What do you think of the new CGC holder?234

Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:

Originally Posted by VintageComics
I'll admit, I purchased a CBCS graded book last year that was restored and missed the word Restored on the label. And I know others have as well.

So if the label had been a different color, say purple, this wouldn't have happened to you?

Originally Posted by PovRow
As far as Restored label goes, I was against Purple from the get go. Now I DO wish that CBCS would have placed an R after a restored grade. Like 9.0R or 9.2R. It would be easy to spot a restored that way.

Originally Posted by PovRow
I joined the CGC boards in 2002. I joined the CBCS boards the day they were available. I also have both CGC and CBCS encapsulated books in my collection. I am not sure WHAT that makes me, besides somewhat lacking a life.

Originally Posted by IronMan
Quote:

Originally Posted by PovRow
I joined the CGC boards in 2002. I joined the CBCS boards the day they were available. I also have both CGC and CBCS encapsulated books in my collection. I am not sure WHAT that makes me, besides somewhat lacking a life.

Just based on this post, we should hang out....

Originally Posted by CatmanAmerica
Quote:

Originally Posted by Studley_Dudley
I don't agree with loose grading claims. I've seen inconsistent grading at times from both CGC and CBCS. A little more from CGC but only lately and on more modern books.
I would like CBCS to use a different style label for restored books. I understand that it says restored in bold-face under the grade, but a different color label or some kind of marking would help differentiate it a little more. It would definitely help the people who don't read the labels.
I only got back into comics a few years ago when I had some time on shore, so I got into the graded comics thing later. I feel no loyalty to one company over another. I go with who I feel is doing a better job. And right now, it's not the place in Sarasota.

One of the reasons I decided to go with CBCS was the elimination of the color stigma. PLODS and GLODS for minor things like slight resto never made any sense to me, especially borderline stuff like cover cleaning with no apparent damage to the book. That said, CGC's conserved label was a good half-measure in the right direction before the latest turn of events.

What matters most is full disclosure while providing a reason for customers to take a closer look at the book. There are other reasons for giving CBCS business, such as their signature verification service and improved clarity of their new holder. Of course, Steve Borock's trusted stewardship of CBCS is a big plus as well. But the biggest reason comes from the competition.

Given the unfortunate cluster fiascos with CGC's new holder launch, folks on board their ship are scurrying about like passengers on the Titanic. 400 plus pages of posted mayhem. Concerned collectors and dealers are either swimming in denial or piling into lifeboats looking for rescue while Captain and crew move deck chairs around and call for calm with claims that everything will be fine. Their secret weapon? A little Dutch boy patching leaks.

Sorry, about the mixed metaphors.

Originally Posted by MR_SigS
Has anyone seen this? I sure hope it isn't real.

Here is the text from the linked post.

[I emailed CGC and this was their response to some of the issues...


"Hi Matt, we are definitely addressing the issues that are being discussed on the boards. We're closely monitoring everything going out right now, and the books are looking very good. The oily appearance is called a newton effect, which is light refracting through the mylar in contact with the outer holder, and doesn't harm the book in any way. We tackled that very early on and have gotten it down to a minor effect, but we're still pushing to get it completely gone. The rest of the things mentioned have only affected a small percentage of books, although the boards have a way of magnifying the seriousness of it. The truth is there are people out there who want to see this holder fail. It's such a drastic change from the old holders that it's going to take a while for some people to get used to, but we're not letting anything out that we feel is sub par. I wouldn't worry about submitting books now or by San Diego. We're doing on-site at Philly this weekend, so I expect some positive feedback from the people who participate. "

Originally Posted by MR_SigS
Quote:

Originally Posted by matterus023

If CBCS ever come into future problems like this 1. I really hope they don't approach it how CGC have and 2. Please please don't defend them if they do and make out like problems are not problems.

After the way CBCS publicly and internally handled their start up hiccups, which received very positive feedback, and the way CGC is publicly(?) and internally(?) handling this runaway snowball, which has been an epic PR failure, I'm sure this won't be an issue. CGC is demonstrating what NOT to do, and it's hard to imagine CBCS falling into the same business practice. CBCS is acting like competition, CGC is acting like a Monopoly.

Both companies seemed to have approached their problems from vastly different perspectives. CGC was so used to being the only respected graders in the business that they seemed to have become complacent, dealing with negative feedback for their 2nd gen slab with a "What's the rush? Where else will they go?" approach. Well, now there's an answer to that question, and the way CGC has responded comes off as rushed panic. Not saying this IS what's happening, but how can any unbiased onlooker see it any other way?

Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Can anyone explain this? JoeyPost maybe? From Harshen's post today:

"Our customers also made us aware of a few minor issues, including a slight wavy appearance on a small percentage of submissions. We reacted immediately to this feedback by conducting a thorough investigation of the cause, which we have identified and rectified. We learned that a majority of the wavy books had gone through CCS prior to CGC and that a recent CCS process change, when combined with the new holder, was producing the unanticipated waviness. We addressed the situation with a minor modification to the CCS process and do not anticipate that this issue will reoccur at any point in the future."

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9227705&fpart=427

Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Can anyone explain this? JoeyPost maybe? From Harshen's post today:

"Our customers also made us aware of a few minor issues, including a slight wavy appearance on a small percentage of submissions. We reacted immediately to this feedback by conducting a thorough investigation of the cause, which we have identified and rectified. We learned that a majority of the wavy books had gone through CCS prior to CGC and that a recent CCS process change, when combined with the new holder, was producing the unanticipated waviness. We addressed the situation with a minor modification to the CCS process and do not anticipate that this issue will reoccur at any point in the future."

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9227705&fpart=427