Manufactured Gold

[october]

What I find kind of troubling (and this is not directed at you, Brad) is how whenever someone trots out the Forbes article, they always neglect to mention Halperin's rebuttal even though they know it's out there.

 

If you are referring to me, I honestly didn't know it existed and If I read it in the past I forgot about it. It took 10 minutes of google searching to even find the Forbes article, as I could recall very little about it.

 

Cast your aspersions elsewhere.

[Red Hook]

I think that section you quoted was "clearly" presented as speculation, and not as fact. Do you seriously think that post is going to do any damage to Halperin or Heritage?

 

The poster knows more than he is comfortable sharing at this time publicly. You should really contact him directly and have a conversation with him, especially as you apparently have spent enough money with Heritage to buy a house or two. You see it as baseless speculation, I consider it a fairly intelligent attempt to put the pieces together.

 

I think even you would have to agree that the setup at Heritage could be seen as labyrinthine at best.

 

But I still would love examples of those career-and-reputation damaging hallucinogenic crackpot theories you referred to that are sending Heritage to the poorhouse and destorying the entire hobby.....and probably western civilization as we know it.

 

 

Red

[Red Hook]

What I find kind of troubling (and this is not directed at you, Brad) is how whenever someone trots out the Forbes article, they always neglect to mention Halperin's rebuttal even though they know it's out there.

 

If you are referring to me, I honestly didn't know it existed and If I read it in the past I forgot about it. It took 10 minutes of google searching to even find the Forbes article, as I could recall very little about it.

 

Cast your aspersions elsewhere.

 

I honestly forgot about both the article and the rebuttal and am glad they both made their appearances here in this thread.

[alecholland]

Here's how I might have done that. Notice how only the white is affected, the integrity of the other colors stays the same. Instead of brightening the image, I removed yellow from only the white. The change is more subtle.

 

[FFB]

 

A couple people had a question about scanning books. If a seller (Heritage, CL, Ebay seller, etc...) wanted to make the whites look whiter, it is no problem to do something like that in Photoshop. There are a variety of methods you can use to remove yellow from the whites in an image using Photoshop. You could even set up a recorded action that could be reused automatically on each image after scanning, eliminating the need to have someone sit and color correct each scan. I work with product photos all the time. I could make a yellow comic page look snow white with the click of one button, no problem.

 

Exactly.

 

Here's the same book, same holder, same serial number from two different venues, and judging from the glare, probably the exact same scan.

The left is Heritage and the right is eBay.

 

 

Some HP scanners are notorious for adding yellow to a scan to make a book appear more drab looking than it is in reality. I asked Brad how to fix this a year or so ago and he showed me how. Here's an example:

 

(Before color adjustment)

 

(After color adjustment)

 

The color-adjusted scan is how the book looks (although I probably should have bumped up the brightness, since the scan looks a little dark). If I hadn't adjusted the color, the scan would be misleading. The moral of the story is, just because someone adjusts color on a scan doesn't mean they're misrepresenting the book. They might be making the book look more like it does in real life. I know we've seen examples where this is not the case, but not every color adjustment means that funny business is going on.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

It would be bad business on Heritage's part to screw over most of their customers most of the time.

 

It would be equally bad business to pass on the opportunity to screw over some of their customers some of the time.

[FFB]

What I find kind of troubling (and this is not directed at you, Brad) is how whenever someone trots out the Forbes article, they always neglect to mention Halperin's rebuttal even though they know it's out there.

 

If you are referring to me, I honestly didn't know it existed and If I read it in the past I forgot about it. It took 10 minutes of google searching to even find the Forbes article, as I could recall very little about it.

 

Cast your aspersions elsewhere.

 

I was referring to you in part, but mainly Kevin since he has referenced it several times in the past without mentioning the rebuttal, and I KNOW he knows it's out there. If you were not aware of the rebuttal, then you get a free pass. But Kevin cannot claim ignorance and so he is busted.

[alecholland]

They might be making the book look more like it does in real life.

 

That's what I use it for. I don't sell comics, but my wife sells other things on Ebay and has me color correct to try to match exactly what the product looks like. She doesn't want the buyer to be surprised or disappointed when they receive their item. I would hope that is what most people are doing, but again large dollar signs usually make people a little wacky. I personally won't buy a book if I can tell the image has been manipulated and it's often very easy to spot, especially the overuse of the brightness/contrast settings. Some of those comics almost look saintly they are so bright.

[sacentaur]

Evidence of illegal and fraudulent activity is very difficult to come by due to a particular entity having near complete control of the situation. And having learned from past mistakes, they can learn to cover their bases very well.

 

Let's make two separations: the first is between what is illegal and what is unethical. Often they go hand in hand, but not always.

 

For example, Talk America (a long distance provider) has fine print in their online contract which says that they can raise and change fees any time they want. They bill directly online through Visa, and this is how they can gradually increase fees over time without being discovered. When later asked about the fees, they refuse to explain them. Their business model is to provide the veil of great customer service while cheating just some - not all - of their customers. So for every customer that calls them crooks, another steps up and relates how wonderful they are. Sound familiar?

 

The second separation is experience, which of course is valuable in framing our thoughts and perceptions. The mistake some of you are making is that you've had dealings that confirm your perception that everything is okie doakie at your level, and it probably was. It's like the neighbor telling the media what a nice guy the just discovered serial killer next door was. However, and I'm sorry to be blunt, the problem here is that you are nobody to them - they are not going to flim-flam just for your benefit, but mainly theirs...and only when it counts.

 

There is no 'smoking gun' yet that I've been made aware of, but when put together the pieces of the puzzle present a very clear picture - but then our eyes have to be open to see it.

 

STEVE Got Larson?

[Ze-man]

What I find kind of troubling (and this is not directed at you, Brad) is how whenever someone trots out the Forbes article, they always neglect to mention Halperin's rebuttal even though they know it's out there.

 

If you are referring to me, I honestly didn't know it existed and If I read it in the past I forgot about it. It took 10 minutes of google searching to even find the Forbes article, as I could recall very little about it.

 

Cast your aspersions elsewhere.

 

I was referring to you in part, but mainly Kevin since he has referenced it several times in the past without mentioning the rebuttal, and I KNOW he knows it's out there. If you were not aware of the rebuttal, then you get a free pass. But Kevin cannot claim ignorance and so he is busted.

 

Scott, just curious about your opinion on both articles. I was not sure if I should take your "trots out" comment that you thought the Forbes article was tripe. Or that you really just wanted both sides of that situation represented. Or something different altogether.

 

 

Thnx

 

Kenny

[sacentaur]

As far as his rebuttal to the Forbes article, I think my signature line explains it all.

 

STEVE

[Bullet123]

I think that section you quoted was "clearly" presented as speculation, and not as fact. Do you seriously think that post is going to do any damage to Halperin or Heritage?

 

 

The poster knows more than he is comfortable sharing at this time publicly. You should really contact him directly and have a conversation with him, especially as you apparently have spent enough money with Heritage to buy a house or two. You see it as baseless speculation, I consider it a fairly intelligent attempt to put the pieces together.

 

I think even you would have to agree that the setup at Heritage could be seen as labyrinthine at best.

 

But I still would love examples of those career-and-reputation damaging hallucinogenic crackpot theories you referred to that are sending Heritage to the poorhouse and destorying the entire hobby.....and probably western civilization as we know it.

 

 

Red

 

Its not damage to Heritage. Its damage to the hobby you claim to have as much vested interest in as me ( not $ but love for the medium). When a new collector comes on the scene and reads threads like this where people cast dispersions about others without proof it sheds a bad light not only on the medium but the collectors of that medium as well. In my brief time in collecting comics, I have met many interesting people from all walks of life who truly enjoy collecting the medium for many different reasons. If I was a newbie and came to these boards I would think this hobby is nothing but a cesspool of the lowest form of pond scum to exist on the planet and while that would cover a few in the hobby, it is neither the norm or the rule by which most in this hobby follow.

[FFB]

What I find kind of troubling (and this is not directed at you, Brad) is how whenever someone trots out the Forbes article, they always neglect to mention Halperin's rebuttal even though they know it's out there.

 

If you are referring to me, I honestly didn't know it existed and If I read it in the past I forgot about it. It took 10 minutes of google searching to even find the Forbes article, as I could recall very little about it.

 

Cast your aspersions elsewhere.

 

I was referring to you in part, but mainly Kevin since he has referenced it several times in the past without mentioning the rebuttal, and I KNOW he knows it's out there. If you were not aware of the rebuttal, then you get a free pass. But Kevin cannot claim ignorance and so he is busted.

 

Scott, just curious about your opinion on both articles. I was not sure if I should take your "trots out" comment that you thought the Forbes article was tripe. Or that you really just wanted both sides of that situation represented. Or something different altogether.

 

 

Thnx

 

Kenny

 

My take on the article, as I've said before, is that Halperin's explanations make logical sense to me and he even backs up one of his rebuttals on the main thrust of the argument with a letter from the former head of the FTC, who wrote that the FTC never should have targeted Heritage for what Certified Rare Coin Galleries did, because CRCG was merely a customer of Heritage's and thus Heritage had no control over CRCG. My take on the Forbes article is that the "journalist" who wrote it was trying hard to make the piece as sensationalistic and controversial as possible. It is not an unbiased, fair-minded piece and thus I don't view it as "journalism" so much as something intended to shock people and sell magazines. There may be some valid points here and there in the article, but they are hard to pick out amid all of the bias and anti-Halperin spin.

 

This is not to say that there aren't valid concerns about Heritage's auction setup, the crack-and-resub game, employee bidding, and other Heritage issues we've talked about before. I am simply stating that I do not view the article as anything other than a biased hatchet job, and certainly not as a fair-minded piece of journalism. The article is one step removed from something I'd expect to see in the National Enquirer.

 

Clear enough?

[THE_BEYONDER]

I think that section you quoted was "clearly" presented as speculation, and not as fact. Do you seriously think that post is going to do any damage to Halperin or Heritage?

 

 

The poster knows more than he is comfortable sharing at this time publicly. You should really contact him directly and have a conversation with him, especially as you apparently have spent enough money with Heritage to buy a house or two. You see it as baseless speculation, I consider it a fairly intelligent attempt to put the pieces together.

 

I think even you would have to agree that the setup at Heritage could be seen as labyrinthine at best.

 

But I still would love examples of those career-and-reputation damaging hallucinogenic crackpot theories you referred to that are sending Heritage to the poorhouse and destorying the entire hobby.....and probably western civilization as we know it.

 

 

Red

 

Its not damage to Heritage. Its damage to the hobby you claim to have as much vested interest in as me ( not $ but love for the medium). When a new collector comes on the scene and reads threads like this where people cast dispersions about others without proof it sheds a bad light not only on the medium but the collectors of that medium as well. In my brief time in collecting comics, I have met many interesting people from all walks of life who truly enjoy collecting the medium for many different reasons. If I was a newbie and came to these boards I would think this hobby is nothing but a cesspool of the lowest form of pond scum to exist on the planet and while that would cover a few in the hobby, it is neither the norm or the rule by which most in this hobby follow.

 

Outside ensuring that one has someone to sell their books to in the future, what possible reason is there to concern oneself with the influx of new collectors?

[Red Hook]

 

Its not damage to Heritage. Its damage to the hobby you claim to have as much vested interest in as me ( not $ but love for the medium). When a new collector comes on the scene and reads threads like this where people cast dispersions about others without proof it sheds a bad light not only on the medium but the collectors of that medium as well. In my brief time in collecting comics, I have met many interesting people from all walks of life who truly enjoy collecting the medium for many different reasons. If I was a newbie and came to these boards I would think this hobby is nothing but a cesspool of the lowest form of pond scum to exist on the planet and while that would cover a few in the hobby, it is neither the norm or the rule by which most in this hobby follow.

 

So we're the ones doing damage to the hobby? How very Alice-in-Wonderland of you.

 

I don't recall any "collectors" getting taken out to the woodshed here.....go back and check my "list" of things I consider facts. Not one of them mentions collectors.

 

I think a newbie might come on here, read for a while and breathe a sigh of relief that there are fellow collectors extremely concerned about some of the practices in the hobby, and be thankful that there are people watching out for their interests and their money. I can't count the times a new arrivee on the boards has expressed appreciation for the fact that these threads exist. And they manage to stick around and share their love for the books and the art.

 

I can't recall every having a new poster mention that he'd come away with a bad impression of "collectors" from reading these threads. Get a grip, son.

 

You want to drive a newbie from the hobby? Then let him bid on a Ewert book on Comiclink, and find out afterwards what he got stuck with. If he ever even finds out.

 

You obviously have read only a narrow sampling of posts on the boards. You don't know me. I've made good friends in this hobby and I enjoy talking to dealers and collectors at the cons I attend. I enjoy collecting and I enjoy talking comics. I wish we didn't have to be concerned with the baloney going on in the hobby in some areas. But that's the way it is. It's way too late to take the blue pill.

 

I completely refute your claim that threads like these cast "aspersion" on collectors. That couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Red

 

PS....still waiting for links and examples of those crazy anarchist threads you keep referring to.

[Bullet123]

I think that section you quoted was "clearly" presented as speculation, and not as fact. Do you seriously think that post is going to do any damage to Halperin or Heritage?

 

 

The poster knows more than he is comfortable sharing at this time publicly. You should really contact him directly and have a conversation with him, especially as you apparently have spent enough money with Heritage to buy a house or two. You see it as baseless speculation, I consider it a fairly intelligent attempt to put the pieces together.

 

I think even you would have to agree that the setup at Heritage could be seen as labyrinthine at best.

 

But I still would love examples of those career-and-reputation damaging hallucinogenic crackpot theories you referred to that are sending Heritage to the poorhouse and destorying the entire hobby.....and probably western civilization as we know it.

 

 

Red

 

Its not damage to Heritage. Its damage to the hobby you claim to have as much vested interest in as me ( not $ but love for the medium). When a new collector comes on the scene and reads threads like this where people cast dispersions about others without proof it sheds a bad light not only on the medium but the collectors of that medium as well. In my brief time in collecting comics, I have met many interesting people from all walks of life who truly enjoy collecting the medium for many different reasons. If I was a newbie and came to these boards I would think this hobby is nothing but a cesspool of the lowest form of pond scum to exist on the planet and while that would cover a few in the hobby, it is neither the norm or the rule by which most in this hobby follow.

 

Outside ensuring that one has someone to sell their books to in the future, what possible reason is there to concern oneself with the influx of new collectors?

 

Because I, as a fellow collector enjoy meeting new people and hearing their stories about why they collect and how they got started. I also enjoy seeing books from genres that I do not collect as that sometimes gets me to take a look at things I either never knew existed or never gave a chance. Is it your mission to chase everyone away from the hobby with your scary bedtimes stories about the creepy dealers and shady collectors out there. If that is your mission, when you are the last one left, please shut the lights off on the way out the door.

[THE_BEYONDER]

The use of the term "medium" seems to be implying that threads like this cast asperations on the comics themselves.

[Red Hook]

 

Because I, as a fellow collector enjoy meeting new people and hearing their stories about why they collect and how they got started. I also enjoy seeing books from genres that I do not collect as that sometimes gets me to take a look at things I either never knew existed or never gave a chance. Is it your mission to chase everyone away from the hobby with your scary bedtimes stories about the creepy dealers and shady collectors out there. If that is your mission, when you are the last one left, please shut the lights off on the way out the door.

 

You seem to feel that threads of the type you describe above cannot exist side by side with threads like these. You are wrong. They've existed side-by-side since the boards started. And there has been no noticeable dropoff in sales, prices realized or number of high grade books coming to market.

 

Most collectors are mature and realistic enough to absorb both the good and bad about the hobby and not go looking for the first exit to Lotus Eater Land.

[THE_BEYONDER]

I think that section you quoted was "clearly" presented as speculation, and not as fact. Do you seriously think that post is going to do any damage to Halperin or Heritage?

 

 

The poster knows more than he is comfortable sharing at this time publicly. You should really contact him directly and have a conversation with him, especially as you apparently have spent enough money with Heritage to buy a house or two. You see it as baseless speculation, I consider it a fairly intelligent attempt to put the pieces together.

 

I think even you would have to agree that the setup at Heritage could be seen as labyrinthine at best.

 

But I still would love examples of those career-and-reputation damaging hallucinogenic crackpot theories you referred to that are sending Heritage to the poorhouse and destorying the entire hobby.....and probably western civilization as we know it.

 

 

Red

 

Its not damage to Heritage. Its damage to the hobby you claim to have as much vested interest in as me ( not $ but love for the medium). When a new collector comes on the scene and reads threads like this where people cast dispersions about others without proof it sheds a bad light not only on the medium but the collectors of that medium as well. In my brief time in collecting comics, I have met many interesting people from all walks of life who truly enjoy collecting the medium for many different reasons. If I was a newbie and came to these boards I would think this hobby is nothing but a cesspool of the lowest form of pond scum to exist on the planet and while that would cover a few in the hobby, it is neither the norm or the rule by which most in this hobby follow.

 

Outside ensuring that one has someone to sell their books to in the future, what possible reason is there to concern oneself with the influx of new collectors?

 

Because I, as a fellow collector enjoy meeting new people and hearing their stories about why they collect and how they got started. I also enjoy seeing books from genres that I do not collect as that sometimes gets me to take a look at things I either never knew existed or never gave a chance. Is it your mission to chase everyone away from the hobby with your scary bedtimes stories about the creepy dealers and shady collectors out there. If that is your mission, when you are the last one left, please shut the lights off on the way out the door.

 

I can't even respond to this jibberish. You must really believe we're as stupid your posts.

[nik]

I kind of understand where Bullet123 is coming from.

 

On one hand we enjoy this hobby and try like heck to promote it to new blood.

 

On the other hand we tend to show more of the wrongdoings thus hurting the hobby we are trying to promote for new people and even seasoned collectors.