Me to CGC: You're misspelling Fox Feature Syndicate. CGC to me: We don't care.
1 1

96 posts in this topic

2,751 posts
9 hours ago, Doohickamabob said:

I can see why CGC would not want to open a can of worms by suddenly writing the publisher a different way, because then all the people who had labels with the other spelling would have a spelling deemed "incorrect" by CGC and could then demand to have their comic reholdered for free to fix the error.

I'd say that is the most likely reason for resisting the change.  But in reality, how many people would actually "demand" to have their labels fixed, I wonder?  I appreciate that it's important to you... but I doubt there are so many others that it would result in a major problem for CGC.  Perhaps it would, if they'd been printing "Marvell Comics" on their labels all these years.  

I also read your entire tale.  I, too, often find myself getting frustrated, trying to champion a trivial cause that's important to me because of the principle of the matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,029 posts

I don't think it is a big issue if CGC had just come out at the beginning and said "it's not going to get changed in our system, sorry." But to repeatedly tell you "got it, no problem" and then go ahead and  grade & take your money before letting you know they would not make the change, that's just wrong.

I would be looking at different options for grading.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,958 posts

... But you can be sure they will correctly label and note in the census all 843 different "variations" (*cough* reprints *cough*) of Walking Dead #1.

 

The difference? One (hint, not the Golden Age one) affects hundreds of submissions ($$$), the other affects maybe a few submission at most...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,385 posts

This was actually something I had noticed many moons ago as well. I read the post sorry to hear that it doesn't really bother me personally too much to be honest which is strange given my OCD tendencies but thought I would share this pic since it was mentioned it is a visual world nowadays. I have mentioned things that I thought needed to be added on a single book and CGC accommodated like for Speed Comics #28 for example. I asked them if they would add, "Classic Nazi Monster cover" and they did. I also had them add something to Flash Comics #7 notation and they agreed. Maybe like others have said it would affect something on a much larger scale. Anyways, here is how it appears on many of their issues clearly no, "s" I would also like to add that I LOLd when i read Bedrocks post ?

37177526226_4311bda5ef_b.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,366 posts

The economics of this factor into play.  CGC makes easy money off of moderns, big money off of big dollar submissions, and good money off of press/resub books.  The books that take the most time and effort to grade and yield the least profit are those similar to what you submitted.  Despite what we'd all like to think, CGC isn't vested financially in making us neurotic obscure GA collectors happy.  If they were to concede on this, a precedent would be set where all of our OCD-like demands would be fair game going forward.  That would take time away from making good money.  My advice: keep your books raw and document them in a spreadsheet as you see fit :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
161 posts
16 hours ago, Doohickamabob said:

I've been meaning to write about this for a while, but it peeved me significantly that I decided to wait.

In early June, I submitted some comics to CGC. Among those comics were some issues by the publisher Fox Feature Syndicate. (The specific issues included the titles Junior and Sunny.)

I've always had a pet peeve about the misspelling of this publisher's name. The name, as indicated in the indicia, as well as the colophon (logo), is "Fox Feature Syndicate." It is NOT "Fox Features Syndicate," with an "s" at the end of "Features." It's just "Feature" (no "s"). It's easy to see how anybody would make this error, since when pronouncing the name out loud, the "s" sound seems like it is attached to the end of the word "Feature" even though it's really only at the beginning of the word "Syndicate." (Sort of like how some people misinterpret the Jimi Hendrix song lyric "while I kiss the sky" as "while I kiss this guy"... Or like the SNL sketch with Sean Connery reading "S Words" as "Swords"...)

First-world problems, right? Okay, sure. But it's also an issue of accuracy. Would you want a CGC label that listed the publisher as "Marvell," or "Tymely," or "Needor"? I wouldn't. I wouldn't trust a company that made those kinds of errors. CGC is the kind of company that is based in the concept of accuracy. It's not a corrugated-cardboard company or aluminum-siding company, where a misspelling or typographical error doesn't matter. It's in the business of paying attention to details and getting little things right. So I feel that it's fair for me to take issue with the misspelling of the publisher's name. So yeah, I think it is a problem, and I think even though it's trivial in the grand scheme of life, within the realm of "Let's be accurate wherever possible," it is an abdication of that commitment to accuracy.

So back to my experience this past summer: I submitted some comics in early June. Prior to submitting, I called CGC's customer service and asked them about the "Fox Features Syndicate" problem. I said I wanted to submit, but didn't want the label to have the misspelled publisher. I was told that they would address the misspelling and that it shouldn't be a problem, so go ahead and submit the comics. So I did.

When submitting the comics, I attached a hand-written note on each comic sleeve, saying "Please note that the publisher's name is 'Fox Feature Syndicate,' not 'Fox Features Syndicate.' Please make sure the label reflects that." (Incidentally, I did my best to be polite in every communication the matter.)

When the comics were received by CGC and processed as Verified, they were posted in my account's submissions section with the wrong publisher name, "Fox Features Syndicate." I thought that meant that they were ignoring my request for the misspelling to be fixed, so I called CGC customer service again. I was told, "Oh, that's just because it's the way it's currently spelled in our database. We will look into that issue before the comics are graded and the labels printed." I said okay, but also said "I don't want the comics graded if the publisher is going to be misspelled." The customer-service rep noted my request.

Fast-forward a couple months. In early August, the comics were Scheduled for Grading (it took a while, and I realize it was convention season so there would be a delay), with the publisher still wrong. I sent an email asking if they were going to fix it, and again stating that I did not want the comics graded with the wrong publisher name on the label.

Not long after, the comics were Graded and out for shipment (Shipped/Safe) in short order. I looked at the grades online and saw that the comics were still listed as "Fox Features Syndicate" as the publisher. That same day, I received an email response that stated the following:

"Thank you for your email. I have confirmed with the graders and the Publisher "Fox Features Syndicate" will remain unchanged. I have also confirmed that they will not be indicating the issue date for the MLK comic as there is not one listed on the book. The Original printing is apparent from the "No Date" issue date and the Fellowship Publisher."

Regarding the MLK comic mentioned above, I had requested if possible for the date of the comic's publication (1957) to be indicated on the label, to distinguish it from the reprints that happened a decade or so later. I didn't know how CGC had labeled the MLK comics in the past, but thought if they could include the date on the label, that would be useful since the whole point of getting comics CGC graded is to certify that they're authentic, and having the date of that comic on the label would make that clear.

What I find interesting about this detail is that the crux of the reason they couldn't put the date on the label for the MLK comic was that "the date is not listed on the book." If CGC is that concerned about adhering to what is listed on the book, then why do they misspell "Fox Feature Syndicate" when it is written that way in the indicia?

I called customer service again, and got Cynthia again. Incidentally, I would like to state that Cynthia was very professional and polite throughout each conversation, even though I got very frustrated with the situation at the end. I also realize that Customer Service reps are just doing what they're told to do by somebody higher up the chain.

Here are the various reasons I was told for why CGC cannot publish "Fox Feature Syndicate" comics with the correct publisher name. I typed these down after the phone call, and they are as close to direct quotes as possible:

-- Fixing the spelling of the publisher "would cause us to have to change our database." Yes, this was given as a reason. I cannot fathom why this shouldn't be a trivial change for a professional, functional company to make to a database.

-- "Other sources (publications/companies) also use that spelling." This is true, others do use the misspelled name, particularly the Overstreet guidebook. I see no reason why CGC should commit to compounding an ongoing error just because others do. I looked through multiple sources, and here are some of the ones who get the spelling right: Webcitation, the Comics Library, Wikipedia, Toonopedia, ComicBookPlus, Comic Vine, DC Comics Artists, Revolvy, the Digital Comic Museum, International Hero, Grant Geissman (in several of his published books), BIP Comics, and  The Grand Comic Book Database.  HAS IT WRONG: The DC Comics Database, My Comic Shop, Good Girl Comics, and the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide. And....CGC.

-- "Both spellings are equally correct. Your spelling is correct, but our spelling is not incorrect." This is a direct quote. For the record, the "Fox Features Syndicate" spelling of the publisher name is absolutely incorrect. I did a fair amount of research to make sure I wasn't making a mistake on my own side. Until 1944 they were Fox Publications and listed addresses in Massachusetts. Then the business was reincorporated as Fox Feature Syndicate, Inc., and they were located at offices located at 10 E. 43rd St. and also 50 E. 42nd St. in New York, New York until declaring bankruptcy in 1950. All of their indicia say "Fox Feature Syndicate," with there being two exceptions -- two issues of Romeo Tubbs from 1950, where it does say "Fox Features Syndicate."  There are a handful of instances where the name says "Fox Publications" or "Fox Comics," and there are a handful of late issues that present the cover title with the words "Fox Features." But the indicia/colophon is spelled out as "Fox Feature Syndicate" 99% of the time.

To quote the Grand Comic Book Database (from multiple pages, separated by ellipses): "Nearly all of Fox's post-war material was published as Fox Feature Syndicate, which is the name that the MSU Comic Art Collection applies to all of Victor Fox's publishing ventures. Only Romeo Tubbs #26(27) and #28 say "Fox Features Syndicate". ... Probably the result of a typo, this alternate company spelling (note the "s" on the end of "Features") has been spotted on one series (so far) from 1950. The vast majority of issues list the indicia publisher without the "s". ... Entry for Fox Feature Syndicate has 306 issues with the name A Fox Feature Publication (or Fox Feature Syndicate), as opposed to 2 issues of Romeo Tubbs.  ...  Confusingly, a few series in the early 50's [2 issues of Romeo Tubbs] featured an indicia publisher of "Fox Features Syndicate, Inc." (note 's' at end of "Features"), which is listed as a separate indicia publisher. However, that form is rare."

-- "We cannot put the date on the MLK comic, because the indicia does not have the date. We can only put on the label that which is on the indicia." / ME: "The indicia for the other comics says Fox Feature Syndicate." / CGC: "That is correct, but our spelling is not incorrect."

-- Finally: "If you want, you can mail them (the Fox Feature Syndicate comics) back and have them removed from the holder, and then you can get a refund."

During our phone conversation, at one point the customer service rep. put me on hold to double-check with the grader/manager who was telling her the situation. While I was on hold, there was a CGC recording touting the company as setting the industry standard for its "commitment to accuracy." I found that ironic.

The phone conversation ended with me telling the customer-service rep that I expected better from CGC. I tried not to be rude, but it really did frustrate me because I thought I made a strong case, and I felt like CGC didn't care about my concerns, and was just blowing me off without much explanation (or with explanations that didn't have much merit, in my view).

I have since cooled off about it, but I wanted to write something to get this off my chest. I realize I am sort of tilting at a windmill here. But it does bug me. I have to say, at the time, I felt like it put me off of the comics-collecting hobby to a large degree. It also made me question getting anything graded again.

I do see how CGC might want to just consolidate a bunch of "Fox Feature Syndicate" related publisher names into one catch-all name that they can use for all the Fox publications in their database, to make it easier on themselves. I also see that Fox comics are a pretty small percentage of the stuff that CGC grades, given that it's a solely Golden Age publisher and not something that is going to affect anything but a tiny percentage of customers, many of whom don't care anyway.

I also realize that CGC was dealing with convention season at the time, and probably had much bigger fish to fry than dealing with this issue, even if they agreed with it to some extent ("Your spelling is correct, but our spelling is not incorrect.") AND... I can see why CGC would not want to open a can of worms by suddenly writing the publisher a different way, because then all the people who had labels with the other spelling would have a spelling deemed "incorrect" by CGC and could then demand to have their comic reholdered for free to fix the error.

Nonetheless, I am frustrated and disappointed that CGC has stated they have no concern about a verifiable error being published on the labels of their graded comics. I am also disappointed that CGC misled me about a situation until it was too late for me to make the decision not to have the comics graded (though they offered a refund if I sent the comics back for de-slabbing, which is kind of an insult.) I have spent several thousand dollars at CGC and would hope to be treated as a valued customer, not somebody whose concerns are a joke to them.

Okay, well.... I think I have fully vented here. Thanks for reading.

 

I completely sympathize. Cgc has seemingly strived to improve the case, forums, turnaround times, etc. But their quality control has always been subpar. I constantly receive books with misspelled labels, false signing dates, incorrect info. Its frustrating when books are logged in quality control for up to a week only to be shipped out with mistakes. I can only assume the quality control part of the process is low on their priority list and unimportant. It's a shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,180 posts

I sent some Cherry file copies (Fogel) along with the certificates to be graded a few years ago.

When I got to see the images, I noticed none of them said "File Copy" on the label.

When I inquired about it, they said "We don't put File Copy on books published after 1975."

I then proceeded to send them some images of CGC graded Cherry's with "File Copy" on the label. I said "I have lots more if you need to see them."

They then changed the labels and put "File Copy" on there. 

Edited by icefires

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,974 posts
3 hours ago, DJones said:

But their quality control has always been subpar. I constantly receive books with misspelled labels, false signing dates, incorrect info. Its frustrating when books are logged in quality control for up to a week only to be shipped out with mistakes. I can only assume the quality control part of the process is low on their priority list and unimportant. It's a shame.

Have you guys ever seen a GLOD label specifying a clipped coupon on a particular page number and when you check the Comic book databases, there is actually no coupon on that particular page in the middle of the book?  :facepalm:

There is a coupon on another page at the end of the book though, which kind of makes you wonder if the coupon was even clipped at all and maybe it should actually be sitting in a blue Universal label instead of a GLOD.  ??? 

Can't tell without cracking the book out of the slab though.  :censored:

Edited by lou_fine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,258 posts

Technically speaking, "Fox Feature Syndicate" is correct:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Feature_Syndicate

The problem is that someone (I'm assuming the OSP) originally added the "s", and it stuck. The publisher is referred to as "Fox Features Syndicate" in Overstreet, Gerber's Photo-Journals, on both grading company labels, Heritage Auctions, ComicLink, MyComicShop, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,728 posts

Clearly, Fox misspelled their own name.  Perhaps that's why they carried such huge uncollected A/R; checks were sent to Fox Features instead.

From Wikipedia:  Fox Feature Syndicate, located at 60 East 42nd Street, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in July 1950, listing liabilities of $721,448 and assets of $932,878, which included $567,800 in uncollected accounts receivables.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,731 posts

I don't think it's "technically speaking," Fox Feature Syndicate is correct.  Fox Features Syndicate is incorrect, probably because of the influence of King Features Syndicate.  I'm with the OP on this one, accuracy is worth striving for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,180 posts
3 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

I don't think it's "technically speaking," Fox Feature Syndicate is correct.  Fox Features Syndicate is incorrect, probably because of the influence of King Features Syndicate.  I'm with the OP on this one, accuracy is worth striving for. 

I couldn't agree more. CGC needs to drop the s. The financial impact to them would be very small. Please "Man Up" CGC.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,195 posts
19 hours ago, Doohickamabob said:

That's okay, I also stopped for a drink or two.

Seriously, I know the wall of text messages do not go over well. I wanted to be thorough and put down all the details, but I understand that it can be tedious to read, so my apologies.

Yeah, this would have been epic even for RMA, so I dropped out along the way. :sorry:

But I sympathize with your impatience at CGC's unwillingness to correct the error.  I don't know if you mentioned this, but from the start, CGC's position has been to follow Overstreet.  So, they've ported over a lot of errors that were in Overstreet.

The bigger issue for me is how often they fail to miss out-and-out errors on labels during the QC step.  I've receive several books with the label from a different book.  There's also the situation where they don't take the time to make sure they've got the correct name of a book.  The census is all fouled up on the Baker Blue Ribbon/Diary Secrets/Teen-age Diary Secrets books.  Similarly the Donald Duck Kite Fun Book (a key book for Barks collectors) entries are an impossible tangle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,377 posts
30 minutes ago, Sqeggs said:

Yeah, this would have been epic even for RMA, so I dropped out along the way. :sorry:

Same here, I got that uniquely nauseating RMA/BLB vibe and it just soured me to immediate disinterest.

I do understand what the OP is saying, but in the big picture it is insignificant to me (especially when sources are in conflict, though the lack of an 's' seems to be technically correct).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,195 posts
7 hours ago, buttock said:

The economics of this factor into play.  CGC makes easy money off of moderns, big money off of big dollar submissions, and good money off of press/resub books.  The books that take the most time and effort to grade and yield the least profit are those similar to what you submitted.  Despite what we'd all like to think, CGC isn't vested financially in making us neurotic obscure GA collectors happy.  If they were to concede on this, a precedent would be set where all of our OCD-like demands would be fair game going forward.  That would take time away from making good money.  My advice: keep your books raw and document them in a spreadsheet as you see fit :)

 

Did y'all hear wha the BUttock being laying down, :jaws:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40,120 posts
19 hours ago, Martin Sinescu said:

I guess the ribbing here is good-natured, but I think CGC's stance is fairly ridiculous. You obviously put a lot of time and consideration into your communication with them beforehand as well as into your post here (yes, I read the whole thing) and I just don't see how their position is really defensible, especially relying on the indicia for the convenience of one argument and then disregarding it for the other. The fact is, they're not correct here (and yes, that means that they're also not not incorrect). It's okay to admit a mistake at some point, especially if it's just unintentional, but to dig in like this and take such a hardline stance while you're wasting hours of your personal time and getting stressed over it is really an unfortunate response on their part. I don't know how their database functions, but if it's so rigid they can't edit one "s" off an existing entry that's a serious structural shortcoming for a company whose data is so important. There must be something going on behind the scenes where the customer service rep was just asked to hold firm because either it can't be fixed or they just don't want to admit a simple mistake and, as you suggested, might feel they'll be on the hook for fixing all existing labels as well. To me there's still just no logical reason why they couldn't accommodate your request if it is correct nor does it make sense that they would want to perpetuate this typo, even if it is a common mistake. Sorry you've had to put up with this, hopefully they can resolve it in a more satisfactory way than what they've offered to this point.

Or at least correct it going forward, and award OP some kind of thankful recognition for pointing it out to them. If I served a Summons on "Fox Features Syndicate", their registered agent would not accep tit :grin:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,959 posts
2 hours ago, sfcityduck said:

I don't think it's "technically speaking," Fox Feature Syndicate is correct.  Fox Features Syndicate is incorrect, probably because of the influence of King Features Syndicate.  I'm with the OP on this one, accuracy is worth striving for. 

Yup, I bet that's absolutely how the typo originally got started. I kept thinking it sounded familiar from some cartoon, just couldn't put my finger on it.

 

5 minutes ago, divad said:

Or at least correct it going forward, and award OP some kind of thankful recognition for pointing it out to them. If I served a Summons on "Fox Features Syndicate", their registered agent would not accep tit :grin:

 

Accep what:whatthe:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40,120 posts
9 minutes ago, Martin Sinescu said:

Yup, I bet that's absolutely how the typo originally got started. I kept thinking it sounded familiar from some cartoon, just couldn't put my finger on it.

 

Accep what:whatthe:

It was actually a typo on my part too, and then I saw it and laughed and decide to leave it. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,634 posts
On 9/20/2017 at 7:46 PM, Doohickamabob said:

That's okay, I also stopped for a drink or two.

Seriously, I know the wall of text messages do not go over well. I wanted to be thorough and put down all the details, but I understand that it can be tedious to read, so my apologies.

No need to apologize, it's not your fault people have short attention sp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1