On Coinbase, I could not get the credit card option to work (inexplicably would not recognize a Wells Fargo VISA credit card, definitely not debit) and that verify fail cost this newbie faster service. But I otherwise found an ACH-based purchase there of a single bitcoin to be a smooth, admittedly slow, process.  So here's one vote for Coinbase.  I read a couple threads elsewhere on bitcointalk about ventures that announce they were hacked, suffered a huge loss, and now will repay account-holders only a fraction of users' account value; I suppose one doesn't know how true any story here is.  Reputation is everything.  I went with Coinbase because of others' reports of successful use, including one responsible user (a national financial magazine reporter) who likely had too much to lose to be part of some scam to "salt the mine" with phony acknowledgements or testimonials.

That said, Coinbase would do well to improve communications with users at various stage of a multiday process so buyers have a better understanding of what is going on during that "black hole" period of ACH or other waiting time.  I hope Coinbase service and transparency will improve.  I would pay a higher fee to comfortably use reputable companies given the horror stories one reads on bitcointalk.  This guy Olaf jumping in on this bitcointalk thread is a step in the right direction, shows some concern for reputation management.  Even if those here with problems don't get the resolution or PM response they want, I'd still prefer to deal with a company that jumps in to engage users posting on bitcointalk than a startup that is a complete dark hole on communications.