Manufactured Gold

[ciorac]

...and just as the stock market adjusted itself last week so will the insane multiples on 9.6/9.8,...has it happened yet?...no,...but it will,...when owner's of coveted books can no longer find buyers for their books they will have no choice thn to come down in their asking prices,...will it be a crash?...not at all,...will it be a correction?...you betcha,.... ,...and unlike the stock market the comic book market is a shrinking arena,...how many people out there under the age of 35 are serious money collectors?...without a replenishment of new big money buyers there is no other logical evolution except for prices to adjust,...you should sell your B&B #28 now while you still can,...

 

As a matter of fact, there are a significant number of new big money buyers coming into the comic market all the time. Given that I sell high-end, big dollar ticket items, I deal with them on a regular basis. For the most part they range between 35-45 years old (and anyway at what point in time was there ever people under the age of 35 acting as "serious money collectors"?). These are collectors who are dropping five and six figures without blinking. So I would have to challenge your premise, particularly that the market is a shrinking arena.

 

What concerns me most, however, is that these new big money buyers have no knowledge of the crack, press, dry clean, resub, manipulation, etc., game, and when it finally becomes known to them, after having spent oodles of money, they may become soured on what is otherwise a great hobby and investment arena.

 

Mark, I find myself in COMPLETE agreement with you on this.

 

First, if anyone cares to follow the Gold thread they will see lots of crossover business of late. Many of those individuals are young bronze and silver collectors who have moved into gold and are spending big bucks. That is great news for them, and the hobby.

 

And your last sentence/paragraph is particularly compelling to me. In fact, I made the same argument to a learned assemblage of collectors at my house just a scant few weeks ago.

 

But, I also recognize how futile efforts to ebb the tide will be. I know you won't agree with that, but it is an unfortunate fact of life. At least in its current iteration.

 

This is the short-sightedness of it all...

 

We already have a fairly recent parallel for this sort of thing....and it almost destroyed the industry for good.

 

Back in the early 90s, new blood came flooding into the market, buoyed up by promises of a 'killing'. Perhaps it was the wrong reason to get involved, but the net effect was that the industry flourished, the new money giving it a boost like it had never seen before.

 

Then the other shoe dropped. The newbies discovered that they'd been sold a bill of goods (something that the long-term collectors knew, but failed to mention as they were too busy making a killing) and they flooded out just as quickly as they had come in. Result? The whole house of cards almost toppled.

 

Can the same thing happen again? Sure it can. Are the actions of the 'manipulate and take the 5th' crowd setting us all up for a fall?

 

I fear that they may be.

 

But so long as the Big Boys' tills keep ringing right now, they don't seem to care.

 

Sad, but true.

 

Not short-sighted on my part FT. You just repeated, nearly verbatim, the argument I made a couple of weeks ago.

 

As long as there is money to be made, it will be made. History has taught us that.

 

And for the record, I will refrain from commenting on civility in a thread anymore if it will light the fuse on a *spoon*-storm like I just finished reading....

[MrBedrock]

somebody get Richard back to the table so he wont feel "run off" by our usual verbal shenanigans here like poor Don Rosa. I d hate for the accusations to start flying how we scared off another professional ..... I suspect with all his experience, he has a lot more to add to our ongoing discusions....

If this thread is gasoline I just like adding the match! Ya'll are more to watch then poking an antbed with a stick. I get back to you when it dies down.

[FFB]

I think you just strengthened my cause.

 

No...you're just whining again about the NOD. First "panic and hysteria" and now "entitlement"...are there any other qualifiers you'd like to falsely interject?

 

Seriously, you where one of the proponents of people actually doing something, anything, concerning their issues in the hobby other than just posting on a Forum. People have actually taken action and now all you can do is slam them. Looks as if you're the one doing nothing but arguing on a Forum...

 

Jim

 

It's not the NOD that is doing this. It's Mark. The NOD's "Gallery of Disclosure" is supposed to be just for books that have been proven to have some work done to them. From what I saw of Mark's post to Richard, Mark was going to add Richard's books to the Gallery of Disclosure even though nothing had been done to them. Just the pure fact that the books got upgraded was enough to get added to the Gallery, apparently. And this isn't even something that the NOD addresses in its guidelines, either. From my reading of NOD guidelines, NOD members are not required to disclose that a book used to be a different CGC grade as long as the book wasn't "enhanced." Mark just seems to want to impose his personal preference for disclosure of prior CGC grades onto the NOD (or in this case, he wants to impose it on a dealer who is not even a member of the NOD), without the rest of the NOD voting on it or approving it, I presume. And more annoyingly, wants to call out a dealer who has a much longer and distinguished track record in this hobby than he does in order to advance his personal agenda. This is the kind of thing that I would have hoped the other, more reasonable NOD committee members would have frowned upon. Am I wrong about that? If so, then I do have a problem with the NOD acting like a bully to pressure other dealers to do what they want.

[MrBedrock]

somebody get Richard back to the table so he wont feel "run off" by our usual verbal shenanigans here like poor Don Rosa. I d hate for the accusations to start flying how we scared off another professional ..... I suspect with all his experience, he has a lot more to add to our ongoing discusions....

If this thread is gasoline I just like adding the match! Ya'll are more to watch then poking an antbed with a stick. I get back to you when it dies down.

Wow, I forget a few words and look like a knucklehead. Ya'll are more FUN to watch then poking an antbed with a stick.

[MrBedrock]

I think you just strengthened my cause.

 

No...you're just whining again about the NOD. First "panic and hysteria" and now "entitlement"...are there any other qualifiers you'd like to falsely interject?

 

Seriously, you where one of the proponents of people actually doing something, anything, concerning their issues in the hobby other than just posting on a Forum. People have actually taken action and now all you can do is slam them. Looks as if you're the one doing nothing but arguing on a Forum...

 

Jim

 

It's not the NOD that is doing this. It's Mark. The NOD's "Gallery of Disclosure" is supposed to be just for books that have been proven to have some work done to them. From what I saw of Mark's post to Richard, Mark was going to add Richard's books to the Gallery of Disclosure even though nothing had been done to them. Just the pure fact that the books got upgraded was enough to get added to the Gallery, apparently. And this isn't even something that the NOD addresses in its guidelines, either. From my reading of NOD guidelines, NOD members are not required to disclose that a book used to be a different CGC grade as long as the book wasn't "enhanced." Mark just seems to want to impose his personal preference for disclosure of prior CGC grades onto the NOD (or in this case, he wants to impose it on a dealer who is not even a member of the NOD), without the rest of the NOD voting on it or approving it, I presume. And more annoyingly, wants to call out a dealer who has a much longer and distinguished track record in this hobby than he does in order to advance his personal agenda. This is the kind of thing that I would have hoped the other, more reasonable NOD committee members would have frowned upon. Am I wrong about that? If so, then I do have a problem with the NOD acting like a bully to pressure other dealers to do what they want.

 

Actually, I will chime in. What you say hits on something I don't think the NOD has taken into account. There are dealers out there who are honest, do disclose as a regular course of business, and do treat their customers with care and respect. These dealers don't feel the NOD is offering anything above what they (the dealers) already offer themselves. But the NOD does seem to have an air of superiority about itself (rightly or wrongly perceived) that the dealers don't want to have any part of. Speaking for myself, whether you like me or not, none of you can find a case where I deceived anyone. But the whole point of my anecdote was that you could in the future if that's what you CHOOSE to believe. And most of you who would choose that are NOD members.

[blazingbob]

I didn't know it was possible to write with a Texas accent. I can almost hear the words.

[awe4one]

It's not the NOD that is doing this. It's Mark. The NOD's "Gallery of Disclosure" is supposed to be just for books that have been proven to have some work done to them. From what I saw of Mark's post to Richard, Mark was going to add Richard's books to the Gallery of Disclosure even though nothing had been done to them. Just the pure fact that the books got upgraded was enough to get added to the Gallery, apparently. And this isn't even something that the NOD addresses in its guidelines, either. From my reading of NOD guidelines, NOD members are not required to disclose that a book used to be a different CGC grade as long as the book wasn't "enhanced." Mark just seems to want to impose his personal preference for disclosure of prior CGC grades onto the NOD (or in this case, he wants to impose it on a dealer who is not even a member of the NOD), without the rest of the NOD voting on it or approving it, I presume. And more annoyingly, wants to call out a dealer who has a much longer and distinguished track record in this hobby than he does in order to advance his personal agenda. This is the kind of thing that I would have hoped the other, more reasonable NOD committee members would have frowned upon. Am I wrong about that? If so, then I do have a problem with the NOD acting like a bully to pressure other dealers to do what they want.

 

Now why can't you just post like this more often and refrain from the insults...

 

It's my understanding as well that only books that have had work done on them will be Gallery examples. That hasn't changed...and if it did, I'm sure there would be a vote. It's not the autocracy that you believe...

 

Jim

[Dad&Son-migration]

It's not the NOD that is doing this. It's Mark. The NOD's "Gallery of Disclosure" is supposed to be just for books that have been proven to have some work done to them. From what I saw of Mark's post to Richard, Mark was going to add Richard's books to the Gallery of Disclosure even though nothing had been done to them. Just the pure fact that the books got upgraded was enough to get added to the Gallery, apparently. And this isn't even something that the NOD addresses in its guidelines, either. From my reading of NOD guidelines, NOD members are not required to disclose that a book used to be a different CGC grade as long as the book wasn't "enhanced." Mark just seems to want to impose his personal preference for disclosure of prior CGC grades onto the NOD (or in this case, he wants to impose it on a dealer who is not even a member of the NOD), without the rest of the NOD voting on it or approving it, I presume. And more annoyingly, wants to call out a dealer who has a much longer and distinguished track record in this hobby than he does in order to advance his personal agenda. This is the kind of thing that I would have hoped the other, more reasonable NOD committee members would have frowned upon. Am I wrong about that? If so, then I do have a problem with the NOD acting like a bully to pressure other dealers to do what they want.

 

Actually, I will chime in. What you say hits on something I don't think the NOD has taken into account. There are dealers out there who are honest, do disclose as a regular course of business, and do treat their customers with care and respect. These dealers don't feel the NOD is offering anything above what they (the dealers) already offer themselves. But the NOD does seem to have an air of superiority about itself (rightly or wrongly perceived) that the dealers don't want to have any part of. Speaking for myself, whether you like me or not, none of you can find a case where I deceived anyone. But the whole point of my anecdote was that you could in the future if that's what you CHOOSE to believe. And most of you who would choose that are NOD members.

 

Speaking as a newer member of NOD... I chose to join because of my active and vocal stance that I don't believe pressing to be restoration. BUT... I will disclose it and if others won't disclose it I'm not about to hide behind a membership and pass judgement. I just want the people I would deal with to know my ethics in the hobby. I'm not speaking for any other members but myself. I do believe that overall, it is a good organization with the right intentions but I guess I'm too far removed from the convention scene and to get a taste of the melodrama that can ensue... I can see it in this thread.. and that's bad enough. I think people are intelligent enough to make a choice on who they would deal with in this hobby and many people are aware of the practices of others. I don't see NOD as an organization that is policing the hobby, but one that is trying to better it thru education and awareness. It is wrong if personal agendas and egos come in...that derails the entire premise..to me anyways.

[MrBedrock]

It's not the NOD that is doing this. It's Mark. The NOD's "Gallery of Disclosure" is supposed to be just for books that have been proven to have some work done to them. From what I saw of Mark's post to Richard, Mark was going to add Richard's books to the Gallery of Disclosure even though nothing had been done to them. Just the pure fact that the books got upgraded was enough to get added to the Gallery, apparently. And this isn't even something that the NOD addresses in its guidelines, either. From my reading of NOD guidelines, NOD members are not required to disclose that a book used to be a different CGC grade as long as the book wasn't "enhanced." Mark just seems to want to impose his personal preference for disclosure of prior CGC grades onto the NOD (or in this case, he wants to impose it on a dealer who is not even a member of the NOD), without the rest of the NOD voting on it or approving it, I presume. And more annoyingly, wants to call out a dealer who has a much longer and distinguished track record in this hobby than he does in order to advance his personal agenda. This is the kind of thing that I would have hoped the other, more reasonable NOD committee members would have frowned upon. Am I wrong about that? If so, then I do have a problem with the NOD acting like a bully to pressure other dealers to do what they want.

 

Actually, I will chime in. What you say hits on something I don't think the NOD has taken into account. There are dealers out there who are honest, do disclose as a regular course of business, and do treat their customers with care and respect. These dealers don't feel the NOD is offering anything above what they (the dealers) already offer themselves. But the NOD does seem to have an air of superiority about itself (rightly or wrongly perceived) that the dealers don't want to have any part of. Speaking for myself, whether you like me or not, none of you can find a case where I deceived anyone. But the whole point of my anecdote was that you could in the future if that's what you CHOOSE to believe. And most of you who would choose that are NOD members.

 

Speaking as a newer member of NOD... I chose to join because of my active and vocal stance that I don't believe pressing to be restoration. BUT... I will disclose it and if others won't disclose it I'm not about to hide behind a membership and pass judgement. I just want the people I would deal with to know my ethics in the hobby. I'm not speaking for any other members but myself. I do believe that overall, it is a good organization with the right intentions but I guess I'm too far removed from the convention scene and to get a taste of the melodrama that can ensue... I can see it in this thread.. and that's bad enough. I think people are intelligent enough to make a choice on who they would deal with in this hobby and many people are aware of the practices of others. I don't see NOD as an organization that is policing the hobby, but one that is trying to better it thru education and awareness. It is wrong if personal agendas and egos come in...that derails the entire premise..to me anyways.

 

Well said, and if all were like you I think NOD and all it is supposed to stand for would be roundly supported by those of us who have held back.

[DeeDee-migration]

I think you just strengthened my cause.

 

No...you're just whining again about the NOD. First "panic and hysteria" and now "entitlement"...are there any other qualifiers you'd like to falsely interject?

 

Seriously, you where one of the proponents of people actually doing something, anything, concerning their issues in the hobby other than just posting on a Forum. People have actually taken action and now all you can do is slam them. Looks as if you're the one doing nothing but arguing on a Forum...

 

Jim

 

It's not the NOD that is doing this. It's Mark. The NOD's "Gallery of Disclosure" is supposed to be just for books that have been proven to have some work done to them. From what I saw of Mark's post to Richard, Mark was going to add Richard's books to the Gallery of Disclosure even though nothing had been done to them. Just the pure fact that the books got upgraded was enough to get added to the Gallery, apparently. And this isn't even something that the NOD addresses in its guidelines, either. From my reading of NOD guidelines, NOD members are not required to disclose that a book used to be a different CGC grade as long as the book wasn't "enhanced." Mark just seems to want to impose his personal preference for disclosure of prior CGC grades onto the NOD (or in this case, he wants to impose it on a dealer who is not even a member of the NOD), without the rest of the NOD voting on it or approving it, I presume. And more annoyingly, wants to call out a dealer who has a much longer and distinguished track record in this hobby than he does in order to advance his personal agenda. This is the kind of thing that I would have hoped the other, more reasonable NOD committee members would have frowned upon. Am I wrong about that? If so, then I do have a problem with the NOD acting like a bully to pressure other dealers to do what they want.

 

Actually, I will chime in. What you say hits on something I don't think the NOD has taken into account. There are dealers out there who are honest, do disclose as a regular course of business, and do treat their customers with care and respect. These dealers don't feel the NOD is offering anything above what they (the dealers) already offer themselves. But the NOD does seem to have an air of superiority about itself (rightly or wrongly perceived) that the dealers don't want to have any part of. Speaking for myself, whether you like me or not, none of you can find a case where I deceived anyone. But the whole point of my anecdote was that you could in the future if that's what you CHOOSE to believe. And most of you who would choose that are NOD members.

 

Good for you! I've said this to several people. Nothing against NOD, but if I'm honest and i disclose everything about every book i sell already, why should i join? If you're an honest person and behave like one, you don't need any organization to put their seal of approval on you or pat you on the back for it. JMO.

[buttock]

somebody get Richard back to the table so he wont feel "run off" by our usual verbal shenanigans here like poor Don Rosa. I d hate for the accusations to start flying how we scared off another professional ..... I suspect with all his experience, he has a lot more to add to our ongoing discusions....

If this thread is gasoline I just like adding the match! Ya'll are more to watch then poking an antbed with a stick. I get back to you when it dies down.

Wow, I forget a few words and look like a knucklehead. Ya'll are more FUN to watch then poking an antbed with a stick.

 

That's alright. We knew you were a knucklehead anyway

[awe4one]

Good for you! I've said this to several people. Nothing against NOD, but if I'm honest and i disclose everything about every book i sell already, why should i join? If you're an honest person and behave like one, you don't need any organization to put their seal of approval on you or pat you on the back for it. JMO.

 

I agree...in a perfect world there's no need for an organization like NOD. But the comics hobby is, sadly, far from perfect...

 

Jim

[Dad&Son-migration]

Good for you! I've said this to several people. Nothing against NOD, but if I'm honest and i disclose everything about every book i sell already, why should i join? If you're an honest person and behave like one, you don't need any organization to put their seal of approval on you or pat you on the back for it. JMO.

 

I agree...in a perfect world there's no need for an organization like NOD. But the comics hobby is, sadly, far from perfect...

 

Jim

 

I will disagree... I think it brings a sense of trust. Like I said, I'm very open and a vocal proponent of pressing. Hence, I want people to know that I will be ethical and disclose it and I find NOD is a great outlet for someone like me that hasn't garnered a wide reputation.

[awe4one]

Good for you! I've said this to several people. Nothing against NOD, but if I'm honest and i disclose everything about every book i sell already, why should i join? If you're an honest person and behave like one, you don't need any organization to put their seal of approval on you or pat you on the back for it. JMO.

 

I agree...in a perfect world there's no need for an organization like NOD. But the comics hobby is, sadly, far from perfect...

 

Jim

 

I will disagree... I think it brings a sense of trust. Like I said, I'm very open and a vocal proponent of pressing. Hence, I want people to know that I will be ethical and disclose it and I find NOD is a great outlet for someone like me that hasn't garnered a wide reputation.

 

To be completely frank, I think the NOD is more than just making a name for individual members...

[MasterChief]

It's my understanding as well that only books that have had work done on them will be Gallery examples. That hasn't changed...and if it did, I'm sure there would be a vote. It's not the autocracy that you believe...

 

The Gallery is what it is. The Introduction spells that out rather clearly. There has been no chitchat about broadening the subject matter.

[Dad&Son-migration]

Good for you! I've said this to several people. Nothing against NOD, but if I'm honest and i disclose everything about every book i sell already, why should i join? If you're an honest person and behave like one, you don't need any organization to put their seal of approval on you or pat you on the back for it. JMO.

 

I agree...in a perfect world there's no need for an organization like NOD. But the comics hobby is, sadly, far from perfect...

 

Jim

 

I will disagree... I think it brings a sense of trust. Like I said, I'm very open and a vocal proponent of pressing. Hence, I want people to know that I will be ethical and disclose it and I find NOD is a great outlet for someone like me that hasn't garnered a wide reputation.

 

To be completely frank, I think the NOD is more than just making a name for individual members...

 

Yes.. you're right.. it should .. SHOULD.. be for education and awareness that done correctly.. will/should garner more respect. It is new so why be against that objective.. so many negative Neds around here...

[FFB]

It's not the NOD that is doing this. It's Mark. The NOD's "Gallery of Disclosure" is supposed to be just for books that have been proven to have some work done to them. From what I saw of Mark's post to Richard, Mark was going to add Richard's books to the Gallery of Disclosure even though nothing had been done to them. Just the pure fact that the books got upgraded was enough to get added to the Gallery, apparently. And this isn't even something that the NOD addresses in its guidelines, either. From my reading of NOD guidelines, NOD members are not required to disclose that a book used to be a different CGC grade as long as the book wasn't "enhanced." Mark just seems to want to impose his personal preference for disclosure of prior CGC grades onto the NOD (or in this case, he wants to impose it on a dealer who is not even a member of the NOD), without the rest of the NOD voting on it or approving it, I presume. And more annoyingly, wants to call out a dealer who has a much longer and distinguished track record in this hobby than he does in order to advance his personal agenda. This is the kind of thing that I would have hoped the other, more reasonable NOD committee members would have frowned upon. Am I wrong about that? If so, then I do have a problem with the NOD acting like a bully to pressure other dealers to do what they want.

 

Now why can't you just post like this more often and refrain from the insults...

 

It's my understanding as well that only books that have had work done on them will be Gallery examples. That hasn't changed...and if it did, I'm sure there would be a vote. It's not the autocracy that you believe...

 

Jim

 

I know it's not set up as an autocracy, but you seem to have one particular member who waves the NOD around like a holy staff of righteousness, and I'm sure you guys aren't voting on it whenever it happens.

[DeeDee-migration]

Good for you! I've said this to several people. Nothing against NOD, but if I'm honest and i disclose everything about every book i sell already, why should i join? If you're an honest person and behave like one, you don't need any organization to put their seal of approval on you or pat you on the back for it. JMO.

 

I agree...in a perfect world there's no need for an organization like NOD. But the comics hobby is, sadly, far from perfect...

 

Jim

 

Are you trying call me naive? Maybe I am, who cares. I admire the guy's honesty, that all there is to it.

[Aman619]

And more annoyingly, wants to call out a dealer who has a much longer and distinguished track record in this hobby than he does in order to advance his personal agenda

 

 

Ive heard this before and cant figure it out exactly. Not directed at you in particular, FFB, but since you mentioned it, would you (or anyone else) care to elaborate on just what you/they mean by "Zaid's personal agenda"? Is this a way of saying that he's trying to make a name for himself, leapfrogging more experienced collector/dealers who have more than a few years in the game?. Or is there more to it? And if thats it, how does that disqualify him from taking a stand, or the lead, or trying to organize some resistance to the prevailing trends...? He's not the only only here who's upset at certain actions going on.

 

IF SO, and as a result, Mark has to fall on his sword so that the idea succeeds a bit more or faster, lets discuss it..., Take Mark out of the spotlight and focus back on the issues.

[DeeDee-migration]

Good for you! I've said this to several people. Nothing against NOD, but if I'm honest and i disclose everything about every book i sell already, why should i join? If you're an honest person and behave like one, you don't need any organization to put their seal of approval on you or pat you on the back for it. JMO.

 

I agree...in a perfect world there's no need for an organization like NOD. But the comics hobby is, sadly, far from perfect...

 

Jim

 

I will disagree... I think it brings a sense of trust. Like I said, I'm very open and a vocal proponent of pressing. Hence, I want people to know that I will be ethical and disclose it and I find NOD is a great outlet for someone like me that hasn't garnered a wide reputation.

 

Like I said Paul, no attack intended. Just a difference of opinion. I would respect you and trust you just as much if you were not a member of NOD.