Manufactured Gold

[garthgantu]

Please post some "before and after" scans of the books in original and current slabs if possible.

 

Again, I feel bad picking you out of the group - but at some point, these kinds of 'urban legends' have to be supported with some sort of visual evidence, even if that evidence is less than 'foolproof' (anyone can manipulate a scan these days).

 

I'd like to give CGC the benefit of the doubt and believe their grading is more consistent than your story would indicate.

 

ricky, you remember that line at the end of pulp fiction--"jules, if you give this nimrod your wallet..." that travolta said to sam in the diner? well, i'm saying it to you now. do not give an iota of your time to finding old scans for this cynic. if your word isn't enough for him, in light of who you are in the hobby, he's not one of the guys you should be interested in influencing.

 

Sorry if my original request came across as cynical towards any one individual - that was not my intention. But given everything you've no doubt seen yourself, Billy, you have to admit you've gotten *more* cynical and not less over the years - true? There's certainly a lot more to be cynical about these days!

[Foolkiller]

I'm not going to rehash the whole, how evident is it that the NOD is clear on whether the assertions are fact or guesswork, because it isn't really relevant to this discussion.

 

My point is, you are asking for proof that you deem acceptable v. someone's word. To me, Rich's word is as good, if not better, than any scan.

[garthgantu]

Well, I can't win fer tryin' here...

 

If I say to you that "proof is not what I'm after, I'm just hoping for more information to add to the mental database (or the historical record)," BillyParker will come back "see, Ricky, he doesn't think you have the proof - he's a cynic AND a doubting Thomas!"

 

This is probably all a moot point (to use the current, not original, definition of the word - before a lawyer jumps up and bites me in the *spoon* on etymological front)... after the way my original request was phrased (not well), and then parsed by the cognoscenti (not generously), Richard's never going to 'pander' to my request.

 

Mission accomplished, guardians of the boards

[esquirecomics]

To some extent, CGC makes guesses and assumptions every day in the course of grading books...

 

They guess or assume that one drop of glue was purposely placed in a given location in an attempt to restore a book's appearance or structure.

 

They assume that a particular type of hairline non-color breaking crease is always a production defect when it's not outside the realm of possibility that such a crease could be created post-production.

 

They guess that a submission of nearly pristine books are not trimmed - but they don't know with absolute certainty, as the Ewert situation painfully illustrated.

 

So even if the NoD is making assumptions and conjectures, I don't see the problem with that... At least the NoD is acknowledging that this is what it is doing.

 

Absolutely.

 

Just like CGC "guessed" that the "glue" on my Rockford More Fun #52 was, in fact, glue when the person who discovered the collection, Mark Wilson, says it is tape residue because he knows for a fact that the OO placed tape on the staples.

 

Just like CGC "guessed" that my Blue Ribbon #1 was the Larson copy based on who submitted the book and claimed to know its history when, in fact, it was not.

 

And both of these examples are having personally inspected the book in hand.

 

Now, I understand both examples and it will happen, but before people start condemning the NOD for "speculating" as to work performed on books without even putting evidence forward to contradict the opinions, lets put things in perspective here. The NOD is trying to use educated reasoning to help the community.

 

In a general sense, it is like the criticism of the Iraq War. I keep hearing people complain about how the war is progressing and that changes need to be made, but few people actually offer substantive ideas as to how to effect a true change.

[Foolkiller]

To some extent, CGC makes guesses and assumptions every day in the course of grading books...

 

They guess or assume that one drop of glue was purposely placed in a given location in an attempt to restore a book's appearance or structure.

 

They assume that a particular type of hairline non-color breaking crease is always a production defect when it's not outside the realm of possibility that such a crease could be created post-production.

 

They guess that a submission of nearly pristine books are not trimmed - but they don't know with absolute certainty, as the Ewert situation painfully illustrated.

 

So even if the NoD is making assumptions and conjectures, I don't see the problem with that... At least the NoD is acknowledging that this is what it is doing.

 

Absolutely.

 

Just like CGC "guessed" that the "glue" on my Rockford More Fun #52 was, in fact, glue when the person who discovered the collection, Mark Wilson, says it is tape residue because he knows for a fact that the OO placed tape on the staples.

 

Just like CGC "guessed" that my Blue Ribbon #1 was the Larson copy based on who submitted the book and claimed to know its history when, in fact, it was not.

 

And both of these examples are having personally inspected the book in hand.

 

Now, I understand both examples and it will happen, but before people start condemning the NOD for "speculating" as to work performed on books without even putting evidence forward to contradict the opinions, lets put things in perspective here. The NOD is trying to use educated reasoning to help the community.

 

In a general sense, it is like the criticism of the Iraq War. I keep hearing people complain about how the war is progressing and that changes need to be made, but few people actually offer substantive ideas as to how to effect a true change.

 

Presuming, of course, you believe a change needs to be made.

[garthgantu]

In a general sense, it is like the criticism of the Iraq War. I keep hearing people complain about how the war is progressing and that changes need to be made, but few people actually offer substantive ideas as to how to effect a true change.

 

Interesting analogy... does that make critics of the NoD hawks or doves?

[garthgantu]

In a general sense, it is like the criticism of the Iraq War. I keep hearing people complain about how the war is progressing and that changes need to be made, but few people actually offer substantive ideas as to how to effect a true change.

 

Presuming, of course, you believe a change needs to be made.

 

Great point, FoolKiller...there will always be those completely deluded followers who refuse to even consider the possibility that a mistake (or three) might have been made and things aren't already perfect. I mean, President Bush still has an approval rating of 28% or something, right?

[esquirecomics]

To some extent, CGC makes guesses and assumptions every day in the course of grading books...

 

They guess or assume that one drop of glue was purposely placed in a given location in an attempt to restore a book's appearance or structure.

 

They assume that a particular type of hairline non-color breaking crease is always a production defect when it's not outside the realm of possibility that such a crease could be created post-production.

 

They guess that a submission of nearly pristine books are not trimmed - but they don't know with absolute certainty, as the Ewert situation painfully illustrated.

 

So even if the NoD is making assumptions and conjectures, I don't see the problem with that... At least the NoD is acknowledging that this is what it is doing.

 

Absolutely.

 

Just like CGC "guessed" that the "glue" on my Rockford More Fun #52 was, in fact, glue when the person who discovered the collection, Mark Wilson, says it is tape residue because he knows for a fact that the OO placed tape on the staples.

 

Just like CGC "guessed" that my Blue Ribbon #1 was the Larson copy based on who submitted the book and claimed to know its history when, in fact, it was not.

 

And both of these examples are having personally inspected the book in hand.

 

Now, I understand both examples and it will happen, but before people start condemning the NOD for "speculating" as to work performed on books without even putting evidence forward to contradict the opinions, lets put things in perspective here. The NOD is trying to use educated reasoning to help the community.

 

In a general sense, it is like the criticism of the Iraq War. I keep hearing people complain about how the war is progressing and that changes need to be made, but few people actually offer substantive ideas as to how to effect a true change.

 

Presuming, of course, you believe a change needs to be made.

 

Fair enough, but there can still be a difference between stating that no change is necessary (a more neutral position) versus actually advocating against change.

[esquirecomics]

In a general sense, it is like the criticism of the Iraq War. I keep hearing people complain about how the war is progressing and that changes need to be made, but few people actually offer substantive ideas as to how to effect a true change.

 

Interesting analogy... does that make critics of the NoD hawks or doves?

 

I'll leave that one to each individual to decide.

[batman_fan]

Hey Rich,

 

Welcome to the boards! We first met while you were "hooking" it at Over the Rainbow in Alb. I truly hate you no longer attending Wondercon as the wife, kid, and job keep me away from San Diego. Nice to see you posting some of your incredible colelction!

[Foolkiller]

In a general sense, it is like the criticism of the Iraq War. I keep hearing people complain about how the war is progressing and that changes need to be made, but few people actually offer substantive ideas as to how to effect a true change.

 

Presuming, of course, you believe a change needs to be made.

 

Great point, FoolKiller...there will always be those completely deluded followers who refuse to even consider the possibility that a mistake (or three) might have been made and things aren't already perfect. I mean, President Bush still has an approval rating of 28% or something, right?

 

That's right. People in the middle of the country and other places (like central PA) are still holding on tightly that their belief is correct. Those minds are never going to be changed.

 

The problem is really if you ever believed CGC was perfect. From the start of day one, not accepting and believing that CGC was prone to mistakes and oversights is the real delusion. It's like trying to perfect a process which does not lend itself to perfection.

 

I've disagreed with aspects of the NOD and its founding principal of "mandatory disclosure". But at the end of the day, it will be the market at large, not me, not anyone here alone on the boards, that will determine the debate on pressing.

[esquirecomics]

I've disagreed with aspects of the NOD and its founding principal of "mandatory disclosure". But at the end of the day, it will be the market at large, not me, not anyone here alone on the boards, that will determine the debate on pressing.

 

Of course, pressing is but just one aspect among many of the NOD and its guiding principles regarding disclosure.

[MrBedrock]

While I knew going in that some of you would call me out and say "prove it" (and a big thank you to those of you who have my back) I was hoping that wouldn't be the over-riding response. I don't have any intention of going through all the books and posting scans and this, that and the other. It isn't worth my time. I did post scans of a Hangman #6 on the Golden Age thread if anyone wants to look at a way cool book. And I will probably be posting more stuff there in the future. What I was hoping was that some of you would realize that all this bluster about pressing and "I can't believe what someone did to that book" and "that must be tinkered with" is just folly. Sure sometimes that is the case, but at the end of the day you don't really know. And what does it really matter. They are beautiful books! If they are 7.0 or 9.6 they are beautiful books and ya'll are wasting so much breath disparaging them you can't see the forest for the trees. Stop being cynical about this stuff and enjoy it for what it is. Comic books! Worth lots of money sometimes, sure. But always a great pleasure. So if you have a problem with some of them changing grades please don't buy any of them until I finish my collection!

[Foolkiller]

I've disagreed with aspects of the NOD and its founding principal of "mandatory disclosure". But at the end of the day, it will be the market at large, not me, not anyone here alone on the boards, that will determine the debate on pressing.

 

Of course, pressing is but just one aspect among many of the NOD and its guiding principles regarding disclosure.

 

Yes, I know -- but pressing is the one we disagree on.

[Sid]

While I knew going in that some of you would call me out and say "prove it" (and a big thank you to those of you who have my back) I was hoping that wouldn't be the over-riding response. I don't have any intention of going through all the books and posting scans and this, that and the other. It isn't worth my time. I did post scans of a Hangman #6 on the Golden Age thread if anyone wants to look at a way cool book. And I will probably be posting more stuff there in the future. What I was hoping was that some of you would realize that all this bluster about pressing and "I can't believe what someone did to that book" and "that must be tinkered with" is just folly. Sure sometimes that is the case, but at the end of the day you don't really know. And what does it really matter. They are beautiful books! If they are 7.0 or 9.6 they are beautiful books and ya'll are wasting so much breath disparaging them you can't see the forest for the trees. Stop being cynical about this stuff and enjoy it for what it is. Comic books! Worth lots of money sometimes, sure. But always a great pleasure. So if you have a problem with some of them changing grades please don't buy any of them until I finish my collection!

 

I don't know who you are but

[Weird Paper]

While I knew going in that some of you would call me out and say "prove it" (and a big thank you to those of you who have my back) I was hoping that wouldn't be the over-riding response. I don't have any intention of going through all the books and posting scans and this, that and the other. It isn't worth my time. I did post scans of a Hangman #6 on the Golden Age thread if anyone wants to look at a way cool book. And I will probably be posting more stuff there in the future. What I was hoping was that some of you would realize that all this bluster about pressing and "I can't believe what someone did to that book" and "that must be tinkered with" is just folly. Sure sometimes that is the case, but at the end of the day you don't really know. And what does it really matter. They are beautiful books! If they are 7.0 or 9.6 they are beautiful books and ya'll are wasting so much breath disparaging them you can't see the forest for the trees. Stop being cynical about this stuff and enjoy it for what it is. Comic books! Worth lots of money sometimes, sure. But always a great pleasure. So if you have a problem with some of them changing grades please don't buy any of them until I finish my collection!

[143ksk]

I did post scans of a Hangman #6 on the Golden Age thread if anyone wants to look at a way cool book.

 

That book was mine when it was slabbed (as an 8.5). It looks the same to me now (except for the number on the slab...)

[esquirecomics]

While I knew going in that some of you would call me out and say "prove it" (and a big thank you to those of you who have my back) I was hoping that wouldn't be the over-riding response. I don't have any intention of going through all the books and posting scans and this, that and the other. It isn't worth my time. I did post scans of a Hangman #6 on the Golden Age thread if anyone wants to look at a way cool book. And I will probably be posting more stuff there in the future. What I was hoping was that some of you would realize that all this bluster about pressing and "I can't believe what someone did to that book" and "that must be tinkered with" is just folly. Sure sometimes that is the case, but at the end of the day you don't really know. And what does it really matter. They are beautiful books! If they are 7.0 or 9.6 they are beautiful books and ya'll are wasting so much breath disparaging them you can't see the forest for the trees. Stop being cynical about this stuff and enjoy it for what it is. Comic books! Worth lots of money sometimes, sure. But always a great pleasure. So if you have a problem with some of them changing grades please don't buy any of them until I finish my collection!

 

I don't need scans Richard.

 

Just the cgc serial numbers, title, issue # and grades. You can e-mail them to me.

 

I think it is great that you don't have a problem with any of these "changing" grade issues. I really do. It makes life a lot easier not to be concerned about it. But yet you know full well that there are people (how many I will leave aside) who do not share your feeling of at ease.

 

So my first question is, if it doesn't bother you at all, then why not disclose these changes for everyone else to know about?

 

That way, for those who share your views, no harm done. And for those who feel otherwise, an informed decision can be made one way or the other. Seems like a win-win situation to me.

 

And to use a real life example of how significant a grade change can be (regardless of how it came about), let's examine Showcase #4. I have the CGC 9.2. Metro has the CGC 9.4. Motor City has the CGC 9.6. One simple subjective grade notch between each. Could be one grade one day, and another grade the other day. But OH what a price difference that would be from one day to the next. Do you want to pay that price difference, assuming you even care about this book of course , knowing that if you had just bought it the week before you could have saved tens of thousands of dollars, if not more?

[esquirecomics]

I've disagreed with aspects of the NOD and its founding principal of "mandatory disclosure". But at the end of the day, it will be the market at large, not me, not anyone here alone on the boards, that will determine the debate on pressing.

 

Of course, pressing is but just one aspect among many of the NOD and its guiding principles regarding disclosure.

 

Yes, I know -- but pressing is the one we disagree on.

 

Perfectly fine, but the impression given is that it is pressing the NOD is all about, and its not. That is just one facet, albeit perhaps the one that generates the most controversy.

[MrBedrock]

I did post scans of a Hangman #6 on the Golden Age thread if anyone wants to look at a way cool book.

 

That book was mine when it was slabbed (as an 8.5). It looks the same to me now (except for the number on the slab...)

Steve?