Do You Feel The Church Books Being Stored in Stacks

[THE_BEYONDER]

I think how many people think pressing = resto is irrelevant. All that is relevant is how many will align their buying habits with that belief. It's easy to vote on a forum poll on the subject, but how many of those that answered yes, or who proclaim in threads that pressing is resto(and further state that a person would have to be an insufficiently_thoughtful_person to think otherwise) are actually asking every dealer about every book that he/she is interested in?

 

As I've said in previous threads, I've talked to many dealers on this subject, and the uniform answer is that a miniscule number of their transactions include the question "has this book been pressed?" Until that changes dramatically, it simply doesn't matter who thinks pressing is resto and who doesn't.

 

 

 

 

That is a very myoptic view Jeff.

 

I would care to wager that a majority of transactions at shows (or especially in stores and most certainly mail order) with dealers do not even involve the question "is this raw book restored?" Does that mean that it simply doesn't matter?

 

It means that, in your example, you encourage the dealer to continue selling books with undisclosed resto if you don't ask the question. With pressing, you encourage the dealer to continue selling books with undisclosed pressing if you don't ask the question. There's nothing myopic about that(or, as you say, myoptic).

 

NOD as a whole has not announced that they believe pressing = resto, but Bill certainly believes that, and thinks progress can only be made if the hobby proceeds from that agreed belief. I disagree. People have to act on that belief for it to mean anything.

 

I thought I was spelling it wrong, but I'm tired and CGC still hasn't added a spell check.

 

I simply don't follow the logic Jeff. I don't see how either scenario is evidence of the question you referenced, i.e., whether the notion of pressing being restoration matters. That dealers are not asked whether a book has been pressed does not mean that (1) the issue is not relevant, or (2) the issue is not significant or (3) that pressing is not restoration. It can just as easily mean that (1) the issue was not important to that particular person, or (2) the transaction would not even involve the question of pressing, i.e., a bronze age book, or (3) the buyer has no idea of the debate over pressing.

 

As you know, there was no unanimity in the NOD when it was formed concerning whether pressing is restoration. There still is disagreement. I would say the majority view among members is that it is, but it really doesn't matter as everyone in the NOD agrees that no matter whether it is or is not, it should be disclosed so that buyers (collectors and dealers alike) can render a fully informed decision.

 

Personally, I agree with Bill. I have never been presented with an argument that I believe has sound basis to say pressing is not restoration. I've seen a lot of opinions to that effect but no reasonable refutation to the professional expert definitions that exist with respect to paper in particular.

 

Whether even if pressing is restoration it should impact the value of the book or make it less desirable is an entirely different question, and absolutely susceptible to subjective opinion.

 

For example, Dr. Watson, if I recall correctly (and my apologies if I am incorrect), voiced his opinion that he would never ever purchase a color touched book. I would not have any problems in buying a color touched book. Both subjective opinions and perfectly valid. I usually won't purchase a book with extensive restoration (especially pieces added), but many others would. Perfectly valid subjective opinions.

 

But none of the opinions impact the facts of whether the book was restored or not.

 

Mark, the easiest way I can condense what I'm trying to say is actions speak louder than words. I don't know what Bill wants to proceed to once we all agree that pressing is resto, but I don't think he'll be able to proceed unless people are acting on that belief, not simply expressing it.

 

Jeff, I'll let Bill answer as to what he wants to do once we all agree on the pressing = restoration debate.

 

I do agree with Bill's expression of agreement with you that the market forces will only effect change if buyer's actions speak louder than words. What I am saying is that this is also a separate substantive issue from whether pressing is restoration.

 

For years the OS Guide defined pressing as restoration (i.e., pressing out wrinkles) and obviously that had very little impact on the market forces.

 

Two different issues.

 

If you could get 100% of collectors to agree that pressing = resto, but none of them asked dealers if books were pressed, what have you gained?

 

C'mon now. If pressing was defined as resto.....sellers would be obligated to disclose it upfront.

 

They would be obligated but some would not do it. I get what you are saying that you should not have to ask, but if you do not ask you are gonna be disappointed. It is just not realistic to expect every person who sells a comic book to disclose the history of the book they are selling mainly because they have no idea of the history.

 

If they have no idea...they have nothing to disclose

 

 

One way to push forward the prospect of disclosure would be to ask everyone that you buy a comic book from if the book has been pressed, especially dealers. Of course you are going to have sellers lie to you just to make a sale. You are going to have sellers that have no clue what you are talking about, but the end result of 10 or a 100 or a 1000 potential buyers all asking the same question has to register in at least some peoples mind "what the hell is pressing or why are so many buyers asking me about pressing."

 

 

 

 

Great point.

[nearmint]

I think how many people think pressing = resto is irrelevant. All that is relevant is how many will align their buying habits with that belief. It's easy to vote on a forum poll on the subject, but how many of those that answered yes, or who proclaim in threads that pressing is resto(and further state that a person would have to be an insufficiently_thoughtful_person to think otherwise) are actually asking every dealer about every book that he/she is interested in?

 

As I've said in previous threads, I've talked to many dealers on this subject, and the uniform answer is that a miniscule number of their transactions include the question "has this book been pressed?" Until that changes dramatically, it simply doesn't matter who thinks pressing is resto and who doesn't.

 

 

 

 

That is a very myoptic view Jeff.

 

I would care to wager that a majority of transactions at shows (or especially in stores and most certainly mail order) with dealers do not even involve the question "is this raw book restored?" Does that mean that it simply doesn't matter?

 

It means that, in your example, you encourage the dealer to continue selling books with undisclosed resto if you don't ask the question. With pressing, you encourage the dealer to continue selling books with undisclosed pressing if you don't ask the question. There's nothing myopic about that(or, as you say, myoptic).

 

NOD as a whole has not announced that they believe pressing = resto, but Bill certainly believes that, and thinks progress can only be made if the hobby proceeds from that agreed belief. I disagree. People have to act on that belief for it to mean anything.

 

I thought I was spelling it wrong, but I'm tired and CGC still hasn't added a spell check.

 

I simply don't follow the logic Jeff. I don't see how either scenario is evidence of the question you referenced, i.e., whether the notion of pressing being restoration matters. That dealers are not asked whether a book has been pressed does not mean that (1) the issue is not relevant, or (2) the issue is not significant or (3) that pressing is not restoration. It can just as easily mean that (1) the issue was not important to that particular person, or (2) the transaction would not even involve the question of pressing, i.e., a bronze age book, or (3) the buyer has no idea of the debate over pressing.

 

As you know, there was no unanimity in the NOD when it was formed concerning whether pressing is restoration. There still is disagreement. I would say the majority view among members is that it is, but it really doesn't matter as everyone in the NOD agrees that no matter whether it is or is not, it should be disclosed so that buyers (collectors and dealers alike) can render a fully informed decision.

 

Personally, I agree with Bill. I have never been presented with an argument that I believe has sound basis to say pressing is not restoration. I've seen a lot of opinions to that effect but no reasonable refutation to the professional expert definitions that exist with respect to paper in particular.

 

Whether even if pressing is restoration it should impact the value of the book or make it less desirable is an entirely different question, and absolutely susceptible to subjective opinion.

 

For example, Dr. Watson, if I recall correctly (and my apologies if I am incorrect), voiced his opinion that he would never ever purchase a color touched book. I would not have any problems in buying a color touched book. Both subjective opinions and perfectly valid. I usually won't purchase a book with extensive restoration (especially pieces added), but many others would. Perfectly valid subjective opinions.

 

But none of the opinions impact the facts of whether the book was restored or not.

 

Mark, the easiest way I can condense what I'm trying to say is actions speak louder than words. I don't know what Bill wants to proceed to once we all agree that pressing is resto, but I don't think he'll be able to proceed unless people are acting on that belief, not simply expressing it.

 

Jeff, I'll let Bill answer as to what he wants to do once we all agree on the pressing = restoration debate.

 

I do agree with Bill's expression of agreement with you that the market forces will only effect change if buyer's actions speak louder than words. What I am saying is that this is also a separate substantive issue from whether pressing is restoration.

 

For years the OS Guide defined pressing as restoration (i.e., pressing out wrinkles) and obviously that had very little impact on the market forces.

 

Two different issues.

 

If you could get 100% of collectors to agree that pressing = resto, but none of them asked dealers if books were pressed, what have you gained?

 

Using those facts, presumably the same thing that was achieved by the fact that 100% of collectors agree (to my knowledge) that pieces added to a book constitutes restoration - affirmative disclosure by sellers.

 

Apples and oranges. First, even dealers agree that pieces added is resto. There's no controversy there. Second, collectors often do ask about that kind of resto, or are able to detect it themselves, thus forcing dealers to disclose upfront.

 

Your point supports my argument.

 

Apples and oranges? Where in the world do you think these definitions all came from? They all had to start somewhere, and many have morphed over the years.

 

How many dealers do you require to take a position on an issue before it becomes "official" policy for the community? And since when is it that only the views of dealers determine the views of the hobby?

 

As I said, Overstreet asserted pressing was restoration for years. That only changed after dealers primarily balked.

 

Now you have modified your comment about collectors asking about restoration to "often". How "often" is often? Is "often" more than "always" or even "most of the time"? And how many collectors do you honestly believe can detect restoration, particularly looking at a book on the floor of a convention? Is that the standard to be applied? Disclosure happens because dealers can "often" get caught? I don't agree with the stated premise that even the majority of collectors can detect restoration, but beyond that this is a terrible standard to apply to a community.

 

Jeff, if you believe my points support your argument, then we might as well cease this back and forth. I thought we were actually having a viable and interesting comparison of views but we're not getting anywhere if you are going to bring in circular arguments because I certainly can assure you that nothing I wrote supports your position.

 

Gotta get some sleep anyway.

 

Dealers disclose resto upfront because 1)customers were asking more and more and more, and 2(because some customers were educating themselves on how to detect resto. It was the marketplace that caused the change, not how Overstreet defined it.

 

The same will hold true for pressing. Upfront disclosure as an accepted normal practice will only occur if the marketplace demands it. It doesn't matter how NOD defines pressing, or how Overstreet defines pressing. The change will only occur if customers, and lots of them, ask the question, and even more than that, base their buying decisions on the answers they get.

[MrBedrock]

How do you know they don't care? Have you asked them?

As hard as it may be to believe, yes, I actually talk to my customers. And there are folks out there that are aware of pressing and actually don't care!

[THE_BEYONDER]

 

It's not the responsibility of the buyer, it's just being a wise consumer. If I buy a used car, I ask if it's been in an accident.

 

A comic dealer who presses might assume you don't care about pressing if you don't ask the question. I think in most cases he'd be right, but in your case he would be wrong, so the smart thing for the customer to do is to ask.

 

I refuse to believe that a seller who presses a 9.0 into a 9.6 believes that a potential buyer wouldn't be interested in that information.

 

As a seller, I would think that my customers would want that information. But, in fact, many of them do not. In most cases they absolutely don't care. In some cases they do not want to know because they don't want to have the obligation of remembering whether it is or isn't when they sell a book down the road.

 

Remembering? C'mon. How hard is it to remember which books have been pressed & which haven't? If they don't want to know......I imagine it's because they don't want to have to disclose that the book was pressed when they sell it.

Holy Cow! you read my post and actually understood it! Congrats.

 

Condescension

[nearmint]

I think how many people think pressing = resto is irrelevant. All that is relevant is how many will align their buying habits with that belief. It's easy to vote on a forum poll on the subject, but how many of those that answered yes, or who proclaim in threads that pressing is resto(and further state that a person would have to be an insufficiently_thoughtful_person to think otherwise) are actually asking every dealer about every book that he/she is interested in?

 

As I've said in previous threads, I've talked to many dealers on this subject, and the uniform answer is that a miniscule number of their transactions include the question "has this book been pressed?" Until that changes dramatically, it simply doesn't matter who thinks pressing is resto and who doesn't.

 

 

 

 

That is a very myoptic view Jeff.

 

I would care to wager that a majority of transactions at shows (or especially in stores and most certainly mail order) with dealers do not even involve the question "is this raw book restored?" Does that mean that it simply doesn't matter?

 

It means that, in your example, you encourage the dealer to continue selling books with undisclosed resto if you don't ask the question. With pressing, you encourage the dealer to continue selling books with undisclosed pressing if you don't ask the question. There's nothing myopic about that(or, as you say, myoptic).

 

NOD as a whole has not announced that they believe pressing = resto, but Bill certainly believes that, and thinks progress can only be made if the hobby proceeds from that agreed belief. I disagree. People have to act on that belief for it to mean anything.

 

I thought I was spelling it wrong, but I'm tired and CGC still hasn't added a spell check.

 

I simply don't follow the logic Jeff. I don't see how either scenario is evidence of the question you referenced, i.e., whether the notion of pressing being restoration matters. That dealers are not asked whether a book has been pressed does not mean that (1) the issue is not relevant, or (2) the issue is not significant or (3) that pressing is not restoration. It can just as easily mean that (1) the issue was not important to that particular person, or (2) the transaction would not even involve the question of pressing, i.e., a bronze age book, or (3) the buyer has no idea of the debate over pressing.

 

As you know, there was no unanimity in the NOD when it was formed concerning whether pressing is restoration. There still is disagreement. I would say the majority view among members is that it is, but it really doesn't matter as everyone in the NOD agrees that no matter whether it is or is not, it should be disclosed so that buyers (collectors and dealers alike) can render a fully informed decision.

 

Personally, I agree with Bill. I have never been presented with an argument that I believe has sound basis to say pressing is not restoration. I've seen a lot of opinions to that effect but no reasonable refutation to the professional expert definitions that exist with respect to paper in particular.

 

Whether even if pressing is restoration it should impact the value of the book or make it less desirable is an entirely different question, and absolutely susceptible to subjective opinion.

 

For example, Dr. Watson, if I recall correctly (and my apologies if I am incorrect), voiced his opinion that he would never ever purchase a color touched book. I would not have any problems in buying a color touched book. Both subjective opinions and perfectly valid. I usually won't purchase a book with extensive restoration (especially pieces added), but many others would. Perfectly valid subjective opinions.

 

But none of the opinions impact the facts of whether the book was restored or not.

 

Mark, the easiest way I can condense what I'm trying to say is actions speak louder than words. I don't know what Bill wants to proceed to once we all agree that pressing is resto, but I don't think he'll be able to proceed unless people are acting on that belief, not simply expressing it.

 

Jeff, I'll let Bill answer as to what he wants to do once we all agree on the pressing = restoration debate.

 

I do agree with Bill's expression of agreement with you that the market forces will only effect change if buyer's actions speak louder than words. What I am saying is that this is also a separate substantive issue from whether pressing is restoration.

 

For years the OS Guide defined pressing as restoration (i.e., pressing out wrinkles) and obviously that had very little impact on the market forces.

 

Two different issues.

 

If you could get 100% of collectors to agree that pressing = resto, but none of them asked dealers if books were pressed, what have you gained?

 

C'mon now. If pressing was defined as resto.....sellers would be obligated to disclose it upfront.

 

They would be obligated but some would not do it. I get what you are saying that you should not have to ask, but if you do not ask you are gonna be disappointed. It is just not realistic to expect every person who sells a comic book to disclose the history of the book they are selling mainly because they have no idea of the history.

 

If they have no idea...they have nothing to disclose

 

 

One way to push forward the prospect of disclosure would be to ask everyone that you buy a comic book from if the book has been pressed, especially dealers. Of course you are going to have sellers lie to you just to make a sale. You are going to have sellers that have no clue what you are talking about, but the end result of 10 or a 100 or a 1000 potential buyers all asking the same question has to register in at least some peoples mind "what the hell is pressing or why are so many buyers asking me about pressing."

 

 

 

 

Great point.

 

Chris, dude, that's exactly what I've been saying.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Chris, dude, that's exactly what I've been saying.

 

 

 

Same time tomorrow?

[MrBedrock]

 

It's not the responsibility of the buyer, it's just being a wise consumer. If I buy a used car, I ask if it's been in an accident.

 

A comic dealer who presses might assume you don't care about pressing if you don't ask the question. I think in most cases he'd be right, but in your case he would be wrong, so the smart thing for the customer to do is to ask.

 

I refuse to believe that a seller who presses a 9.0 into a 9.6 believes that a potential buyer wouldn't be interested in that information.

 

As a seller, I would think that my customers would want that information. But, in fact, many of them do not. In most cases they absolutely don't care. In some cases they do not want to know because they don't want to have the obligation of remembering whether it is or isn't when they sell a book down the road.

 

Remembering? C'mon. How hard is it to remember which books have been pressed & which haven't? If they don't want to know......I imagine it's because they don't want to have to disclose that the book was pressed when they sell it.

Holy Cow! you read my post and actually understood it! Congrats.

 

Condescension

Sorry...

but the truth is that there are folks who don't want to disclose, and by not knowing whether a book is pressed they can honestly say they don't know.

[nearmint]

Chris, dude, that's exactly what I've been saying.

 

 

 

Same time tomorrow?

 

Wouldn't miss it. (thumbs u

[THE_BEYONDER]

 

 

See ya then....

[Park]

Chris, dude, that's exactly what I've been saying.

 

 

 

To be honest, after rereading some of your most recent posts, it is pretty much the same. It was not terribly easy to wade through the "discussion" you were having with Red Hook.

[nearmint]

Chris, dude, that's exactly what I've been saying.

 

To be honest, after rereading some of your most recent posts, it is pretty much the same. It was not terribly easy to wade through the "discussion" you were having with Red Hook.

 

To be forever remembered as the Red Hook debacle.

[selegue]

I think how many people think pressing = resto is irrelevant. All that is relevant is how many will align their buying habits with that belief. It's easy to vote on a forum poll on the subject, but how many of those that answered yes, or who proclaim in threads that pressing is resto(and further state that a person would have to be an insufficiently_thoughtful_person to think otherwise) are actually asking every dealer about every book that he/she is interested in?

 

As I've said in previous threads, I've talked to many dealers on this subject, and the uniform answer is that a miniscule number of their transactions include the question "has this book been pressed?" Until that changes dramatically, it simply doesn't matter who thinks pressing is resto and who doesn't.

 

 

 

 

That is a very myoptic view Jeff.

 

I would care to wager that a majority of transactions at shows (or especially in stores and most certainly mail order) with dealers do not even involve the question "is this raw book restored?" Does that mean that it simply doesn't matter?

 

It means that, in your example, you encourage the dealer to continue selling books with undisclosed resto if you don't ask the question. With pressing, you encourage the dealer to continue selling books with undisclosed pressing if you don't ask the question. There's nothing myopic about that(or, as you say, myoptic).

 

NOD as a whole has not announced that they believe pressing = resto, but Bill certainly believes that, and thinks progress can only be made if the hobby proceeds from that agreed belief. I disagree. People have to act on that belief for it to mean anything.

 

I thought I was spelling it wrong, but I'm tired and CGC still hasn't added a spell check.

 

I simply don't follow the logic Jeff. I don't see how either scenario is evidence of the question you referenced, i.e., whether the notion of pressing being restoration matters. That dealers are not asked whether a book has been pressed does not mean that (1) the issue is not relevant, or (2) the issue is not significant or (3) that pressing is not restoration. It can just as easily mean that (1) the issue was not important to that particular person, or (2) the transaction would not even involve the question of pressing, i.e., a bronze age book, or (3) the buyer has no idea of the debate over pressing.

 

As you know, there was no unanimity in the NOD when it was formed concerning whether pressing is restoration. There still is disagreement. I would say the majority view among members is that it is, but it really doesn't matter as everyone in the NOD agrees that no matter whether it is or is not, it should be disclosed so that buyers (collectors and dealers alike) can render a fully informed decision.

 

Personally, I agree with Bill. I have never been presented with an argument that I believe has sound basis to say pressing is not restoration. I've seen a lot of opinions to that effect but no reasonable refutation to the professional expert definitions that exist with respect to paper in particular.

 

Whether even if pressing is restoration it should impact the value of the book or make it less desirable is an entirely different question, and absolutely susceptible to subjective opinion.

 

For example, Dr. Watson, if I recall correctly (and my apologies if I am incorrect), voiced his opinion that he would never ever purchase a color touched book. I would not have any problems in buying a color touched book. Both subjective opinions and perfectly valid. I usually won't purchase a book with extensive restoration (especially pieces added), but many others would. Perfectly valid subjective opinions.

 

But none of the opinions impact the facts of whether the book was restored or not.

 

Mark, the easiest way I can condense what I'm trying to say is actions speak louder than words. I don't know what Bill wants to proceed to once we all agree that pressing is resto, but I don't think he'll be able to proceed unless people are acting on that belief, not simply expressing it.

 

Jeff, I'll let Bill answer as to what he wants to do once we all agree on the pressing = restoration debate.

 

I do agree with Bill's expression of agreement with you that the market forces will only effect change if buyer's actions speak louder than words. What I am saying is that this is also a separate substantive issue from whether pressing is restoration.

 

For years the OS Guide defined pressing as restoration (i.e., pressing out wrinkles) and obviously that had very little impact on the market forces.

 

Two different issues.

 

If you could get 100% of collectors to agree that pressing = resto, but none of them asked dealers if books were pressed, what have you gained?

 

Using those facts, presumably the same thing that was achieved by the fact that 100% of collectors agree (to my knowledge) that pieces added to a book constitutes restoration - affirmative disclosure by sellers.

 

Apples and oranges. First, even dealers agree that pieces added is resto. There's no controversy there. Second, collectors often do ask about that kind of resto, or are able to detect it themselves, thus forcing dealers to disclose upfront.

 

Your point supports my argument.

 

Apples and oranges? Where in the world do you think these definitions all came from? They all had to start somewhere, and many have morphed over the years.

 

How many dealers do you require to take a position on an issue before it becomes "official" policy for the community? And since when is it that only the views of dealers determine the views of the hobby?

 

As I said, Overstreet asserted pressing was restoration for years. That only changed after dealers primarily balked.

 

Now you have modified your comment about collectors asking about restoration to "often". How "often" is often? Is "often" more than "always" or even "most of the time"? And how many collectors do you honestly believe can detect restoration, particularly looking at a book on the floor of a convention? Is that the standard to be applied? Disclosure happens because dealers can "often" get caught? I don't agree with the stated premise that even the majority of collectors can detect restoration, but beyond that this is a terrible standard to apply to a community.

 

Jeff, if you believe my points support your argument, then we might as well cease this back and forth. I thought we were actually having a viable and interesting comparison of views but we're not getting anywhere if you are going to bring in circular arguments because I certainly can assure you that nothing I wrote supports your position.

 

Gotta get some sleep anyway.

 

 

JPS

 

 

[lizards2]

 

I am a big Dilbert fan, but this one made me laugh for about five minutes solid - classic lampoon of management :thumbsup:

 

My kids gave me the DVDs of the TV series a couple years ago - they are pretty funny - not a week goes by when we don't watch some episodes....,

[TeddieMercede]

Chris, dude, that's exactly what I've been saying.

 

 

 

To be honest, after rereading some of your most recent posts, it is pretty much the same. It was not terribly easy to wade through the "discussion" you were having with Red Hook.

 

Spider Jerusalem is done posting ? Who says we cant pretend to be Comic Book Heroes in real life ?

[ciorac]

How do you know they don't care? Have you asked them?

As hard as it may be to believe, yes, I actually talk to my customers. And there are folks out there that are aware of pressing and actually don't care!

 

I'm sure that is true. If I know a book is pressed and it is priced fairly, I don't care either. I still buy it, but informed.

 

And to Dan and Jeff's points. Where does the duty and responsibility shift from the buyer to the seller?

 

Case in point, newbish collector at show has to carry his list of questions now to ask dealers about books he is interested in.

 

He can't just ask "is it restored"? and get the whole truth, right? Those who don't accept that pressing is resto can answer that question "No" with a clear conscience if that is all that has been done to the book.

 

So now, the poor buyer has to be VERY SPECIFIC:

 

1. Is it restored?

2. Does it have any work done to it?

3. Has it been trimmed? (Remember some of you don't think trimming is resto, so it can't be covered in question #1)

4. Does it have any color touch?

5. Any materials added?

6. Chemicals used?

7. Pieces added?

8. Has it been disassembled?

9. Do you know of anything at all that has been done to the book that changed the grade?

 

That's a heavy burden for them to bear.

 

Richard,

 

Back when I used to have my dealer table next to yours, in the pre-intact pressing days, we didn't get asked about pressing much. But we did, get asked the first two questions a LOT, and having been at your booth in Chicago the last few years, you still do.

 

So, people do ask. Quite often, it is slicing and dicing what fits those two categories and what doesn't that is the rub.

 

 

 

[nearmint]

I would just ask "has any work been done to this book, including pressing?"

[divad]

Do You Feel The Church Books Being Stored in Stacks are "pressed" in the way we use the term "pressing" in the various "pressing threads"?

 

No.

[Shield]

I'm still waiting for a reasonable explanation as to why some sellers feel that pressing doesn't need to be disclosed upfront.

 

Perhaps because they think that since CGC doesn't consider pressing restoration, why should they disclose it?

[FlyingDonut]

How do you know they don't care? Have you asked them?

As hard as it may be to believe, yes, I actually talk to my customers. And there are folks out there that are aware of pressing and actually don't care!

 

I'm sure that is true. If I know a book is pressed and it is priced fairly, I don't care either. I still buy it, but informed.

 

And to Dan and Jeff's points. Where does the duty and responsibility shift from the buyer to the seller?

 

Case in point, newbish collector at show has to carry his list of questions now to ask dealers about books he is interested in.

 

He can't just ask "is it restored"? and get the whole truth, right? Those who don't accept that pressing is resto can answer that question "No" with a clear conscience if that is all that has been done to the book.

 

So now, the poor buyer has to be VERY SPECIFIC:

 

1. Is it restored?

2. Does it have any work done to it?

3. Has it been trimmed? (Remember some of you don't think trimming is resto, so it can't be covered in question #1)

4. Does it have any color touch?

5. Any materials added?

6. Chemicals used?

7. Pieces added?

8. Has it been disassembled?

9. Do you know of anything at all that has been done to the book that changed the grade?

 

That's a heavy burden for them to bear.

 

Richard,

 

Back when I used to have my dealer table next to yours, in the pre-intact pressing days, we didn't get asked about pressing much. But we did, get asked the first two questions a LOT, and having been at your booth in Chicago the last few years, you still do.

 

So, people do ask. Quite often, it is slicing and dicing what fits those two categories and what doesn't that is the rub.

 

 

 

Just ask "Has there been ANY work done to the book - ANYTHING at all."

[divad]

How do you know they don't care? Have you asked them?

As hard as it may be to believe, yes, I actually talk to my customers. And there are folks out there that are aware of pressing and actually don't care!

 

I'm sure that is true. If I know a book is pressed and it is priced fairly, I don't care either. I still buy it, but informed.

 

And to Dan and Jeff's points. Where does the duty and responsibility shift from the buyer to the seller?

 

Case in point, newbish collector at show has to carry his list of questions now to ask dealers about books he is interested in.

 

He can't just ask "is it restored"? and get the whole truth, right? Those who don't accept that pressing is resto can answer that question "No" with a clear conscience if that is all that has been done to the book.

 

So now, the poor buyer has to be VERY SPECIFIC:

 

1. Is it restored?

2. Does it have any work done to it?

3. Has it been trimmed? (Remember some of you don't think trimming is resto, so it can't be covered in question #1)

4. Does it have any color touch?

5. Any materials added?

6. Chemicals used?

7. Pieces added?

8. Has it been disassembled?

9. Do you know of anything at all that has been done to the book that changed the grade?

 

That's a heavy burden for them to bear.

 

Richard,

 

Back when I used to have my dealer table next to yours, in the pre-intact pressing days, we didn't get asked about pressing much. But we did, get asked the first two questions a LOT, and having been at your booth in Chicago the last few years, you still do.

 

So, people do ask. Quite often, it is slicing and dicing what fits those two categories and what doesn't that is the rub.

 

 

Now here are three Board dealers that I've come to know (and like even ) with strong and vastly different opinions on the topic of PIP

 

I wouldn't hesitate to buy from any of them, but I clearly would have questions about the provenance of their wares, due to their long-time involvement in the trade, and their extensive inventories amassed through the trade.