So is it worth it to resubmit a graded VSP comic for the new label and slab? I have two comics, one is a Caliber Presents #1 9.4 VSP O'Barr that I recently purchased and a ASM #361 9.6 VSP Bagley, both over $250 FMV at th moment, that I'm considering sending in with my next submission.
Post 105 IP   flag post
598062 204 30
Thread locked. No more posts permitted. Return home.