Unique CGC label error.
0

27 posts in this topic

10,773 posts
13 minutes ago, MadGenius said:

Thank you, Sean and Shane. It's in everyone's best interest that CGC improves in the QC department. How much time and money was wasted with this one submission that had to be sent back twice? Mistakes will happen, but if CGC had ensure they are minimized then that is better for their bottom line and will engender more good will from their customer base.

I'm going to respectfully disagree that QC at CGC is statistically as bad as you are inferring. You stated 'Rarely do I get a submission back without any label errors'. You must have tremendously bad luck. Over the years, with probably a couple thousand submissions, I only recall having one label error. Also, it's not the fault of QC that your book arrived with a crack in the slab. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,505 posts
56 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

I'm going to respectfully disagree that QC at CGC is statistically as bad as you are inferring. You stated 'Rarely do I get a submission back without any label errors'. You must have tremendously bad luck. Over the years, with probably a couple thousand submissions, I only recall having one label error. Also, it's not the fault of QC that your book arrived with a crack in the slab. 

I just looked at my invoice history for the past 6 months. I've submitted 37 books including the 2 book reholder that they messed up by transposing the labels. I had 4 label errors out of 37 (10.8%) and that is not counting the one that was cracked. Small sample size, granted, but a 5-10% error rate seems about right based on my experience over the years. Is it bad luck? Possibly, but I've submitted enough books over the years for some of that bad luck to even out. It hasn't. In my opinion, an error rate of less than 1% is what I would expect, but I feel they are above that figure.

And this is just QC/label errors. Don't even get me started on the various accounting errors I've experience over the years. I like the CGC product and they always, eventually, make good on these errors so I keep coming back. BUT, I would like them a lot more if I didn't have to deal with these sorts of this on a semi-regular basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,773 posts
3 hours ago, MadGenius said:

I just looked at my invoice history for the past 6 months. I've submitted 37 books including the 2 book reholder that they messed up by transposing the labels. I had 4 label errors out of 37 (10.8%) and that is not counting the one that was cracked. Small sample size, granted, but a 5-10% error rate seems about right based on my experience over the years. Is it bad luck? Possibly, but I've submitted enough books over the years for some of that bad luck to even out. It hasn't. In my opinion, an error rate of less than 1% is what I would expect, but I feel they are above that figure.

And this is just QC/label errors. Don't even get me started on the various accounting errors I've experience over the years. I like the CGC product and they always, eventually, make good on these errors so I keep coming back. BUT, I would like them a lot more if I didn't have to deal with these sorts of this on a semi-regular basis.

It really makes you wonder. If they can have errors on the labels and errors with the accounting, can they have errors with the grade ? Do you think that sometimes the wrong grade is input ? I once submitted a book, issue #98 of a title. The book was in the 8.5 range with some obvious flaws. It got a grade of 9.8 . I often wondered if the issue number influenced an error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
839 posts
On 3/30/2018 at 9:09 AM, Impulse :) said:

20180330_110236.jpg.caabacea556b9252549f113f04c93d76.jpgRarely do I have a CGC label error, but curious how this label got by quality control? 

Great label.  Keep it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,884 posts
16 hours ago, Bomber-Bob said:

I'm going to respectfully disagree that QC at CGC is statistically as bad as you are inferring. You stated 'Rarely do I get a submission back without any label errors'. You must have tremendously bad luck. Over the years, with probably a couple thousand submissions, I only recall having one label error. Also, it's not the fault of QC that your book arrived with a crack in the slab. 

Bob, you can correct me if I am wrong, but I am going to assume nearly all or all of yours were blue label, and that they were all vintage (meaning that CGC has graded plenty of them over the years and had plenty of time to fix any typos or problems with the labels). MG does a fair amount of SS stuff, and also a lot of Moderns. From my experience, CGC does much worse on these types of books for two major reasons: (1) Yellow labels require hand entering data for sigs and human error is MUCH more likely; and (2) Moderns are subject to having the entire label be completely wrong (wrong series, wrong volume etc.) and QC is not as familiar with them to make the error seem clear.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,773 posts
11 minutes ago, seanfingh said:

Bob, you can correct me if I am wrong, but I am going to assume nearly all or all of yours were blue label, and that they were all vintage (meaning that CGC has graded plenty of them over the years and had plenty of time to fix any typos or problems with the labels). MG does a fair amount of SS stuff, and also a lot of Moderns. From my experience, CGC does much worse on these types of books for two major reasons: (1) Yellow labels require hand entering data for sigs and human error is MUCH more likely; and (2) Moderns are subject to having the entire label be completely wrong (wrong series, wrong volume etc.) and QC is not as familiar with them to make the error seem clear.   

Yes, you are correct about my submissions. I also see your point on the SS stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,505 posts
28 minutes ago, seanfingh said:

Bob, you can correct me if I am wrong, but I am going to assume nearly all or all of yours were blue label, and that they were all vintage (meaning that CGC has graded plenty of them over the years and had plenty of time to fix any typos or problems with the labels). MG does a fair amount of SS stuff, and also a lot of Moderns. From my experience, CGC does much worse on these types of books for two major reasons: (1) Yellow labels require hand entering data for sigs and human error is MUCH more likely; and (2) Moderns are subject to having the entire label be completely wrong (wrong series, wrong volume etc.) and QC is not as familiar with them to make the error seem clear.   

For this reason, I'd like to see the Signature Series forms be available online. Hopefully this is something that CGC is considering in the near future.

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
0