InvstmntComcSuply

I would not take the lack of mention by the LOC as implicit that Lexan is not inert. I am sure there are several archivally sound materials that the LOC does not mention.

One would think that there would be some sort of link with documentation of Lexan being used by curators, conservators, hell, even picture framers, etc. somewhere but I can't find it. Except for an old bid to replace a plexiglass cover on a display case at a National Park. How is it that you are certain that they are inert? Most plastics offgas or leach out chemicals over time in their natural course of decomposition. The process is accelerated by heat. Because you have not seen any deleterious effects in 15 years does not mean that none have occurred. Millions of comic books have been stored in polyethylene and polypropylene bags over the last 15 years and many owners would not be able to notice any appreciable difference from the day they stored them. That doesn't mean that the paper did not yellow and the inks did not dull, It just means that the owner didn't notice it. Additionally, if they used chipboard or even "acid free" at time of manufacture coated SBS boards (which become highly acidic as they age), I can't imagine many owners honestly making that claim as there will definitely be yellowing/fading.

There is no difference between the 2 mil Mylar products. The BCW boards however are SBS and will become acidic before you sneeze on them.

My guess is because someone messaged the seller last night saying a whole forum is placing bids to win and find out his information to pursue him legally. And the seller either found the forum or just came over to comics general and canceled all the bids from the start of the thread. My guess is they will cancel them from now on and just try to cash out with the few thousand it is at now. He is probably trying desperately to get the last legitimate high bidder to agree pay and end the auction early.

There are many forms of proof that don't require them to see the item, which is why they do yank lots of auctions. The easiest way is to prove that they lifted an image from someone else's auction by just telling them which auction it got lifted from. Sure, but when you have someone selling reprints as originals, why does it take multiple complaints to have the auction killed? The auction is being reported as Significantly Not As Described (SNAD) which will require the buyer to go through the hassle of repacking and returning the item, per ebays buyer protection requirements. Of course: If the buyer is uninformed and doesn't file the SNAD, ebay still gets their cut. If the buyer can't be bothered with returning (probably not the case here, but often in smaller $ transactions) eBay still gets their cut. If the buyer fails to file within 45 days, because they are hospitalized, die or other problems, ebay still gets their cut. If the buyer fails to get signature confirmation when returning, eBay still gets their cut (and the buyer is out the full amount). Ebay also gets the float and the interest on the money the entire time, up until the seller gets the item back. I just think ebay is too disincentivized to yank auctions.

I don't think definitive proof does anything for ebay. Because it is not like they are going to buy it to check our proof.

Yes, and they have been reported numerous times and have had their listings pulled, only to be back up and running within a few days. What surprises me, is that it may take dozens of complaints via the Report Item link (as evidenced here) on an auction page before ebay does anything. Even then, if the seller simply tweaks it, they can relist and start all over again. One would think that ebay has some culpability once they have been notified of false claims or bait and switch descriptions, but apparently, that is not the case.

This guy cgc-mylars NOT Mylar puts a single comic to shame. He has sold 10s of thousands of $ of great looking, but cheap, polyproplene bags over the last 2-1/2 years as expensive Mylar.

Maybe this isn't such a great idea for an eight year old

I don't think the Christmas technology bump is going to affect me that much, coming from Atari, maybe the 8 year old. But I doubt he can wait that long

disclaimer I can't remember playing a console style home video game since Atari but I have an 8 year old who wants an x-box. < end disclaimer > Anything I should know before I go plunk down the $? Or any online deals I should choose from instead of walmart/bestbuy?

There are just certain things that stand out with me

Thanks for the order, Andy! I appreciate your business! Drew

arghhhh

They should either eliminate projected grades, or state strongly that CI employees are not graders and that projected grades may not reflect certified grades. My guess is it is more likely to go the following route: "We are the in house conservation specialists for CGC, we know exactly what it takes to get a grade bump. Sorry, what were the 3 security digits on your credit card number again?"

So assuming the graders still won't know a CI submission from any other. What happens when a $1000 CI submission does not meet the projected grade? There will be a strong incentive to, at a minimum "run it through again at no charge to see if we catch the graders on a better day" again, and again and ..... or even a CI employee directly inquiring from the graders "what will it take to make this a x.x?" It is going to be hard to explain to customers "Here is our in house conservation department, they do GREAT work" and then "Sorry, your book did not meet the projected grade." or "CI must have missed something in their initial examination, your book only received a 9.2 instead of a 9.8 and yes you still owe us for the CI services rendered" The "appearance" of conflict of interest is one thing. However, in this case there are huge financial as well as "customer goodwill" incentives for conflict of interest to occur. I expect at a minimum that CI employees will be cross trained as graders, which will improve their ability to "maximize potential". As an aside: It is going to be a fun when CGC goes into upselling mode and offers "value added" services on a book that was just pressed. .

DD#1 apparently from all_things_comics showing up here, now

eBay's rules say ten days (or seven business days). If you can't pay within that time frame you shouldn't bid. If a buyer is a repeat offender of this rule upon a certain seller they should block him/her. There is no "seven or ten day" rule. Sellers can set their own policy on time frame to initiating the unpaid item process, however they can not initiate it earlier than 4 days after the bid. If they do it any time between 4 and 32 days from auction close, their final value fees will be refunded.

Selling is about profiting. I don't take idiosyncrasies as a personal affront when they don't cost me additional time or effort. There is little to no cost to file the unpaid item claim (it can be automated) and it apparently gets him off his wallet. Ultimately, this guy pays and drives up other prices when it is an auction setting.

I would never block a buyer that pays in less than 30 days.

It is a fact, that an alkaline board will deter yellowing caused by the breakdown of paper as it ages. It is the whole point of using a board that maintains its alkalinity, such as Gerber or Cole's and staying away from a board that quickly becomes acidic and contributes to degradation like BCW's.

They do have to pay a bill, no idea if it's "hefty". CGC enforces faster turnarounds on books based on value to prevent this issue. If there's a "lot" of "cheap" books there, no idea what the formula is for their insurance. Average value perhaps? It is a balancing act. Longer TAT = fewer submissions = - profits Longer TAT = + fast tracks = + profits Increase employees = - profits = decrease TAT Longer TAT = + insurance costs Longer TAT = + stability since the work is already "in house" Longer TAT = + chance of encouraging competition (I think this is actually very minor)

I would think not. I read that over time it would contribute to the overall deterioration, which was the whole point to this topic. Has anyone heard of or had any experience with the microchamber boxes at the URL below? Any thoughts about it? http://www.conservationresources.com/Main/section_3/section3_5.htm Does it offer the same advantages as the paper that goes inside the comics? The microchamber boxes are made of board just slightly thicker than a fullback. Nothing like the corrugated cardboard used in "standard" comic long or short boxes. Yes, it offers the same advantages as the paper that goes inside the comics The way you say that it's "nothing" like the corrugated cardboard, it sounds like that's a bad thing. Is that the case? I would think that since standard cardboard boxes are not acid-free and that microchamber boxes offer the advantage of absorbing acidic pollutants like the paper that goes in the comics, that would mean that the microchamber boxes would be a much better choice. Would you disagree with that statement? I was pointing out the structural difference between the microchamber boxes and regular comic boxes, not the vast difference in preservation capability, where microchamber wins, hands down. The picture of the microchamber comic box looks like it might be made similar to a regular short box. Most people look at it and think it is manufactured from a corrugated board. However, since the microchamber board is flat, it does not have nearly the structural strength of corrugated board. The boxes can not be made very large and only hold about 75 books. I would not stack them for any reason.

I sell the cotton based microchamber interleaving paper that CGC uses, precut to several comic book sizes. I believe Sam uses the wood pulp bond paper. Bags-un is great, but they cut their microchamber too small.