Why Are My Comics Coming Back with Bad Newton Rings?
2 2

74 posts in this topic

42,163 posts
4 minutes ago, Get Marwood & I Live! said:

That's not really fair sean, come on.

CGC themselves list the 'crystal clear display' above preservation and security on their own website:

cc.thumb.PNG.78f4c2403e93c3e8ef3a845e624a23f6.PNG

https://www.cgccomics.com/grading/holder.aspx

You can't imply that the visuals don't matter when CGC themselves trumpet that they do. And newton rings destroy that visual aspect when they are prevalent on a book.

And as for frost on a popsicles box analogy, popsicles are not a visual medium collectible (last time I looked). Would you buy them if they had an odd looking brown substance on the packaging that looked like poo? 

Be fair

I can't really argue about the visual display thing in light of that - LOL.  I had no idea that they were trumpeting their case as "ideal for display."  My perspective has always been that the comic (and the certification of grade or witnessed signature) is important, and the case is not.  But definitely, if CGC is going to market based upon crystal clear display. They are failing.

By the way, MTG_comoccollector, that is an example of how to civilly tell someone they are flat wrong and how to gracefully admit it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,720 posts
2 minutes ago, seanfingh said:

I can't really argue about the visual display thing in light of that - LOL.  I had no idea that they were trumpeting their case as "ideal for display."  My perspective has always been that the comic (and the certification of grade or witnessed signature) is important, and the case is not.  But definitely, if CGC is going to market based upon crystal clear display. They are failing.

By the way, MTG_comoccollector, that is an example of how to civilly tell someone they are flat wrong and how to gracefully admit it.

 

(thumbsu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 posts
1 hour ago, seanfingh said:

You don't care about science and you don't care that CGC doesn't care. And you don't care that 85% of the people that buy the things don't care.  Until it hits CGC's bottom line, they are not going to care, and at this point I no longer care about the discussion.  I also think you are a tool.

I’m not sure where you are getting that I don’t care about science. I am not denying science, I am bringing up a concern with the product. Again, I think there is a solution. If you think science locks out any solutions, I disagree strongly. I’m also confused where I said I don’t care that CGC doesn’t care, but I am aware that they are closing in on a monopoly as others have mentioned, in my initial post. That doesn’t mean I don’t care.

Can you share your source of data for that 85%? Generally curious where that conclusion originated from. 

Resorting to name calling is low energy, but if you feel the need to lash out, knock yourself out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,163 posts
1 hour ago, MTG_comiccollector said:

I’m not sure where you are getting that I don’t care about science. I am not denying science, I am bringing up a concern with the product. Again, I think there is a solution. If you think science locks out any solutions, I disagree strongly. I’m also confused where I said I don’t care that CGC doesn’t care, but I am aware that they are closing in on a monopoly as others have mentioned, in my initial post. That doesn’t mean I don’t care.

Can you share your source of data for that 85%? Generally curious where that conclusion originated from. 

Resorting to name calling is low energy, but if you feel the need to lash out, knock yourself out.

What a hilarious low energy response from a tool who included in his first response to me - "moronic," " if you can muster up some more wit" and "just sound like some company shill. Yawn."

2jr4rw.jpgvia Imgflip Meme Generator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27,712 posts

He lost a twinkie on that game. :gossip:

Seriously tho' I'm not sure what a 'low energy' response is...but whatever it is, it sounds infinitely preferable, to the so called 'high energy' , attention whoring nonsense that is spouted from time to time by  individuals who think a keyboard is an RPG, when in actual fact (in their hands) is a clown's bucket of confetti. :sumo:  

Edited by Grantley Goddard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,593 posts
3 hours ago, Grantley Goddard said:

Seriously tho' I'm not sure what a 'low energy' response is...

Ex: "I know you are, but what am I?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55,173 posts

The irony of "be fair" should not be missed, but if we're truly trying to "be fair", it must be noted that CGC's official statement about their "Crystal-clear display" is a reference to the clarity of the new holder...not the presence or absence of Newton rings.

The clarity of the new holder is, in fact, a substantial and evident improvement over the old holder, immediately obvious when holding the two in hand and comparing. The Newton rings will certainly affect the presentation of the book, but the clarity of the plastic is not hindered by them.

In the interest of fairness, if that's really the goal....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
937 posts
18 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

The irony of "be fair" should not be missed, but if we're truly trying to "be fair", it must be noted that CGC's official statement about their "Crystal-clear display" is a reference to the clarity of the new holder...not the presence or absence of Newton rings.

The clarity of the new holder is, in fact, a substantial and evident improvement over the old holder, immediately obvious when holding the two in hand and comparing. The Newton rings will certainly affect the presentation of the book, but the clarity of the plastic is not hindered by them.

In the interest of fairness, if that's really the goal....

This is true. 100%. The Newton Rings stand out better than ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 posts
On 10/9/2018 at 4:11 PM, seanfingh said:

What a hilarious low energy response from a tool who included in his first response to me - "moronic," " if you can muster up some more wit" and "just sound like some company shill. Yawn."

2jr4rw.jpgvia Imgflip Meme Generator

What’s hilarious is you’ve resorted to making up stats to back up your ideas and now sinking lower to memes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,163 posts
1 hour ago, MTG_comiccollector said:

What’s hilarious is you’ve resorted to making up stats to back up your ideas and now sinking lower to memes. 

Where is your high energy response to the fact that you resorted to name calling and insults first, tool?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52,303 posts
On 10/9/2018 at 12:04 PM, MTG_comiccollector said:
On 10/9/2018 at 10:38 AM, seanfingh said:

The issue doesn't show up in cards because there is no plastic to plastic contact.  Newton rings are a refractory-type optical effect caused by plastic to plastic contact. It is not a defect because it doesn't affect the comic or the security of the case.  It's cool if you don't like it, and its cool if you avoid books that show them.  But its like getting upset that your box of popsicles has frost on the outside.  It looks bad, but it doesn't affect the popsicles inside.  There is nothing anyone can do to fix science and make newton rings not appear (at least not under the current design of the holder).

Finally, your statement that they are to "ensure a displayable piece" is not accurate. CGC grades and encapsulates comic books. They do not agree to met anyone's standard of "displayability." Again, it is your prerogative to avoid the product, but not liking something does not make it defective.  

Maybe the card grading companies don’t want their cases to look like mess so they don’t double plastic. Maybe if they did they would build out small extrusions to seperat the the two by a mm. There are a mass of smart solutions out there. Is it that complex to accept that there could be another solution? Should all businesses give up when they put out a product that receives complaints?

your analogy with a popsicle box is moronic. I’m not sure it’s even worth entertaining since it’s so distant. Feel free to try again if you can muster up some more wit.

If you believe there is no parallels to displayability to slabbed collectibles, I am not sure what to tell you. Good luck selling your dish soap slabs. You’re starting to just sound like some company shill. Yawn.

Seanfingh's response to you was neither insulting not abusive. Your response to him was. There really was no need for that. Maybe instead of worrying about his wit (and if you'd been here for more than than a couple months, you'd know you are dead wrong about his level of wit) you should worry about crafting respectful responses instead of being an a s s. 

Edited by Jerkfro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52,303 posts
On 10/12/2018 at 8:32 AM, TwoPiece said:

Sixty-Nine.

Dranzer.

I win.

No, no. Low Energy is the new Dranzer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52,303 posts
12 hours ago, seanfingh said:
13 hours ago, MTG_comiccollector said:

What’s hilarious is you’ve resorted to making up stats to back up your ideas and now sinking lower to memes. 

Where is your high energy response to the fact that you resorted to name calling and insults first, tool?

He's a low energy twit

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
2 2