• 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.

Newton Rings
15 15

676 posts in this topic

On 11/4/2019 at 3:47 AM, IbukiLord said:

My LCS recently received 30 CGC submissions and didn't see any with Newton Rings while I was going through them but what I did notice is that all of them have loose inner holders now, I'm assuming this is done so that the 2 plastics don't touch each other and cause the effect?

Is this the solution now to have a loose inner sleeve?

It sounds like CGC may be using a thicker sealed Mylar inner sleeve.  No way of knowing if this is or isn’t an aspect of the fix, but it seems like a possible solution to reduce or eliminate NR.  I suspect a thicker sealed inner sleeve of Mylar would protect books from damage if the sleeve had enough room to float loose inside the hard polycarbonate case, but just guessing.  

CGC management probably won’t discuss how they fixed the problem in much detail ...if indeed they have... as I suspect the work-around will be considered proprietary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, slynger said:

Just received this yesterday. Date says it was signed 10/21 so it was slabbed after that. Really hope they did/are fixing it, because this is terrible. Going to reach out to Brittany for help. Where do I find her email?  Thanks. 

brittany@cgccomics.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Silver Age Stud said:

If I buy a book that has this affect will CGC reholder it?

A small amount of newton rings is considered "normal and acceptable" by CGC, but if your slab is showing an excessive amount of newton rings they will usually reholder it for you (though the newton ring effect is often removed by scuffing the inner well - which can also be unsightly). Definitely contact Brittany at CGC with scans or pics of your slab showing the severity of the newton rings and wait for her agreement before sending anything back to CGC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Black_Adam said:

A small amount of newton rings is considered "normal and acceptable" by CGC, but if your slab is showing an excessive amount of newton rings they will usually reholder it for you (though the newton ring effect is often removed by scuffing the inner well - which can also be unsightly). Definitely contact Brittany at CGC with scans or pics of your slab showing the severity of the newton rings and wait for her agreement before sending anything back to CGC.

Thanks for the info, I greatly appreciate it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im honestly curious how many books don't have newton rings? Im now to the point where I have so many slabs needing to be fixed that I can't ship them all to CGC in 1 package because no courier will insure its value. 20+ books with reholder fees, submission fees, membership fees, handling fees, 4x international shipping fees, 4x insurance. This is what customers have to deal with to fix something that shouldn't have happened in the first place. The majority of my collection has newton rings so bad that I don't want to display the books. It's been over a year since @CGC Comics left this post, has there been any communication since then? Any improvement? Anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy cow, I had no idea how lucky I had gotten until I read this thread.  Just got 9 Hama signed G.I. Joe's back...no rings.  I thought perhaps the process had improved but now see it has not and I just got lucky.  Phew!  Condolences to all who have gotten Ringed.

GI Joe 2 -8.5 CGC-no bag.jpg

GI Joe 21 -9.0 CGC-no bag.jpg

Edited by lordisam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2019 at 12:09 PM, Jeffro. said:
On 12/11/2019 at 9:44 AM, DR.X said:

they're not going to fix the problem, so long as people keep sending them books.

And why should they as long as the money keeps rolling in? 

That's a short sighted way of looking at it. Yes they're always going to do business regardless. The question is how much business are they not receiving due to this design flaw? How much better would they be doing without these unsightly distortions on their proprietary holders?

I would think the longer this goes on without a clear solution more people will decide to avoid them.

Edited by MGsimba77
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MGsimba77 said:

That's a short sided way of looking at it. Yes they're always going to do business regardless. The question is how much business are they not receiving due to this design flaw? How much better would they be doing without these unsightly distortions on their proprietary holders?

I would think the longer this goes on without a clear solution more people will decide to avoid them.

I doubt that, for basic marketing reasons: there is not any competition that returns the percentage of economic reward when the owner sells the host brand or the buyer buys the host brand, or carries market credibility to the degree of the host brand which makes transactions a simple by product of collecting.

Correction costs to achieve perfection have likely been evaluated and the impact on future business evaluated. The decision by the host brand to announce that the current product is the best it can be for now and any annoying results are normal, is the simplest least economic impact on the host brand.  It is a gripe hole, and people are using it faithfully.

I would think you agree that the calculation has already been made of what percentage of business flow interruption can be absorbed before the increased expenditures to achieve perfection have to be made to keep the host brand viable. My bet is the market is so far from that tipping point that it is a good idea to leave a gripe hole in place.

What If a competitor arrives with perfection? Sounds good, except the time it would take for that competitor to achieve the level of economic importance and reputation that the collector desires would be years, and would probably be a market failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, wilbil said:

I doubt that, for basic marketing reasons: there is not any competition that returns the percentage of economic reward when the owner sells the host brand or the buyer buys the host brand, or carries market credibility to the degree of the host brand which makes transactions a simple by product of collecting.

Correction costs to achieve perfection have likely been evaluated and the impact on future business evaluated. The decision by the host brand to announce that the current product is the best it can be for now and any annoying results are normal, is the simplest least economic impact on the host brand.  It is a gripe hole, and people are using it faithfully.

I would think you agree that the calculation has already been made of what percentage of business flow interruption can be absorbed before the increased expenditures to achieve perfection have to be made to keep the host brand viable. My bet is the market is so far from that tipping point that it is a good idea to leave a gripe hole in place.

What If a competitor arrives with perfection? Sounds good, except the time it would take for that competitor to achieve the level of economic importance and reputation that the collector desires would be years, and would probably be a market failure.

The ring-free product is excellent, but that is no comfort to the small minority (?) of people that receive the faulty product. We all understand the economics and business strategy I think. Some of us however think that CGC could do so much more for the customers they let down, i.e. those that receive slabs marred by rings, often having waited an age to get them in the first place. If they treated those customers better, say by not having the front line try to fob them off and by offering cash compensation (not credit), their reputation could improve immeasurably.  Any company can find itself with problems. It's how they deal with them that defines them. That last bit sounded a bit Batmany didn't it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, wilbil said:

I doubt that, for basic marketing reasons: there is not any competition that returns the percentage of economic reward when the owner sells the host brand or the buyer buys the host brand, or carries market credibility to the degree of the host brand which makes transactions a simple by product of collecting.

Correction costs to achieve perfection have likely been evaluated and the impact on future business evaluated. The decision by the host brand to announce that the current product is the best it can be for now and any annoying results are normal, is the simplest least economic impact on the host brand.  It is a gripe hole, and people are using it faithfully.

I would think you agree that the calculation has already been made of what percentage of business flow interruption can be absorbed before the increased expenditures to achieve perfection have to be made to keep the host brand viable. My bet is the market is so far from that tipping point that it is a good idea to leave a gripe hole in place.

What If a competitor arrives with perfection? Sounds good, except the time it would take for that competitor to achieve the level of economic importance and reputation that the collector desires would be years, and would probably be a market failure.

This assumes a lot of things, none of which have real world credibility unless one is living under the impression that the top dog is always right, especially if it’s a bulldog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Foley said:

*short sighted :baiting:

Its cool I'll just blame my phone's autocorrect xD

8 hours ago, wilbil said:

Correction costs to achieve perfection have likely been evaluated and the impact on future business evaluated.

 

8 hours ago, wilbil said:

I would think you agree that the calculation has already been made of what percentage of business flow interruption can be absorbed before the increased expenditures to achieve perfection have to be made to keep the host brand viable. My bet is the market is so far from that tipping point that it is a good idea to leave a gripe hole in place.

Yes I'd assume (emphasis on assume) they have looked into cost/benefit data as best they can. The cost side is quantifiable which presumably would include wasted man hours dealing with all those free reholder submissions plus added shipping cost. I don't think it's as easy to measure the potential benefit side considering this is a major hobby. 

Its dangerous for them to sit on their laurels and just assume no other competitor will start to eat into market share at some point. Once that starts it may be tough to stop. Anything is possible! I think people out there seeing all these gimmicks like custom label, Ebay screening service, pedigree labels then getting submissions back splattered with NRs may decide to be former customers. They are playing with fire and will eventually get burned if that's their attitude. Especially with these marketing gimmicks going on!

Its quite frustrating because the new slabs are beautiful IF done right. The clarity is definitely superior! They greatly improve the eye appeal of any book imo. But again...the whole thing is a terrible wasted effort when they can't get it right:frustrated: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Get Marwood & I said:

The ring-free product is excellent, but that is no comfort to the small minority (?) of people that receive the faulty product. We all understand the economics and business strategy I think. Some of us however think that CGC could do so much more for the customers they let down, i.e. those that receive slabs marred by rings, often having waited an age to get them in the first place. If they treated those customers better, say by not having the front line try to fob them off and by offering cash compensation (not credit), their reputation could improve immeasurably.  Any company can find itself with problems. It's how they deal with them that defines them. That last bit sounded a bit Batmany didn't it. 

It may not be a "small" minority. People have routinely reported submissions of 10 or more here with half or roughly a third having rings. 

Whatever the percentage I agree with you its never a good idea to antagonize your customers no matter how big you are as a company. Like the old saying goes...*Get back to basics*. 

Less new labels more clear holders!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MGsimba77 said:

It may not be a "small" minority. People have routinely reported submissions of 10 or more here with half or roughly a third having rings. 

Indeed, hence my question mark. No idea on numbers myself. Maybe it's a drop in the ocean. Maybe the TATs are suffering due to all the returns. 

4 minutes ago, MGsimba77 said:

Whatever the percentage I agree with you its never a good idea to antagonize your customers no matter how big you are as a company. Like the old saying goes...*Get back to basics*. 

Less new labels more clear holders!!!

Yep. The gimmicks are likely just salt in the wounds of the aggrieved. Get the basics right first, eh...

Link to comment
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
15 15