fantastic_fourfantastic_four Just far far too long without a custom title. Really. Seriously now. 2002?
TOTAL NEWBIE
Registered: 03/29/02
Posts: 19742
Loc: the Baxter Building, Virginia
Originally Posted By: frankbearss
I'd like for someone to throw out another successful company that offers as many uncharged services to its customers as CGC does. Registry, boards, previous grader notes process, census...these things cost money. Smart companies charge for services like these.
Or smart companies create them specifically knowing the services will create indirect revenues--best example in the world is Google, who doesn't charge the general public for anything yet makes hundreds of billions from companies giving software away for free to the masses. The Registry inspires people to slab more books and buy more slabs...the boards create general goodwill for CGC as a company and have helped to cement them as an industry staple...and the Census encourages people to slab more books on issues with low counts.
fantastic_fourfantastic_four Just far far too long without a custom title. Really. Seriously now. 2002?
TOTAL NEWBIE
Registered: 03/29/02
Posts: 19742
Loc: the Baxter Building, Virginia
Originally Posted By: mndb369
Originally Posted By: Mark 1
Originally Posted By: blazingbob
I'm not sure what the uproar is about.
CGC has been "toll collecting" for years now.
FMV walkthroughs were always a way to "share" in the owners windfall even though I've always questioned how a grading company knew what something would sell for. Always seemed like a conflict of interest.
CGC tried to share in the profitable pressing business because frankly there is more money made pressing than grading.
Since that one didn't fly they are trying another way to profit from pressing. Charge the upgraders for the notes that they need when they are on the fence trying to figure if a book is upgradeable. No overhead, pure profit, no more phone calls to the graders.
I respectfully disagree Bob.
It's not just pressers or crack, press, resub people calling for graders notes.
They had to be the catalyst for this change and why it became a problem for CGC...but certainly not all who called for graders notes.
I've called and it wasn't to see what upgrade potential a book has. I called to see if a book I am interested in buying had a detached centerfold, rusty staples, etc.
fantastic_fourfantastic_four Just far far too long without a custom title. Really. Seriously now. 2002?
TOTAL NEWBIE
Registered: 03/29/02
Posts: 19742
Loc: the Baxter Building, Virginia
Originally Posted By: Blogon scum
I was going to order for grader notes on 1 book just to see what they look like but was curious about security of credit card data. I signed in but when I came to the page to enter name, address, and credit card info I did not see https in the url like other websites that encrypt data. Should I be concerned or am I just being paranoid?
You should be concerned--I got hacked once by registering on a web site I bought a television from using the same username/password combo I use on lots of sites. The site didn't use SSL, and within an hour, someone else--I presume another user on Comcast's network since Comcast is my ISP--hacked two accounts I used that same username/password on (my email account and World of Warcraft account). Any data not sent via HTTPS you should assume is being shared with the world.
10. Company compiles data regarding, and makes digital images of, items submitted for Services. In partial consideration for the performance of Services by Company pursuant to this Submission Form, Customer hereby authorizes Company to compile such data and make such images and agrees that Company shall have an irrevocable, non-exclusive, perpetual, unlimited, royalty-free right and license to use and commercialize such data and images for any purpose.
IMO, the problem with their "legal" position is that a non-exclusive license can be revoked at any time through a writing and the use of the word irrevocable is contradictory to the nature and definition of "non-exclusive license" as covered in USC 17.
Secondly, this disclaimer flies in the face of state based contract law and more importantly, if there is or ever was an intent for commerce they have a problem with tort law - negligent misrepresentation, material concealment and fraud.
JMO.
_________________________
Missed it by that much!!!
fantastic_fourfantastic_four Just far far too long without a custom title. Really. Seriously now. 2002?
TOTAL NEWBIE
Registered: 03/29/02
Posts: 19742
Loc: the Baxter Building, Virginia
Originally Posted By: comicwiz
The decision for me was made long before this recent decision to charge a fee for graders notes.
That said, further to your point, I feel that it needs to go much further than boycotting their services.
It seems these boards are treated like their own private garden, where they can road test and gauge online temperatures and community response on poorly hatched plans or business changes.
I've held back numerous times from posting/responding to questions because I feel they need to start paying full freight for some of the insights and opinions being shared on these boards.
Businesses pay BIG fees for thinktank consulting. CGC's an all-grown-up-business now and needs to start doing the same.
No more free rides.
And if anyone here helps them with research on rarer stuff like I have in the past, make sure to start charging nosebleed toll rates.
No small company of CGC's size pays big fees for thinktank consulting--I'm thining you're holding CGC to an unreasonable standard by comparing them to the types of standards large, massively-profitable companies are. Any idea how profitable they are? I wouldn't be able to pass the types of judgments you're passing on them without knowing this.
10. Company compiles data regarding, and makes digital images of, items submitted for Services. In partial consideration for the performance of Services by Company pursuant to this Submission Form, Customer hereby authorizes Company to compile such data and make such images and agrees that Company shall have an irrevocable, non-exclusive, perpetual, unlimited, royalty-free right and license to use and commercialize such data and images for any purpose.
IMO, the problem with their "legal" position is that a non-exclusive license can be revoked at any time through a writing and the use of the word irrevocable is contradictory to the nature and definition of "non-exclusive license" as covered in USC 17.
Secondly, this disclaimer flies in the face of state based contract law and more importantly, if there is or ever was an intent for commerce they have a problem with tort law - negligent misrepresentation, material concealment and fraud.
JMO.
I had a book damaged during submission. Unfortunately when I contested that the damage happened during the time the book was in CGC's hands, they asked me provide a scan. The only scan I had of the book was not retrievable as it was on a computer that experienced permanent hard-disk failure. I was told CGC did not take scans of comics they receive, but after reading these terms, I'm wondering whether they conveniently used that excuse to discard me and my claim.
The decision for me was made long before this recent decision to charge a fee for graders notes.
That said, further to your point, I feel that it needs to go much further than boycotting their services.
It seems these boards are treated like their own private garden, where they can road test and gauge online temperatures and community response on poorly hatched plans or business changes.
I've held back numerous times from posting/responding to questions because I feel they need to start paying full freight for some of the insights and opinions being shared on these boards.
Businesses pay BIG fees for thinktank consulting. CGC's an all-grown-up-business now and needs to start doing the same.
No more free rides.
And if anyone here helps them with research on rarer stuff like I have in the past, make sure to start charging nosebleed toll rates.
No small company of CGC's size pays big fees for thinktank consulting--I'm thining you're holding CGC to an unreasonable standard by comparing them to the types of standards large, massively-profitable companies are. Any idea how profitable they are? I wouldn't be able to pass the types of judgments you're passing on them without knowing this.
That (the thinktank part) was a dig on the comment made by this boardie who claimed they were in the "million(ish)" revenue range.
I was totally serious about the free ride part though.
10. Company compiles data regarding, and makes digital images of, items submitted for Services. In partial consideration for the performance of Services by Company pursuant to this Submission Form, Customer hereby authorizes Company to compile such data and make such images and agrees that Company shall have an irrevocable, non-exclusive, perpetual, unlimited, royalty-free right and license to use and commercialize such data and images for any purpose.
IMO, the problem with their "legal" position is that a non-exclusive license can be revoked at any time through a writing and the use of the word irrevocable is contradictory to the nature and definition of "non-exclusive license" as covered in USC 17.
Secondly, this disclaimer flies in the face of state based contract law and more importantly, if there is or ever was an intent for commerce they have a problem with tort law - negligent misrepresentation, material concealment and fraud.
JMO.
Even without the disclaimer, I can't imagine what law would prevent them from selling the notes.
IMO, it's a work for hire contract - and there's no such thing as a royalty free non-exclusive license en perpetuity. Compiling data is one thing. Charging a fee for access to data is another. Not clearly communicating to the client that there's commerce based on the process that's being entirely covered by the client or offering a reduction for license is negligent misrepresentation and material concealment. Again, JMO.
_________________________
Missed it by that much!!!
