SGC Response concerning new labels

[Blackie]

updated.........was able to get ahold of SGC concerning the Sub...........all is Good!

[GregMitch34]

As I stated way up top--it's irrelevant that SGC claims that needed to make changes because of new computer program. No one is saying they should not make any changes, just that the ones they made--which were design choices, not mandated by computer--are bad. Their claim that "some people just don't like change" is, frankly, pretty offensive when they have offered no explanation of why these particular choices were made.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by GregMitch34

As I stated way up top--it's irrelevant that SGC claims that needed to make changes because of new computer program. No one is saying they should not make any changes, just that the ones they made--which were design choices, not mandated by computer--are bad. Their claim that "some people just don't like change" is, frankly, pretty offensive when they have offered no explanation of why these particular choices were made.

Maybe they will learn. Even as big as Coca-Cola is as a Fortune 500 company, they too, learned quickly to get rid of "New Coke". Lest they wanted Pepsi to be the only game in town with the majority of the market share.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by GregMitch34

As I stated way up top--it's irrelevant that SGC claims that needed to make changes because of new computer program. No one is saying they should not make any changes, just that the ones they made--which were design choices, not mandated by computer--are bad. Their claim that "some people just don't like change" is, frankly, pretty offensive when they have offered no explanation of why these particular choices were made.

They offered a lot of explanation but you failed to listen. (see first post)

[Peter_Spaeth]

In one month people will be completely used to it, I predict.

[The Nasty Nati]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In one month people will be completely used to it, I predict.

I don't think so. Over the years SGC has made changes to their flip, but not this drastic. There were tweaks, but the green border remained. Removing the green border is removing their identity not to mention upset a lot of OCD collectors...which lets face it, is a lot.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by GregMitch34

As I stated way up top--it's irrelevant that SGC claims that needed to make changes because of new computer program. No one is saying they should not make any changes, just that the ones they made--which were design choices, not mandated by computer--are bad. Their claim that "some people just don't like change" is, frankly, pretty offensive when they have offered no explanation of why these particular choices were made.

+1. That's how I read it too--almost condescending. The fact that you need new computers, etc. is certainly understandable and probably well known to all. This is not the problem. There are at least 150 species of animals on this planet and probably some plants and minerals with more computer/techno knowledge than I and yet even I could find decent labeling software and a nice printer to address these so-called concerns. Several here have prepared mock-ups of superior labels with only hours or less of time to do so. I still have not seen an explanation as to how this label provides an extra line of text more than the last one. They removed their barcode, which is neither here nor there to me although it might be nice on the back for those with proper scanning abilities, yet their website still extolls as one of the virtues of their product the existence of this barcode. Then to basically shrug the whole thing off with the old "you can't please everybody" byline is exactly that---dismissive.

The folks on this board come from many walks of life, and several have had the opportunity to elicit sales pitches from advertisers and design folks on how to better improve the perception of their product or service. I wonder how many of us would accept this presentation and explanation as being even professional, much less something we would find attractive.

[srs1a]

Very well stated Todd.

[GregMitch34]

Leon, with respect, telling me "you failed to listen" is pretty impolite. Apparently that applies, I guess, to 4 out of 5 here. They did NOT offer any real explanation for the design choices, just the need to make some sort of changes. As others have shown, changes that reflected more of their current design, with all of the "lines" they want, could be made easily--contrary to what SGC clalms. They were free to choose any type face, keeping the green box and so forth. And the current label itself already has 4 lines of copy (and they've now deleted the bar code).

[Leon]

Originally Posted by GregMitch34

Leon, with respect, telling me "you failed to listen" is pretty impolite. Apparently that applies, I guess, to 4 out of 5 here. They did NOT offer any real explanation for the design choices, just the need to make some sort of changes. As others have shown, changes that reflected more of their current design, with all of the "lines" they want, could be made easily--contrary to what SGC clalms. They were free to choose any type face, keeping the green box and so forth. And the current label itself already has 4 lines of copy (and they've now deleted the bar code).

Greg, I was only giving my opinion just as you do..and had I wanted to include others in that opinion I would have done that too. SGC gave this explanation in the first post-

"Internally we needed a label
that could contain more information (we now have 4 lines of text area, instead of 3 lines). Having 4 lines of available space is necessary for our business going forward. Having a colored border would have made this difficult and cluttered."


Whether there are work-arounds, or other solutions is besides the point of this post, and then you said this.... many posts down-

" Their claim that "some people just don't like change" is, frankly, pretty offensive when they have offered no explanation of why these particular choices were made."

So that is why I said what I did. However, I could have been more tactful so for that, I apologize. I doubt I will post in this thread anymore but will relegate myself to the others concerning the same subject.

[pgellis]

Let me preface what I am about to say by saying that I only collect SGC graded cards. I love the look of their holder/flip. I love their grading and their customer service, etc., etc. I am a customer.

So here's the question we all want an answer to: WHY CHANGE?

I know what Sean said, but why make such a drastic change? Perhaps, perhaps they thought that if they made a dramatic change to the flip, that then collectors would send in their existing collection to be re-holdered so their existing collection would have uniformity going forward?

Just a thought, but maybe it is more about creating a new revenue stream?

I know most of us will say that they would never send in their existing cards for re-holdering, but as we have already seen, continuity is a very important issue to collectors.

Just a thought....

[2dueces]

Wow. All this because a company changed it's flip design? OCD really does go hand in hand with card collecting.