What I gained from the pressing thread

[THE_BEYONDER]

You still havent answered the question i presented to you either.

 

What are you asking Arex?

 

I think the "Ask & I'll Tell" policy is BS.

Im asking why you always toss up the marginalized angle when someone uses the Ask and Tell.

You arent marginalized because you still have the power to ask. To become marginalized means to not have the ability, power, or audience to express your concerns.

You have that with dealers, a "Is this pressed" puts all the power in the palm of your hand.

So, i just want to know why you keep moving the debate from m first question I asked you

 

WTF?

 

It is the attempt to marginalize the views of those that oppose the practice of pressing that I was responding to.

 

I understand what marginalized means, but I appreciate your condescention in explaining it to me. Thanks for that.

 

I don't accept the "Ask & I'll Tell" policy because I consider PRESSING TO BE RESTORATION .

 

I'm not the only one.

 

Even if one truly believes that it isn't resto, one can hardly dismiss the fact that it's a form of structural manipulation. The work done had a significant impact on the CGC numerical grade, and should be disclosed up front.

 

Why not disclose it?

 

 

Tell me Arex.....

 

Why have you adopted the "Ask & I'll Tell" policy?

 

 

Explain it to me like I'm a five-year-old.......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Transplant]

Garry,

think about this angle for a minute. I submit maybe 20 books a year. It is easy for me to remember which ones were pressed, which ones werent, if I just send in a couple of books to get pressed.

But what if I send in a batch of 10 books and say, press the ones that need it skip the ones that dont, and submit them all. Now, how do I know which ones are pressed? I get a bill saying I had x# pressed +sub fees +shipping. I pay it, get my books, and go on about my business. The presser tells me how many were pressed and i need to ask which ones. Maybe I forget to ask :shrug: then what.

Now, thats on a person who subs 20 books a year.

Multiply that by a sheit load for Steve and see where the issue comes in at keeping up with what is and is not pressed?

 

Watson has had dozens of the same X-Men book pressed looking for a 9.8. He would send in the batch to Matt and then they would get sent in to CGC. How in the hubs of hades is anyone supposed ot know which ones are and are not? Its dozens of the same book.

Just a point of clarification:

 

When Matt presses a book for me, he prepares an invoice that shows which book was pressed. It's a paper trail that I can look back at and say, "This book was pressed." The only scenario where you can't know for sure is when someone submits multiples of the same book for pressing and then direct submission to CGC. In that case, maybe Steve's argument works. Otherwise, it's not that he CAN't track the books he pressed, it's that DOESN'T WANT TO. Not making a value judgment and I don't think Steve would argue with this either.

[Paratrooper]

Why does a select group of collectors expect the rest of the comic collecting world to cater to them? I just don't understand that. You don't like pressing, ask about it. It can't really be that hard. I have disdain for date stamps, I ask.. why can't you?

 

"a select group"

 

: to relegate to an unimportant or powerless position within a society or group

— mar·gin·al·i·za·tion

 

 

 

Einstein’s Definition

 

Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

 

----in·san·i·ty

 

Einstein’s Definition

 

Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

 

----in·san·i·ty

Einstein’s Definition

 

Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

 

----in·san·i·ty

Einstein’s Definition

 

Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

 

----in·san·i·ty

 

Einstein’s Definition

 

Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

 

----in·san·i·ty

[THE_BEYONDER]

[Paratrooper]

 

What Einstein say about pressing

[Transplant]

 

What Einstein say about pressing

He said it's all relative.

[Paratrooper]

 

What Einstein say about pressing

He said it's all relative.

 

DING DING DING we have a winner!

[Flaming_Telepath]

Arex,

 

The ability to keep track of who did what to which is simple. I've got 850 books of my own, and they are logged with all manner of detail, including when they were bought, how much for, whether they are a Pedigree, whether they have date stamps, etc, etc, etc, :blahblah:

 

Now, for my business (coming to an interweb near you in 2009!), I have even more detail logged. Basically, a simple piece of software...take your pick between dozens and dozens...can keep track of every imaginable bit of information that you wish to keep.

 

The thing is, the more books you have in your business stock, the more serious you are about it, the more detail you need...so what's one additional field?

 

Let me throw out a hypothetical here because I'm curious. Again, don't assume I'm taking a side here because of a question I ask. I have less of an agenda than do many where pressing is concerned.

 

But if I'm running a business where I buy and sell comics, and if I have a piece of software where I track pressing, then unless I'm the Original Owner of the book, isn't the "pressing" item going to read as "unknown" anyway (unless the owner discloses to you when he/she sells to you)? If that's the case, then how is that different than what Steve does when he says all books may have been pressed? I don't see how a line-item makes a difference for a MAJORITY of stock a person might have that they're not the original owner of.

 

Maybe I'm missing something with this, though, which is why I ask. My concern would be that if a seller using the above system didn't have the book pressed him/herself then he/she would place "no" as the answer to that line item when it may in fact not be true. Which would make said person more dishonest than someone who doesn't proactively disclose.

 

Again, this is not directed at you specifically. I think the highest of you as a seller. I'm just wondering if the flaw I'm seeing is the reality or if there's more to it.

 

Here's what could be entered in the field...

 

(1) Pressed (by whom and when, because you commissioned the work)

(2) Pressed (unknown, but was disclosed at point of purchase)

(3) Pressed (not disclosed, but work is obvious)

(4) Not known

(5) Not pressed (in the case of an OO collection)

 

I don't think anybody is asking for guesses to be made, or misleading information to be given, but an honest disclosure of what is know is easy-peesy. (thumbs u

[MCMiles]

Well, it sounds like it isn't about disclosure after all. It is about pressing. It isn't good enough that Steve's policy warns potential customers not buy because there is a high probability the book has been pressed. Which, according to Jim, will cost him potential sales which equates to lost money. So let me get this straight.

Steve presses books because he is greedy, but scares off potential income at the same time. Seems to be a bit counter productive.

 

But again, it really isn't about disclosure for some people. It is about pressing. You don't like it. Fine others do and don't care. Sorry.

If it were about disclosure, Steve's policy would be perfectly acceptable. He has some great books but rarely something that can't be found somewhere else. If you had looked as hard as Steve does, you may have found the book as well, before he had a chance to press it.

 

Nope, the policy of buy somewhere else because my books might be pressed isn't good enough. Now sellers are expected to adapt and change they way they buy, catagorize, track, and even submit books. All to cater to the needs of a few, and it is only few giving Steve a problem with his policy.

[rob_allan]

Arex,

 

The ability to keep track of who did what to which is simple. I've got 850 books of my own, and they are logged with all manner of detail, including when they were bought, how much for, whether they are a Pedigree, whether they have date stamps, etc, etc, etc, :blahblah:

 

Now, for my business (coming to an interweb near you in 2009!), I have even more detail logged. Basically, a simple piece of software...take your pick between dozens and dozens...can keep track of every imaginable bit of information that you wish to keep.

 

The thing is, the more books you have in your business stock, the more serious you are about it, the more detail you need...so what's one additional field?

 

Let me throw out a hypothetical here because I'm curious. Again, don't assume I'm taking a side here because of a question I ask. I have less of an agenda than do many where pressing is concerned.

 

But if I'm running a business where I buy and sell comics, and if I have a piece of software where I track pressing, then unless I'm the Original Owner of the book, isn't the "pressing" item going to read as "unknown" anyway (unless the owner discloses to you when he/she sells to you)? If that's the case, then how is that different than what Steve does when he says all books may have been pressed? I don't see how a line-item makes a difference for a MAJORITY of stock a person might have that they're not the original owner of.

 

Maybe I'm missing something with this, though, which is why I ask. My concern would be that if a seller using the above system didn't have the book pressed him/herself then he/she would place "no" as the answer to that line item when it may in fact not be true. Which would make said person more dishonest than someone who doesn't proactively disclose.

 

Again, this is not directed at you specifically. I think the highest of you as a seller. I'm just wondering if the flaw I'm seeing is the reality or if there's more to it.

 

Here's what could be entered in the field...

 

(1) Pressed (by whom and when, because you commissioned the work)

(2) Pressed (unknown, but was disclosed at point of purchase)

(3) Pressed (not disclosed, but work is obvious)

(4) Not known

(5) Not pressed (in the case of an OO collection)

 

I don't think anybody is asking for guesses to be made, or misleading information to be given, but an honest disclosure of what is know is easy-peesy. (thumbs u

 

So by this model Pressing: Unknown would be listed on any book that was sold? That's not a terrible way to go about it, I don't suppose. I know you'd be the type to do it in this fashion. I wonder if others who adopted a model like this would hold to it as truly. Then again, that would in and of itself be a filter on the dealer a person uses if they are concerned with the issue.

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

Nope, the policy of buy somewhere else because my books might be pressed isn't good enough. Now sellers are expected to adapt and change they way they buy, catagorize, track, and even submit books. All to cater to the needs of a few, and it is only few giving Steve a problem with his policy.

 

Er...all I said was it could be easily done if you wanted to.

 

Can't remember me demanding it, nor expecting it.

 

Or maybe I'm having trouble reading what I wrote.

[Transplant]

Well, it sounds like it isn't about disclosure after all. It is about pressing. It isn't good enough that Steve's policy warns potential customers not buy because there is a high probability the book has been pressed. Which, according to Jim, will cost him potential sales which equates to lost money. So let me get this straight.

Steve presses books because he is greedy, but scares off potential income at the same time. Seems to be a bit counter productive.

 

But again, it really isn't about disclosure for some people. It is about pressing. You don't like it. Fine others do and don't care. Sorry.

If it were about disclosure, Steve's policy would be perfectly acceptable. He has some great books but rarely something that can't be found somewhere else. If you had looked as hard as Steve does, you may have found the book as well, before he had a chance to press it.

 

Nope, the policy of buy somewhere else because my books might be pressed isn't good enough. Now sellers are expected to adapt and change they way they buy, catagorize, track, and even submit books. All to cater to the needs of a few, and it is only few giving Steve a problem with his policy.

 

It's all about pressing? I hear time and time again but repeating it doesn't make it true. It's not about pressing, it's about disclosure.

 

Again I ask: What if a seller took the same stance with ct or trimming? "I can't be bothered to keep track of what books have been done." The point is that no one is requiring anyone to disclose anything. People here are just stating their opinions that it would be a better selling practice to do so. If the seller doesn't agree, that's their prerogative. But this continued practice of belittling people because they care about it or because they ask the question or because they think it should be done proactively is just weak. It's a weak debating technique to criticize the participant rather than address the issue raised.

 

Steve just doesn't care enough about the issue or the buyers to whom it matters, to be bothered to check the records. On books where it might matter to me, I'll ask. If he can't answer, I'll decide whether it's a deal breaker for me.

[Monstro]

people, the reason "some" do not disclosing pressing has NOTHING to do with not being able to keep track of it. if they wanted to they could. they simply don't care to.

[Boboset]

:makepoint:Reading this thread gave me a really bad headache.

[awe4one]

Nope, the policy of buy somewhere else because my books might be pressed isn't good enough. Now sellers are expected to adapt and change they way they buy, catagorize, track, and even submit books. All to cater to the needs of a few, and it is only few giving Steve a problem with his policy.

 

Only a few are vocal about it. Unless you or he have sold to the majority of the Forum since implementing the policy, you have no way of knowing what effect it's having...

 

Jim

[sborock]

"Steve just doesn't care enough about the issue or the buyers to whom it matters, to be bothered to check the records. On books where it might matter to me, I'll ask. If he can't answer, I'll decide whether it's a deal breaker for me."

 

I am glad someone gets it (thumbs u

 

But Mike is also correct. There are people on these boards (and other places) who will still tell me that the way I run my own biz is not good enough.

 

The customer speaks with $$$, that's the vote, not some post on an internet. If that was the case Joey Q would have been let go of Marvel years ago, Matt Nelson would be out of business instead of hiring more employees, Mr. Moore would over see all and be final voice on all his movie scripts, etc.

 

I stay away from Greg White because he doesn't tell you if a book is trimmed, CT'd or other, but I know plenty of people who do business with him anyway. It is their choice. It is also my choice who I sell to. If Danny-boy or Jerry Ross wanted to buy books from me, I would not sell to them. There are a couple of collectors I choose not to do business with who really like pressed books or do not care either way, but they are soooooo picky ("There is the smallest scracth on my holder", or even though they saw the scan of the book and bought it, once they get it they say things like "It's more of a mis-wrap than I thought" or "The date stamp looked smaller/lighter in the scan") they become a problem on EVERY transaction.

 

 

[sborock]

Nope, the policy of buy somewhere else because my books might be pressed isn't good enough. Now sellers are expected to adapt and change they way they buy, catagorize, track, and even submit books. All to cater to the needs of a few, and it is only few giving Steve a problem with his policy.

 

Only a few are vocal about it. Unless you or he have sold to the majority of the Forum since implementing the policy, you have no way of knowing what effect it's having...

 

Jim

 

I am going to go out on a limb here, but I think I have sold to about 40-50 different board members (with repeat business) and have had about 20 sales threads. That is a pretty good % for the amount of threads. I also get quite a few pm's from board members. Many ONLY visit the (or some) other sections and avoid CG because they think it's too much of a zoo (I am a happy monkey and like this zoo )

[MCMiles]

Nope, the policy of buy somewhere else because my books might be pressed isn't good enough. Now sellers are expected to adapt and change they way they buy, catagorize, track, and even submit books. All to cater to the needs of a few, and it is only few giving Steve a problem with his policy.

 

Er...all I said was it could be easily done if you wanted to.

 

Can't remember me demanding it, nor expecting it.

 

Or maybe I'm having trouble reading what I wrote.

You are right. You onlly gave an example of how it could be done. I'm sure there are many ways.

 

In order for SB to have any other policy, he would have to adopt and put the effort in to one system or the other. He dosen't want to do that. I've seen his stuff, I could understand why. So really he is doing the best possible thing, by saying it the way he has. I can't speak for Steve, maybe that isn't why he has his policy. Some dealers can't even be bothered to price thier inventory, some can't be bothered with back cover scans. If you don't like it don't buy.

[awe4one]

Nope, the policy of buy somewhere else because my books might be pressed isn't good enough. Now sellers are expected to adapt and change they way they buy, catagorize, track, and even submit books. All to cater to the needs of a few, and it is only few giving Steve a problem with his policy.

 

Er...all I said was it could be easily done if you wanted to.

 

Can't remember me demanding it, nor expecting it.

 

Or maybe I'm having trouble reading what I wrote.

You are right. You onlly gave an example of how it could be done. I'm sure there are many ways.

 

In order for SB to have any other policy, he would have to adopt and put the effort in to one system or the other. He dosen't want to do that. I've seen his stuff, I could understand why. So really he is doing the best possible thing, by saying it the way he has. I can't speak for Steve, maybe that isn't why he has his policy. Some dealers can't even be bothered to price thier inventory, some can't be bothered with back cover scans. If you don't like it don't buy.

 

That's Steve....you'd decided to adopt his policy as well after saying multiple times on this Forum you WOULD disclose.

 

Why would you flip like that? And you can can the problem buyers angle as I haven't seen you identify an anti-presser as giving you a problem in the past. Is it a fear of actually upfront identifying which ones are pressed?

 

I'm not being glib here and looking for a serious answer. Your flipping to a non-disclosure disclosure is more troubling than Steve. At least he has been consistent from the start...

 

Jim

[FlyingDonut]

Why does a select group of collectors expect the rest of the comic collecting world to cater to them? I just don't understand that. You don't like pressing, ask about it. It can't really be that hard. I have disdain for date stamps, I ask.. why can't you?

 

(thumbs u