Number 6

Bought a CGC magazine from an e Bay seller who charges $22 for shipping and claims he packs very securely. Book arrived this morning at my work in it's in a Medium Flat Rate box. Setting aside the fact that he's gouging on shipping, I've always found the Medium Flat Rate box a tight fit for regular size CGC comic books. Box is really light too. Really looking forward to opening this up when I get home to see what's inside.

So we're still withholding the name of this shop from those not-in-the-know?

I don't know about the results from the current auctions, but there's some CGC books coming up in the next auction where the grading is...yikes. Everyone has been saying this scam is confined to certain Marvel books, and maybe it is just the light cannon Heritage uses on their scans, but there's some Gold Key and DC books I'll be giving a hard pass to no matter what the label says.

I remember a contributor to Comic Book Marketplace recalling having to buy several comics to get the one he wanted from a vending machine but I had no idea what one looked like. Thanks for posting the picture.

Well, it’s always a relief to find out that my personal feelings happen to land on the right side of The Law. What I was trying to get across … and may not be doing a very good job of …is that when I’m evaluating whether or not to do business with a seller I personally have found it better to try to ascertain what the mindset of the seller is rather than view it through the lens of my personal stances are or what is legally allowed. Because if there’s a problem, I’m 99.99% sure I’m not taking them to court so working out a resolution is going to depend on what the seller is willing to do rather than what I can force him to do.

While I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, it sounds reasonable to me, I think where disagreements between buyers and sellers arise is: what constitutes “in the condition sold”? If something substantial was missed - a clipped coupon or writing on the interior, or the item was damaged in transit (especially if the seller’s packing contributed to the damage) then I would think those would be reasonable exceptions to the “no returns” rule. But what if the seller listed the book as NM- and buyer feels strongly that it’s no better than VF+? The buyer is going to argue that it didn’t arrive in the condition it was sold as. But in my experience this is, bare minimum, exactly the type of return a seller is trying to get out of with a “no returns” policy. If “no returns” only kicks in when a buyer is completely satisfied with all aspects of a transaction, then a policy of “no returns” is meaningless and redundant. If a buyer is satisfied obviously he’s not going to return it. And from my experience, sellers who have a “no returns” policy don’t intend that policy to be meaningless. To be clear: I’m not advocating for a no-returns policy with teeth. My point was simply, as a buyer if I’m doing my due diligence and trying to play it safe, I personally have found it safer to interpret a seller’s no return policy in a seller-centric way rather than a buyer-centric way as that’s often how they intended it. If a seller doesn’t want to stand behind his advertised grade then what else is he going to try and wiggle out of with that policy?

I know my opinion on this will not be a popular one, but while I will go ahead and share it, please do not attempt to label it as “blaming the victim”, that’s not what I’m doing. I agree that the seller was in the wrong. I agree that his packing was slipshod and resulted in the books being damaged. And I agree that despite the seller’s stated “no returns” policy the seller should not only have accepted the return but also refunded the return shipping cost due to his negligent packaging. However, I don’t think a new rule is needed as I think the rule we already have regarding seller’s having stated return policy already covers this. This seller stated “no returns” in his sales thread rules (which complies with the rules). For me personally, when I see that a seller has a “no returns” policy, I take them at they’re word, and I understand that what they mean is that when they’ve been paid and the item is handed to the post office they’re washing their hands of it and don’t feel an obligation to stand behind what they sell from that point on. I’m not passing judgement, I’m just interpreting that is how they choose to do business. And many do. So for me personally, unless I have a prior history of doing business with a “no returns” seller, when I see that type of policy in a sales thread 9 time out of 10 I’m going to pass it buy. Now, should a blanket, simplistic “no returns” policy cover events like this where comics don’t arrive as advertised because of negligence on the seller’s part? Personally, no I don’t think so. But again, if a seller just states simply “no returns” without qualifying it any way (and this is a reason I skip over those threads as it’s an indication that they haven’t put a lot of thought into their rules and the various ways a transaction might play out) without any qualifiers then I’m taking them at their word that they’re going to refuse take responsibility for anything and everything. I can’t just assume that the seller will do the right thing if such a situation comes up. Now after seeing “no returns” and a buyer is still tempted to buy, rather just assume that their policy will make allowance for such a situation, I think the appropriate thing to do is ask before making a claim on anything in the thread. Likewise, if a new, unfamiliar seller pops up here (honestly I had never seen this member’s name until this thread) and you have no idea whether they know how to pack comics properly, I think the prudent thing to do is for a buyer to ask before claiming books in the thread, not just quickly assume that everyone who sells here knows what they’re doing. I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion because when a sales thread goes up people want to jump in and start throwing up ‘take it’ and don’t want to risk losing out on something they want because they took to time to ask some clarifying questions via PM. And to be clear: by saying the above I am in no way suggesting that somehow what happened here was Balls’ fault because he didn’t ask questions before hand or that he ‘got what he deserved’ by buying from a “no returns” seller. Balls had every right to ask and expect for the return shipping to be covered and that the seller should have agreed. What I am saying is: this is why I don’t think a new rule. While I personally don’t think a seller’s stated return policy absolves them of responsibility in a situation like this…I also believe that buyers have a responsibility to do a certain amount of due diligence before entering into a transaction. And I think it would it would be a mistake to constantly adding and tweaking rules to shield buyers from that responsibility. I appreciate that the community wants to look out for each other but we also have to look out for ourselves.

You did.

For life of me, I can't figure out the behavior around this event. A few years ago I purchased a book that was one of the "dregs" left over after the feeding frenzy was done. For the condition and price of what I received my overall experience was....o.k. It wasn't in anyway a bad experience, it was fine. And I would probably buy from them again...if it wasn't for the extreme competitive behavior of others in these threads. But I didn't feel like what I received was massively undergraded and/or underpriced either, certainly nothing that would make me feel the need to start slamming the "take it" button before hardly even seeing what I was claiming. But again, not faulting the seller, if he can generate that kind of "enthusiasm" more power to him. It's just a strange thing to watch sitting here on the sidelines.

Agreed, I've cracked open a handful of these newer slabs and this whole "they pop right open" talk is news to me.

I have a few of older slabs, not 1st generation, but that older slab that’s thinner than the one they’re using now. On a couple of them the inner well is starting to yellow a bit. I would think that if I had those reholdered that they would change the inner well as well. In that case, would that perhaps trigger a new grade date as I would assume they would have to give the book a quick once over when it’s out of the well to make sure it’s still approximately the same grade?

Yeah, now someone just needs to post a picture of Rose holding a copy of Detective #395 saying "I'll love you forever" and that would be me.

So...is it already too late to get out?

The point is: both attempts at “celebrating bombs” are transparently juvenile. I understand box office results are important as it, among other things, determines whether more these movies get made. But this box office wang-measuring contest has gotten beyond absurd. If someone is truly a fan of comic book movies (and not just a simp) then there really hasn’t been a reason to spike the football about in the last couple of years.

Hey, it’s Mr. Higher, Further,Faster. Was looking forward to your pom-poming over in the Marvels thread. What happened?

Agreed. My wife just started watching season 3 for the first time last night. The actor who plays Bullseye she likes from some romantical show she watches. I sat down to rewatch a couple episodes with her. Man, I forgot how good this show is.

Even a dollar a label credit would be decent incentive to return them I would think. I think the potential problem you might run into though is people trying to fake labels, CGC would have to dedicate staff and time to double-checking every label they get back.

The relisted #170 just ended at $56, almost half of what it ended for the previous time when you won it. Nice to see that the shill bidding and padded shipping cost strategy is working out for him. At this rate, if relists it a couple more times he’ll be getting a negative amount

That’s a really sweet copy. I finally picked up a decent copy off of e Bay not long ago. Not nearly as nice as yours and not a first edition/first printing but good enough for flipping through and bringing back memories. I checked this book out multiple times from the library as a kid and spent a lot of time soaking in the Adams covers in that last color section. I had no clue about artists or anything like that at that point, but I remember thinking even as a kid “why don’t the Batman comics I see at the grocery store look like these?”

I saw on Amazon they were doing these B&B color omnibus reprints. I really, really, really wish they would do omnibus reprints of the Batman and Detective issues that include (but not limited to) the issues that have Neal Adams covers and interiors with the original coloring. I know there’s the Neal Adams omnibuses but I can’t stand the recoloring he did and think in some cases it spoils the stories.

I agree, scammers are always going to find an opening they can exploit. My concern is that CGC will handle this the way they normally do: ignore the situation for 6+ months, respond like there’s “nothing to see here” before finally acknowledging that there’s a problem and actually doing something about it. Scammers are going to do what they do, but CGC being slow to respond and close loopholes is what’s really going to damage their brand.

Hopefully the state doesn’t put him to work making license plates while he’s in prison. It will take him 10 years to crank out one plate.

I don’t know if it’s “key enough” but Saga of the Swamp Thing #20 always seems to have a jacked-up wrap.

I don’t want to discourage anything that might help, but I’m not sure how much going to a local newspaper or TV station would help. Normies still have a really hard time grasping why anyone would pay large sums of money for old comic books, but then to take it a step farther and try and explain why people then take said expensive comics along with even more money and send them to a complete stranger to be tinkered with…I just don’t know if general audiences will be able to get past “why to adults waste good money like this” to see clearly what Heroes Restoration has done. And at this point, how much would Mike care about a public shaming that would come from such an article or spot? Honestly, short of law enforcement showing up I don’t think anything is going to compel him to give those books up now. The more I think about it, I suspect he feels the hobby ‘screwed him over’ and is responsible for his business failing (nothing to do with any bad decisions he made) and the the hobby “owes” him this. Again, not trying to discourage anyone taking the ball and running with it when it comes to “local exposé”, I’m just feeling increasingly pessimistic about this getting resolved in a satisfactory way for the victims.

When it comes to the correct term, the lawyers here would probably be in a better position to ascribe a label to what Heroes Restoration is doing to his customers. Maybe defrauding a person of their books? Inducing people to part with their property under the pretense that it's going to be handled a certain way, when the actual reality is the work promised isn't done and neither the money nor book(s) are returned.