Manufactured Gold

[Ze-man]

Wow, this stuff is blowing my mind. Do you seriously think this list of dealers who do not openly disclose pressing is comprehensive? It's fall far short. I think you're grossly underestimating how many people, both collectors and dealers, are involved in the crackout game. These people you list are very visible because they mainly operate through the internet, and it's all there for everyone to see. There are so many other people out there buying and selling books that you're not taking into consideration.

 

no offense, but you seem to be grossly underestimating how much this "game" bothers people once they are made aware of it.

 

i suspect most people don't care because most people have no freaking idea just what is going on

 

Why do you think I'm grossly underestimating how much it bother's people? What are you basing this on? I think I have a pretty good view of people's perception of pressing from where I sit, and I wholeheartedly disagree.

 

Way more people know about pressing today than a year ago, thanks in part to the boards, Scoop, GPA, and other outlets. Where is this groundswell that is talked about? How much more does the word have to be spread before you acquiesce?

 

if people aren't bothered by it, then why are the majority of dealers who do work (pressing) on books unwilling to disclose same?

 

apologies if this feels like a tu quoque direction of questioning

 

A very simple answer. They don't consider pressing to be restoration.

 

Even if people think pressing isn't a form of restoration. I still imagine they would like to know about it.

 

Don't you agree?

 

No easy way to say it, so I will just ask you. Why do you feel it is ok to NOT tell people openly that you pressed the book they are buying from you? Besides the money part, I really would like to know why you feel withholding information like this is in any way shape, or form...a good thing for the hobby

 

Eveyone else seems to think this way, why dont you?

 

Ze-

 

Kenny,

 

Don't confuse "a few people on a message board" with "everyone else."

 

Love,

 

Me

 

The many outweigh the few. So that makes everything A O K , Gotcha.

 

If Matt wated to reply to my post he could have, but thanks for filling the class in on what we already know.

 

 

Ze-

[qualitycomix]

A very simple answer. They don't consider pressing to be restoration.

 

Based on your experience in restoration, do you consider things like erasure to be restoration?

 

If not, why?

 

If so, then would you disclose even if in a CGC holder?

 

I've always looked at this thing with a practical viewpoint. Anyone can erase something on a book, whether it's dirt, a date, or a pencilled "Larson." How can this be considered restoration? It's silly. Are all those erased Larson books restored? Of course not. So no, I don't think erasing is restoration.

 

Thanks Matt, I'm on the fence on this issue, but to play devil's advocate:

 

Anyone can take a marker or a pen and touch up a book. Based on the criteria you gave above, then why is color touch considered resto?

[esquirecomics]

 

Hey, its no fun without the branch going back and forth!

[Matt Nelson]

You mean the guys benefiting from pressing and the non-disclosure of it don't consider it restoration. I see a fairly clear line of division between buyers and sellers on this area. A couple of exceptions, but still.....

 

 

also, got the label, Matt. Thanks.

 

No, that's not what I mean at all. Everyone I know that presses has no problem buying a pressed book. To me, that makes the system work. If they only sold pressed books, and refused the buy them, then you'd be right.

 

Great on the label! You'll send it to CGC, right?

 

They don't refuse to buy them because they know they can resell them without disclosure. That's what makes the system work.

 

It's a tougher road to buy a book, press it, certify it and then disclose it. You cut out some buyers that would normally want that book. But the tradeoff is that buyers develop a sense that they have a better sense of trust in a transaction with a dealer who does disclose regardless of whether it's restoration or not.

 

And Matt, I appreciate you coming on here and answering questions. I don't see many others coming on the forums to defend their business practices when it comes to disclosure at least not to this extent.

 

Thanks Brent. I'm trying....

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're saying above that the dealer is buying the pressed book for less than market value because it's disclosed as pressed, and therefore worth less? Am I correct? No, what I'm saying is that these people will pay full retail for the pressed books. In otherwords, they treat them the same as unpressed books. In their eyes there is no difference.

[qualitycomix]

You mean the guys benefiting from pressing and the non-disclosure of it don't consider it restoration. I see a fairly clear line of division between buyers and sellers on this area. A couple of exceptions, but still.....

 

Remember when I sold that FF#53 last year and disclosed pressing in the auction? It sold for just shy of a record price to a dealer. So apparently it isn't just collectors who are on the buying end of this, nor is it just dealers who are on the pressing end of this.

 

So what?

 

For one thing, this would be more impressive (at least on an anecdotal level) if the book had been sold to a collector rather than a dealer. According to Matt, no dealers care so this sale was irrelevant.

 

In any event, if this transaction is to be interpreted as meaning anything, it could then be argued that the concerns about disclosure are not accurate. So then what is the big deal about disclosure?

 

I sold an X-Men #4 CGC NM 9.4 Pacific Coast earlier this year and disclosed it was pressed. It sold for a very healthy price of $6,300.

[FFB]

I'm with Brad on this one - the crack/press/resubmit game has been going on for quite some time, and by many more than one well-known dealer or collector. Lauterbach is a good guess in the present case, since he sells most of his stock via C-link, lives very close to the Blazing one, and is known to press books to improve their CGC grades.

 

I've weighed in already with my view that I believe the purchase/crack/press/resub/re-auction dance is done with great frequency by Heritage.

 

Moral? If you don't like buying high grade books that may have been pressed, then do not do business with Comiclink, Matt Nelson, Lauterbach, Pedigree and the other dealers and auctioneers that refuse of their own volition to disclose non-disassembly cleaning and/or pressing.

 

Wow, this stuff is blowing my mind. Do you seriously think this list of dealers who do not openly disclose pressing is comprehensive? It's fall far short. I think you're grossly underestimating how many people, both collectors and dealers, are involved in the crackout game. These people you list are very visible because they mainly operate through the internet, and it's all there for everyone to see. There are so many other people out there buying and selling books that you're not taking into consideration.

 

I don't see where he limits himself to only those he named above as individuals who allegedly engage in undisclosed manipulation of books. In fact, his language implicitly, if not explicitly, acknowledges the list is broader.

 

In any event, it does not matter if the list he cited is comprehensive or limited in nature. What is imperative is that anytime someone identifies an individual as engaging in whatever type of conduct is at issue that such characterization or allegation is accurate.

 

If the list is accurate than those engaging in whatever conduct might be at issue have no basis to complain and if there are consequences from those actions, so be it. Right?

 

And I am not talking about ethics or illegalities here in the slightest, nor even the question of morality. Let's look at it plain and simple. The RNC recently ran a television ad against Congressman Harold Ford as part of the Tennessee Senate race. The obvious objective was to support the *spoon* (what the heck, the boards won't let me write Rep - bublican? ) candidate. It likely had the opposite effect and led people to Congressman Ford rather than against him. Actions. Consequences.

 

By the way Matt, if you wish to add names to the list so that the appropriate individuals who are not as visible are taken into consideration, I am sure everyone here would be most grateful to you.

 

In your strained attempt to use yet another political analogy in relation to comic book collecting, you have obviously missed the point Matt was making -- that you and everyone else cannot "protect" yourselves from the crack-out game just by avoiding those few dealers who have been highlighted here. It is a false sense of security that is being created.

 

Unless, of course, you or others take the attitude of "What I don't know doesn't hurt me," in which case I have to ask what is the BFD about pressing anyway?

 

Thank you Mr. Defender of those engaged in repetoire with me. I can always count on you to intervene and spell it out the real trurth for everyone.

 

Sorry, I didn't figure you to be one who would object to a comment from someone outside of your A-B conversation. Considering how many A-B conversations between others you've butted into uninvited, I mean.

 

It is not about protecting oneself from a select group of dealers. It is about highlighting certain affirmative conduct and the consequences that can arise therefrom. It is about education and informed decisions. Read my follow-up post as there is no way the results of the conduct can be avoided nowadays, but the conduct can be addressed if that is what someone wishes to do.

 

Actually, the original post that Matt was responding to (you know, the one he responded to where you completely missed the point of what he was trying to say) was directed explicitly toward a recommended course of conduct to "protect" oneself from pressers. So whatever your agenda may have been, your response to Matt missed the point he was making.

 

As far as the "What I don't know doesn't hurt me", that mantra belongs to those who repeatedly argue, such as CGC, that if pressing cannot be identified on a book what's the big deal. Somehow I don't think that view can be ascribed to me. But by all means Scott, please do use your logic to figure out a way that it can be.

 

I know you don't feel this way and I didn't say you did. You have made it quite clear that your biggest problem is lack of disclosure, not so much that books are pressed. My point is that (a) if people think they're "safe" if they just avoid the few dealers who have been "outed" as engaging in the crack/press/resub game on these forums, they're deluding themselves, and (b) assuming (a) is true, if a buyer's position is that he will just avoid those who have been outed and assume that those who haven't been outed are "safe" sellers, because "what they don't know doesn't bother them," then what is the big deal about pressing anyway, since it is typically undetectable?

[esquirecomics]

A very simple answer. They don't consider pressing to be restoration.

 

Based on your experience in restoration, do you consider things like erasure to be restoration?

 

If not, why?

 

If so, then would you disclose even if in a CGC holder?

 

I've always looked at this thing with a practical viewpoint. Anyone can erase something on a book, whether it's dirt, a date, or a pencilled "Larson." How can this be considered restoration? It's silly. Are all those erased Larson books restored? Of course not. So no, I don't think erasing is restoration.

 

Thanks Matt, I'm on the fence on this issue, but to play devil's advocate:

 

Anyone can take a marker or a pen and touch up a book. Based on the criteria you gave above, then why is color touch considered resto?

 

Geez Brent, don't you know anything? Because it added something to the book!

 

Taking away stuff that had been added is fine. Just can't add stuff by itelf.

 

But what about if you used some sort of wet solvent or cleaning solution (or whatever the heck is used) to remove pencil marks on a cover rather than a dry erasure. Is that not an identified form of restoration?

[esquirecomics]

You mean the guys benefiting from pressing and the non-disclosure of it don't consider it restoration. I see a fairly clear line of division between buyers and sellers on this area. A couple of exceptions, but still.....

 

Remember when I sold that FF#53 last year and disclosed pressing in the auction? It sold for just shy of a record price to a dealer. So apparently it isn't just collectors who are on the buying end of this, nor is it just dealers who are on the pressing end of this.

 

So what?

 

For one thing, this would be more impressive (at least on an anecdotal level) if the book had been sold to a collector rather than a dealer. According to Matt, no dealers care so this sale was irrelevant.

 

In any event, if this transaction is to be interpreted as meaning anything, it could then be argued that the concerns about disclosure are not accurate. So then what is the big deal about disclosure?

 

I sold an X-Men #4 CGC NM 9.4 Pacific Coast earlier this year and disclosed it was pressed. It sold for a very healthy price of $6,300.

 

[esquirecomics]

I know you don't feel this way and I didn't say you did. You have made it quite clear that your biggest problem is lack of disclosure, not so much that books are pressed. My point is that (a) if people think they're "safe" if they just avoid the few dealers who have been "outed" as engaging in the crack/press/resub game on these forums, they're deluding themselves, and (b) assuming (a) is true, if a buyer's position is that he will just avoid those who have been outed and assume that those who haven't been outed are "safe" sellers, because "what they don't know doesn't bother them," then what is the big deal about pressing anyway, since it is typically undetectable?

 

I believe I said something to this effect above though more diplomatically.

[Sal]

You mean the guys benefiting from pressing and the non-disclosure of it don't consider it restoration. I see a fairly clear line of division between buyers and sellers on this area. A couple of exceptions, but still.....

 

 

also, got the label, Matt. Thanks.

 

No, that's not what I mean at all. Everyone I know that presses has no problem buying a pressed book. To me, that makes the system work. If they only sold pressed books, and refused the buy them, then you'd be right.

 

Great on the label! You'll send it to CGC, right?

 

They don't refuse to buy them because they know they can resell them without disclosure. That's what makes the system work.

 

It's a tougher road to buy a book, press it, certify it and then disclose it. You cut out some buyers that would normally want that book. But the tradeoff is that buyers develop a sense that they have a better sense of trust in a transaction with a dealer who does disclose regardless of whether it's restoration or not.

 

And Matt, I appreciate you coming on here and answering questions. I don't see many others coming on the forums to defend their business practices when it comes to disclosure at least not to this extent.

 

Thanks Brent. I'm trying....

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're saying above that the dealer is buying the pressed book for less than market value because it's disclosed as pressed, and therefore worth less? Am I correct? No, what I'm saying is that these people will pay full retail for the pressed books. In otherwords, they treat them the same as unpressed books. In their eyes there is no difference.

 

without disclosure, how do you know?

[nik]

A nice test would be to sell 2 identical graded books, same grade, only 1 was pressed to achieve the grade. Disclose the one that was pressed, my hunch is that the average collector will pay the same for either one.

[qualitycomix]

You mean the guys benefiting from pressing and the non-disclosure of it don't consider it restoration. I see a fairly clear line of division between buyers and sellers on this area. A couple of exceptions, but still.....

 

 

also, got the label, Matt. Thanks.

 

No, that's not what I mean at all. Everyone I know that presses has no problem buying a pressed book. To me, that makes the system work. If they only sold pressed books, and refused the buy them, then you'd be right.

 

Great on the label! You'll send it to CGC, right?

 

They don't refuse to buy them because they know they can resell them without disclosure. That's what makes the system work.

 

It's a tougher road to buy a book, press it, certify it and then disclose it. You cut out some buyers that would normally want that book. But the tradeoff is that buyers develop a sense that they have a better sense of trust in a transaction with a dealer who does disclose regardless of whether it's restoration or not.

 

And Matt, I appreciate you coming on here and answering questions. I don't see many others coming on the forums to defend their business practices when it comes to disclosure at least not to this extent.

 

Thanks Brent. I'm trying....

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're saying above that the dealer is buying the pressed book for less than market value because it's disclosed as pressed, and therefore worth less? Am I correct? No, what I'm saying is that these people will pay full retail for the pressed books. In otherwords, they treat them the same as unpressed books. In their eyes there is no difference.

 

Actually, what I'm saying is that the dealer will pay the same whether it has been pressed or not because it doesn't matter. When they sell it, they don't have to disclose anything. IF they did disclose, the $$$ amount paid MIGHT be slightly less. It's probably similar to notes being on the CGC label. I would pay a little more for a "note-less" copy because it does get less sometimes in the marketplace.

[FFB]

You mean the guys benefiting from pressing and the non-disclosure of it don't consider it restoration. I see a fairly clear line of division between buyers and sellers on this area. A couple of exceptions, but still.....

 

Remember when I sold that FF#53 last year and disclosed pressing in the auction? It sold for just shy of a record price to a dealer. So apparently it isn't just collectors who are on the buying end of this, nor is it just dealers who are on the pressing end of this.

 

I do remember. It sticks out because of the rarity of a sale like that. If you had the data to prove a trend, then I think it would be of more significance. As for now....I have to categorize it under "isolated incident".

 

But...to take it further.....I think your sale proves at least the possiblity that disclosure may not be as harmful to the bottom line as most sellers fear.

 

I agree on all counts (including your last comment, which I believe to be true as long as the book is in a blue CGC holder) and wish we had more data points.

[qualitycomix]

A nice test would be to sell 2 identical graded books, same grade, only 1 was pressed to achieve the grade. Disclose the one that was pressed, my hunch is that the average collector will pay the same for either one.

 

Based on my experiences, there will be little difference.

 

However, it could be because the buyer doesn't understand what pressing is.

 

Then again, the marketplace may think there is no $$$ difference. I don't know since there aren't enough disclosed pressed books being sold.

[Matt Nelson]

Buyers, the number of which is unknown, are starting to turn away from dealers who refuse to disclose certain information. There are more than enough dealers, and I believe that number will grow, who buyers will unhesitatingly turn to who meet their needs and principles. Therein lies the consequence to the action.

 

Is this unknown number of buyers a large number? Give me some proof that the number is significant enough to create the groundswell you've mentioned. What is the current membership total of the NOD?

 

 

There are countless examples where books have been correctly identified as having been manipulated, whether that be through methods of pressing, dry cleaning, resubbing or a combination of these and other means.

 

If so, then there are 1000x countless number of books that will never be identified. How can you expect a fair assessment with such lopsided numbers?

 

 

Nor am I clear as to what you are attempting to infer by your second clause. No one should ever be expected to disclose information they do not know, nor guess as to what might be. Honest and open judgments and conduct are all that can ever be expected. [/color]

 

agreed.

 

 

So, you are saying Bob (or anyone else for that matter) has no right to be concerned, annoyed or even angry regarding what took place? Only the buyer of the books possess that right? That is quite a narrow interpretation of a community. I suppose simply because someone was robbed down the street from me makes no difference to how I feel about the safety of my community as the victim was not me?

 

To the contrary the victim was the community, and we are all entitled to raise this as an issue.

 

The victim? Bob knew the rules of the game (I'm assuming until he confirms his knowledge of pressing prior to consignment). How in the world can you call him a victim?

 

To take it one step further, how is this different than Harley Yee buying your book for $1000 and marking it up to $2000 on his wall?

[FFB]

I think it's interesting. I thought the idea of barcodes on the interior paper that can only be made visible under ultraviolet light would be a great solution to the resub problem. The response I saw was that no one wanted the books to be touched. But they don't mind their books being put into a press?

 

I think that if most buyers and sellers don't mind their books being put into a press, then they wouldn't mind the barcode idea. But maybe the correlation isn't there?

 

Some UV ink becomes visible with age. I wouldn't personally mind a bar code (I think I was one of the people who suggested it as a solution a few years ago), but at the same time, I can see why others would not like it.

[Matt Nelson]

I think it's interesting. I thought the idea of barcodes on the interior paper that can only be made visible under ultraviolet light would be a great solution to the resub problem. The response I saw was that no one wanted the books to be touched. But they don't mind their books being put into a press?

 

I think that if most buyers and sellers don't mind their books being put into a press, then they wouldn't mind the barcode idea. But maybe the correlation isn't there?

 

Brent, I have issues with your phrase "the resub problem." It's an integral part of a grading service in all industries. Like it or hate it, it's not a problem.

[FFB]

You mean the guys benefiting from pressing and the non-disclosure of it don't consider it restoration. I see a fairly clear line of division between buyers and sellers on this area. A couple of exceptions, but still.....

 

Remember when I sold that FF#53 last year and disclosed pressing in the auction? It sold for just shy of a record price to a dealer. So apparently it isn't just collectors who are on the buying end of this, nor is it just dealers who are on the pressing end of this.

 

So what?

 

For one thing, this would be more impressive (at least on an anecdotal level) if the book had been sold to a collector rather than a dealer. According to Matt, no dealers care so this sale was irrelevant.

 

In any event, if this transaction is to be interpreted as meaning anything, it could then be argued that the concerns about disclosure are not accurate. So then what is the big deal about disclosure?

 

There were several collectors bidding on the auction. My recollection is that the two highest underbidders were collectors. The problem is, it's still only a single datapoint.

 

What we don't have are auctions where pressing is disclosed in a neutral fashion (in other words, without fire and brimstone/negative comments about the practice of pressing) where the book sold for significantly below retail.

 

Divad sold a Ghost Rider #1 raw on ebay with the notation that it was RESTORED/pressed. He got a great price on it relative to unrestored FMV too, as I recall.

 

Still only two data points, but neither one evidences any market-wide negative consequences when pressing is disclosed.

[Harvey Dude]

the climate on the boards does not reflect what's going on out there in the world of buying and selling.

 

I am not part of the inside crowd but from a collector's standpoint, I disagree with you entirely. Collector's do care about ethics in this hobby and that includes full disclosure.

[Matt Nelson]

Wow, this stuff is blowing my mind. Do you seriously think this list of dealers who do not openly disclose pressing is comprehensive? It's fall far short. I think you're grossly underestimating how many people, both collectors and dealers, are involved in the crackout game. These people you list are very visible because they mainly operate through the internet, and it's all there for everyone to see. There are so many other people out there buying and selling books that you're not taking into consideration.

 

no offense, but you seem to be grossly underestimating how much this "game" bothers people once they are made aware of it.

 

i suspect most people don't care because most people have no freaking idea just what is going on

 

Why do you think I'm grossly underestimating how much it bother's people? What are you basing this on? I think I have a pretty good view of people's perception of pressing from where I sit, and I wholeheartedly disagree.

 

Way more people know about pressing today than a year ago, thanks in part to the boards, Scoop, GPA, and other outlets. Where is this groundswell that is talked about? How much more does the word have to be spread before you acquiesce?

 

if people aren't bothered by it, then why are the majority of dealers who do work (pressing) on books unwilling to disclose same?

 

apologies if this feels like a tu quoque direction of questioning

 

A very simple answer. They don't consider pressing to be restoration.

 

wait wait wait wait. i never said anything about restoration.

 

if it's not restoration, if it is...doesn't matter one bit to me. truthfully, i could not care less one way or the other.

 

but it still needs to be disclosed. unless there's a stigma about pressing that for some reason, even though it's not 'restoration' still exists anyways, which is essentially a fancy way of dealers having their cake and eating it, too

 

To be blunt, they just don't care. I've talked to just about every dealer ad nausem about pressing, and even the ones who don't press don't think it's a big deal. I'm telling you, the climate on the boards does not reflect what's going on out there in the world of buying and selling.

 

It is not the views of the dealers that matters. It is the views of the collectors/buyers.

 

BTW Matt, I do wish to acknowledge my appreciation for your participation in this discussion.

 

WHOA! Everyone's views matter!!! You've just offended most of your peers in the Overstreet Advisor section!

 

And thank you! And if things get heated between us, here's my in advance.