• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

dena

Administrator
  • Posts

    1,350
  • Joined

Everything posted by dena

  1. I think that you'll find that the community becomes self policing - especially when awards season is approaching. It is amazing how closely collectors watch sales and immediately report entries that are suspicious. We've seen this in the coin and comics registries which have been around about two decades. Most participants are in it because they love this hobby, love to show off their sets and they love to see what other collectors are doing. There isn't much incentive for someone to cheat. Whatever they gain in a potential prize will be overshadowed by the negative feedback they receive on social media when they are caught doing it. This is a very vocal group.
  2. It is absolutely not true that awards will be given to users with the most points. Best sets, yes. Most points, no. Also, this is not the first and only Registry managed by the Certified Collectibles Group. If there is even a hint that someone is cheating, they will be disqualified.
  3. CGC Trading Cards™ is excited to announce that the CGC Trading Cards Registry is now live and ready for your Pokémon and Magic: The Gathering Cards! Online registries are popular and powerful tools that gamify collecting and provide inspiration, organization and recognition as collections are shared around the world. With the CGC Trading Cards Registry, TCG collectors will find a superior platform where they can display their CGC-certified cards and compete against other collectors to see who has the best sets. Read more >
  4. Thanks so much for your questions and comments! Regarding set types, what you currently see is just the beginning. We will continue to add new set types and we welcome requests for new set types. When you click into each category, you'll see a link that reads 'Request a new set type here>' Regarding hybrid sets, we do not have plans to allow cards graded by other companies. However, I will bring your suggestion to the team for consideration,.Your feedback is greatly appreciated.
  5. Update: We found what is causing the incorrect status to be displayed in submission tracking and we are working on a solution. We look forward to getting this resolved ASAP.
  6. These are displaying now as well as the card in your first post in this thread. Thanks for your patience.
  7. Do you see it in the report now? If not, would you please let me know the certification number so I can dive deeper?
  8. There was a connectivity issue between the website and our internal system that provides the information you see in submission tracking. That issue was resolved this morning. Please let us know if you continue to see a problem.
  9. Thanks for the feedback. We are still tweaking the typeahead search. I will report this specific example to our programmers. The examples are extremely helpful.
  10. Thanks Sharon! I'll look at this.
  11. Sorry for the delay in responding. I was out for a few days over the holidays. I'll look at getting that fixed so it doesn't require the month/year format. Thanks for the feedback. I see you posted this comment on 12/23. I'm wondering if you entered the order prior to 12/22. There were a few updates made on 12/22 to address the weird check total situation and some problems in the book search. Is it better for you now? Or are you still seeing those problems?
  12. Dang it! Thanks for the continued feedback. We know this is extremely frustrating and we would love to get this settled. Back to the drawing board we go...
  13. I haven't forgotten you. Still working on an answer for you. I can see your history so no need to provide anything.
  14. Updates made for some of the problems reported: We added logic to the typeahead to list titles alphabetically after you enter your search terms. If you use the # symbol in front of your issue number in the typeahead, it will understand that it is the issue number specifically. Before, if you entered just the number 6, it pulled results where 6 appeared anywhere in the description. Fixed check total problem (haven't tested this one myself yet to confirm the problem has been resolved) Fixed shipping method on legacy order packing slips. Customer selected one shipping method but packing slip showed a different method. The shipping method was correct in our database it was just wrong on the packing slip and that has been corrected. We are continuing to work on other issues reported and doing further work to improve the typeahead. Thanks for your feedback and patience so far.
  15. I'm told Invision made a change on Thursday night that they think should resolve the login issues. Are you all still having issues getting in since Thursday night?
  16. Thanks for reporting. There is a fix being released later today that will address that check amount problem.
  17. Looking into this and will get back shortly with an answer. Thanks for your patience.
  18. Recently we saw this error when there was an issue with a field length in the book description. I have a programmer looking into this and will get back to you ASAP.
  19. Yes! This was already on our list of enhancements that would follow after the initial release. Great information provided here so far. Thank you. I think the typeahead wasn't an issue on our trading card and sports card forms because those databases are a fraction of the size of the comics database. We had some input on the best way to manage the comics typeahead but the tricky part is addressing various scenarios. Clearly we did not get that quite right but we will. Our top goal is to make it easier for the end user.
  20. Thanks for providing that additional information about the payment screen. We already have a fix in place on our staging site and will make that live on Monday. We would put the fix in place today but we always shy away from doing site deployments on a Friday in case it results in something breaking elsewhere and then there are issues going into the weekend. Thanks so much for bringing it to our attention. Regarding the typeahead field, we already have some ideas in the works and a group of us are meeting Monday to see if those ideas get us where we need to be. Our objective is always to make a better online experience for the customer . If that means adding a different element to the design, that's what we'll do. Any comments made here will be shared with the team and once we've made adjustments, I'd really love to get your feedback about whether we're hitting the mark or if we still have work to do. We are dealing with this as an urgent issue. Stay tuned.
  21. Thanks all for your feedback. We are working to address all concerns immediately. Answers in red to some questions so far: It no longer possible to do multiple tiers in one session. You have to pick the tier you are submitting under. Once selected you can't change. So if you have five moderns, five economy and one Express - you start over 3x. That's 3x entering address, 3x entering payment information. 3x the printing. I'm sure it saves CGC a bit of time. When receiving logs in books they split off different tiers on one order form. Now they don't have to do that. We did it for them. You can add multiple Tiers in one session. When you are in your cart, there is an option to Add Another Service Even worse is I'm not sure what you would do if you make a mistake. Let's say for instance you sort out your submission of 20 books. Ten moderns, 10 economy. So you do the 10 moderns, print everything out and then start a new submission for the economy. And discover you missed a modern published 1/75. I suppose you have to send the modern in as economy - or start over - throwing away the modern submission you did. Or it could be the opposite. You find a book published 12/74 in your "modern" stack. Economy already done. Old system you just typed in the book and the computer moved it into the right tier. Since you can have multiple tiers in a session as indicated above, this would not be an issue. You could either go to your cart and 'Add Another Service' or, if you are working on your Economy and add a Modern book, the form will let you know that it is out of the date range for Economy and will ask you if you'd like to add another service to your session. The look up function is really horrid for modern books. For instance there has been a jillion Amazing Spider-man titles. So you have to either scroll through a long list trying to find the right issue #4, or you have to type in the date. Sometimes it's 09/14. But a different title published Sept 2014 might not be found unless you type 9/14. And you still have to sort through the various Canadian and Swedish and variant covers to find your book. We are aware the typeahead is an issue and we are working to tweak the sorting so it better returns the results you would expect. That is a top priority for us and we intend to fix this ASAP. CGC continues down it's path to kill trees. Remember the day when you could do a submission of 20 books and the submission printed out on sheet of paper? If you printed a copy for yourself it was two pieces of paper. Now a submission of one book is four pages. That should not be the case and I am looking into this. I also had weirdness where when it was time to enter payment information that if I wanted to pay with a check, CGC wanted more $$ than the total of the order. Credit card was the submission amount. IDK if that means CGC thinks I have some outstanding balance or what. I guess I'll call accounting tomorrow to check on that. This should also not be the case. The form should be charging the same regardless of the payment method. I am looking into this right away. I suppose a web designer thinks it looks prettier, but any enhanced functionality is aimed at making CGC's side easier. This is not the case. We had overwhelming feedback that the old format had it's own issues and the goal in changing to this new format was to provide a faster experience for the customer. Also, the typeahead, when delivering results more efficiently, will get the user to the correct item in our database which will make it quicker for receiving to get your submissions verified and in the queue faster. We've seen evidence of this in our other verticals. The number of trading cards coming in correctly identified nearly doubled when the transition was made from the old format to the new format. I realize that it is hard to see the benefit now when the typeahead is not performing in the way it should. However, we are committed to making this a superior experience and your feedback helps us get there.
  22. Thanks for the info, Greg. I think those are old entries that have since been corrected but are being pulled from a table of entries that should not be in use. We are looking into this now and will get this sorted out ASAP.
  23. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Regarding Chrome, if you clear your cache, does it load? Regarding the 1982 book, can you tell me which book specifically?