Manufactured Gold

[THE_BEYONDER]

I thought that at first, but why is the break purple rather than grey?

 

Just curious....

[FFB]

This next case is pretty interesting in and of itself. Not because the issue is currently ranked #32 on Overstreet's list of most valuable Golden Age books, but rather for the reason that it presents some interesting points of study between the graded versions.

 

***************

 

All Winners Comics #1

 

Described as a "dazzling copy" in its March 6, 2003 auction debut, this CGC graded 8.5 Golden Age key sported a clearly identifiable dust shadow along its left front-cover edge.

 

Appearing again seven months later, the 1941 Timely was re-graded as a 9.2 and branded with a description befitting its newly certified grade. With special emphasis on its census topping position, the copy achieved a purchase price 180% greater than its original close. The clarity and depth of the dust shadow was somehow minimized.

 

It was definitely dry cleaned. Dust shadows are easily minimized with light strokes of an eraser. They're nothing more than time-compacted dust sitting on top of the cover inks, with perhaps some of the dust ingrained into the paper and adhering to the inks themselves. If a dust shadow is on a colored area, it may not come out all the way, but can be significantly minimized. But on a white area, they can often be completely or almost completely removed. You can be sure that the dust shadow wasn't removed with an aqueous cleaning, because an aqueous cleaning will just muddy the dust shadow and cause it to set more deeply and permanently into the paper fibers. (This is paper conservation 101, by the way. You can read up some more on this topic in the articles on Stanford's Conservation Online website. I've copied some of the articles on the boards before.)

 

Perhaps the cleaning was by dry technique with specific attention to the oxidation shadow and the soiled areas of the spine and lower-rear cover. It is interesting to note the marked change in the consistency of the shadow within the yellow region above the cape. In contrast, there is little, if any, change to the red cape and yellow portion directly beneath it. The area below Sub-Mariner's arm remains unchanged.

 

There's a difference between a dust shadow and an oxidation shadow. A dust shadow is easily removed with an eraser. An oxidation shadow isn't. Unlike a dust shadow, an oxidation shadow can be minimized or removed by aqueous cleaning (and also by a bleaching). An oxidation shadow is just a strip of tanned paper. This one is definitely a dust shadow.

[FFB]

Was color-touch missed? Look at the 10cent price circle. There is a break in the circle in the 1st scan....but none in the second.

 

Who would risk a PLOD by color touching a tiny spot like that, where it wouldn't affect the grade anyway? I don't think it's color touch. More likely a scanner artifact.

[FFB]

And of course, my next question is this -- what does this example mean to those of you who said that you focus on old label slabs to avoid resubs? Here, the resub is obviously in an old label slab, and so it doesn't seem like sticking to old label slabs will insure that you're getting a book that hasn't been cleaned or pressed.

[awe4one]

And of course, my next question is this -- what does this example mean to those of you who said that you focus on old label slabs to avoid resubs? Here, the resub is obviously in an old label slab, and so it doesn't seem like sticking to old label slabs will insure that you're getting a book that hasn't been cleaned or pressed.

 

Of course it's no insurance...but the chances are greatly diminished. I'll take the odds an old label slab is untouched over a new label everytime...

 

Jim

[FFB]

And of course, my next question is this -- what does this example mean to those of you who said that you focus on old label slabs to avoid resubs? Here, the resub is obviously in an old label slab, and so it doesn't seem like sticking to old label slabs will insure that you're getting a book that hasn't been cleaned or pressed.

 

Of course it's no insurance...but the chances are greatly diminished. I'll take the odds an old label slab is untouched over a new label everytime...

 

Jim

 

You know, Jim, I'm not sure that's true. People knew what dry cleaning was long before CGC and there are tons of GA books with dust shadows or dirty sections on white covers.

[MasterChief]

It was definitely dry cleaned.

 

That is my bet also. I was going to add that the treatment was probably done using a combination of materials (e.g., cleaning pad, groom stick, erasers) but declined as I was getting in over my head.

 

 

There's a difference between a dust shadow and an oxidation shadow.

 

 

Very interesting comment regarding dust & oxidation shadow.

 

I was led to believe they were one in the same. Mainly because Overstreet has the terms defined with the same wording. Thanks for the clarification.

 

--MC

[Red Hook]

And of course, my next question is this -- what does this example mean to those of you who said that you focus on old label slabs to avoid resubs? Here, the resub is obviously in an old label slab, and so it doesn't seem like sticking to old label slabs will insure that you're getting a book that hasn't been cleaned or pressed.

 

Of course it's no insurance...but the chances are greatly diminished. I'll take the odds an old label slab is untouched over a new label everytime...

 

Jim

 

You know, Jim, I'm not sure that's true. People knew what dry cleaning was long before CGC and there are tons of GA books with dust shadows or dirty sections on white covers.

 

 

I would claim that the risk would be reduced with SILVER AGE books....ie going with older CGC labeling. No guarantees for sure. Also, older labels on GA books might be an assurance that the book has not been resubbed multiple times. Again, just playing the odds, no guarantees.

 

Red

[awe4one]

And of course, my next question is this -- what does this example mean to those of you who said that you focus on old label slabs to avoid resubs? Here, the resub is obviously in an old label slab, and so it doesn't seem like sticking to old label slabs will insure that you're getting a book that hasn't been cleaned or pressed.

 

Of course it's no insurance...but the chances are greatly diminished. I'll take the odds an old label slab is untouched over a new label everytime...

 

Jim

 

You know, Jim, I'm not sure that's true. People knew what dry cleaning was long before CGC and there are tons of GA books with dust shadows or dirty sections on white covers.

 

GA is at the greatest risk with the old labels. But with the press and clean factories, Jason Ewert and Matt Nelson being the most notable but not the only examples, focusing their efforts on SA/BA late in the old label reign, the chances of worked on SA/BA comics in new labels are much greater than old.

 

Jim

[tth2]

Bullet, I am confused. If nobody turned over stones, then everybody who has something to hide would remain hidden , as they would like it. I for one would rather wade through all the posts, good and bad, ugly, and walk away more informed about my hobby. Then sit with my nose in a funny book and let the people making the most money in our hobby tell me what I should, and should not worry about.

Kenny, I think Bullet123 already answered this question, in the post that you actually quoted, when he said

 

"I have no problem with these threads. When the thread sticks to factual information such as your side by side scans. It is when people go off and spew unsubstantiated venom aimed at either impuning ones integrity or reputation that it bothers me."

 

This is my precise problem too. Like Bullet123, I had no comments in this thread when MasterChief was listing upgraded books (except when he misidentified a less transparent book as being the result of some paper restoration), or in previous threads when people identified upgraded books and where the upgraded book had been originally sold and was being resold. Or the threads about books showing up on Lewis Wayne's website. Them's the facts, and there is no arguing with them, and people's eyes should be opened to what is going on. I have no problem with that.

 

What I don't like is when people going beyond the facts to speculate in a harmful manner because there are no repercussions for them doing so. I will continue to protest when I see this happening, even if the "cool kids" like Brad think I'm a dork or teacher's pet for doing so (and broadcast their opinion of me at the top of their lungs). Bob and I keep raising first hand facts from our actual experiences in dealing with Heritage. These facts continue to be dismissed offhand because it doesn't fit the conspiracists' theories. Well, until they provide me with a smoking gun or a clear factual linkage, I will continue to protest the unfair speculation that goes on here.

 

If they end up proving with facts that their allegations were correct all along, I will gladly eat crow publicly. It certainly won't be the first time in my life I've done that.

But has anyone ever considered that with all the people that have worked at Heritage or CGC over the last 6 years, with quite a number of ex-employees now, if something really dirty was really going on, wouldn't SOMEONE have spilled the beans by now? If Jim Halperin was really the devil incarnate, wouldn't some angry ex-employee have said something by now? It's happened with tobacco companies, pharmaceutical companies, nuclear power companies, religious cults, etc. Why not here?

 

Finally, I'm really insulted by Brad's insinuation that my defense of Heritage is purely out of self interest. It's too bad his small-mindedness can't wrap itself around the fact that I might want to defend a principle and try to stop the shameless and harmful speculation that has become these boards' bread and butter. But, I will address those issues with him directly in a PM.

 

It works both ways. We all(as a group) should remember to be more open to both sides of every story.

Kenny, the problem is that in fact on these boards there are no both sides of the story. As I keep pointing out with my high school analogy, the only acceptable chain of thought is to knock everything. Those who don't follow the group thought are shouted down and labeled as pollyanas, dorks, apologists, etc. When I raised my defense here, Brad's response was to attack my integrity, because in his world view the only reason I could possibly have for disagreeing with him is that I'm dirty too.

[Ze-man]

Bullet, I am confused. If nobody turned over stones, then everybody who has something to hide would remain hidden , as they would like it. I for one would rather wade through all the posts, good and bad, ugly, and walk away more informed about my hobby. Then sit with my nose in a funny book and let the people making the most money in our hobby tell me what I should, and should not worry about.

Kenny, I think Bullet123 already answered this question, in the post that you actually quoted, when he said

 

"I have no problem with these threads. When the thread sticks to factual information such as your side by side scans. It is when people go off and spew unsubstantiated venom aimed at either impuning ones integrity or reputation that it bothers me."

 

This is my precise problem too. Like Bullet123, I had no comments in this thread when MasterChief was listing upgraded books (except when he misidentified a less transparent book as being the result of some paper restoration), or in previous threads when people identified upgraded books and where the upgraded book had been originally sold and was being resold. Or the threads about books showing up on Lewis Wayne's website. Them's the facts, and there is no arguing with them, and people's eyes should be opened to what is going on. I have no problem with that.

 

What I don't like is when people going beyond the facts to speculate in a harmful manner because there are no repercussions for them doing so. I will continue to protest when I see this happening, even if the "cool kids" like Brad think I'm a dork or teacher's pet for doing so (and broadcast their opinion of me at the top of their lungs). Bob and I keep raising first hand facts from our actual experiences in dealing with Heritage. These facts continue to be dismissed offhand because it doesn't fit the conspiracists' theories. Well, until they provide me with a smoking gun or a clear factual linkage, I will continue to protest the unfair speculation that goes on here.

 

If they end up proving with facts that their allegations were correct all along, I will gladly eat crow publicly. It certainly won't be the first time in my life I've done that.

But has anyone ever considered that with all the people that have worked at Heritage or CGC over the last 6 years, with quite a number of ex-employees now, if something really dirty was really going on, wouldn't SOMEONE have spilled the beans by now? If Jim Halperin was really the devil incarnate, wouldn't some angry ex-employee have said something by now? It's happened with tobacco companies, pharmaceutical companies, nuclear power companies, religious cults, etc. Why not here?

 

Finally, I'm really insulted by Brad's insinuation that my defense of Heritage is purely out of self interest. It's too bad his small-mindedness can't wrap itself around the fact that I might want to defend a principle and try to stop the shameless and harmful speculation that has become these boards' bread and butter. But, I will address those issues with him directly in a PM.

 

It works both ways. We all(as a group) should remember to be more open to both sides of every story.

Kenny, the problem is that in fact on these boards there are no both sides of the story. As I keep pointing out with my high school analogy, the only acceptable chain of thought is to knock everything. Those who don't follow the group thought are shouted down and labeled as pollyanas, dorks, apologists, etc. When I raised my defense here, Brad's response was to attack my integrity, because in his world view the only reason I could possibly have for disagreeing with him is that I'm dirty too.

 

Meet me halfway, I admit all things might not be doom and gloom if you admit all things are not as they appear.

 

Convincing you was not on my agenda, but continuing to talk serves both sides. Call me, willya.. pm sent. Talking about this might prove benificial to both of us. And possibly resolve more then 25 posts could.

 

My interest lies WITH the hobby, as do yours.

 

But yet we are still divided.

[FFB]

And of course, my next question is this -- what does this example mean to those of you who said that you focus on old label slabs to avoid resubs? Here, the resub is obviously in an old label slab, and so it doesn't seem like sticking to old label slabs will insure that you're getting a book that hasn't been cleaned or pressed.

 

Of course it's no insurance...but the chances are greatly diminished. I'll take the odds an old label slab is untouched over a new label everytime...

 

Jim

 

You know, Jim, I'm not sure that's true. People knew what dry cleaning was long before CGC and there are tons of GA books with dust shadows or dirty sections on white covers.

 

GA is at the greatest risk with the old labels. But with the press and clean factories, Jason Ewert and Matt Nelson being the most notable but not the only examples, focusing their efforts on SA/BA late in the old label reign, the chances of worked on SA/BA comics in new labels are much greater than old.

 

Jim

 

I'll give you that as to Bronze. Silver, I don't know.

[Harvey Dude]

And of course, my next question is this -- what does this example mean to those of you who said that you focus on old label slabs to avoid resubs? Here, the resub is obviously in an old label slab, and so it doesn't seem like sticking to old label slabs will insure that you're getting a book that hasn't been cleaned or pressed.

 

I knew this funny business was going on back in the day but I viewed it more as very limited in scope. I believe the press and resubmit operation has exploded over the last several years. The documented healthy profits that can be attained, CGCs tacit approval over the process and services that offer exclusive pressing as a means to increase profits (remember PCS?) all are contributors to an explosion in this environment. I am only buying old label books myself, unless it is some rare copy that I really need.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Bullet, I am confused. If nobody turned over stones, then everybody who has something to hide would remain hidden , as they would like it. I for one would rather wade through all the posts, good and bad, ugly, and walk away more informed about my hobby. Then sit with my nose in a funny book and let the people making the most money in our hobby tell me what I should, and should not worry about.

Kenny, I think Bullet123 already answered this question, in the post that you actually quoted, when he said

 

"I have no problem with these threads. When the thread sticks to factual information such as your side by side scans. It is when people go off and spew unsubstantiated venom aimed at either impuning ones integrity or reputation that it bothers me."

 

This is my precise problem too. Like Bullet123, I had no comments in this thread when MasterChief was listing upgraded books (except when he misidentified a less transparent book as being the result of some paper restoration), or in previous threads when people identified upgraded books and where the upgraded book had been originally sold and was being resold. Or the threads about books showing up on Lewis Wayne's website. Them's the facts, and there is no arguing with them, and people's eyes should be opened to what is going on. I have no problem with that.

 

Even if you did, what could you possibly say?

 

What I don't like is when people going beyond the facts to speculate in a harmful manner because there are no repercussions for them doing so. I will continue to protest when I see this happening, even if the "cool kids" like Brad think I'm a dork or teacher's pet for doing so (and broadcast their opinion of me at the top of their lungs). Bob and I keep raising first hand facts from our actual experiences in dealing with Heritage. These facts continue to be dismissed offhand because it doesn't fit the conspiracists' theories. Well, until they provide me with a smoking gun or a clear factual linkage, I will continue to protest the unfair speculation that goes on here.

 

You said exactly the same thing regarding Jason Ewert

 

If they end up proving with facts that their allegations were correct all along, I will gladly eat crow publicly. It certainly won't be the first time in my life I've done that.

But has anyone ever considered that with all the people that have worked at Heritage or CGC over the last 6 years, with quite a number of ex-employees now, if something really dirty was really going on, wouldn't SOMEONE have spilled the beans by now? If Jim Halperin was really the devil incarnate, wouldn't some angry ex-employee have said something by now? It's happened with tobacco companies, pharmaceutical companies, nuclear power companies, religious cults, etc. Why not here?

 

What possible benefit could one have for doing so?

 

Finally, I'm really insulted by Brad's insinuation that my defense of Heritage is purely out of self interest. It's too bad his small-mindedness can't wrap itself around the fact that I might want to defend a principle and try to stop the shameless and harmful speculation that has become these boards' bread and butter. But, I will address those issues with him directly in a PM.

 

It works both ways. We all(as a group) should remember to be more open to both sides of every story.

Kenny, the problem is that in fact on these boards there are no both sides of the story. As I keep pointing out with my high school analogy, the only acceptable chain of thought is to knock everything. Those who don't follow the group thought are shouted down and labeled as pollyanas, dorks, apologists, etc. When I raised my defense here, Brad's response was to attack my integrity, because in his world view the only reason I could possibly have for disagreeing with him is that I'm dirty too.

 

I didn't read anything that implied you were 'dirty', only that you were either attempting to protect your bottom-line...in denial...or both.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I remember two years ago being personally hung, drawn and quartered by the masses for suggesting the existence of an in-house book manipulation arm of CGC. I was repeatedly told that, unless I could produce a confession, signed in blood by Steve Borock, I would not be believed and I had no right to besmirch the good name of the Sarasota boys.

 

Anyone remember PCS?

 

As far as I'm concerned, carry on with the educated speculation...

[drbanner]

I remember two years ago being personally hung, drawn and quartered by the masses for suggesting the existence of an in-house book manipulation arm of CGC. I was repeatedly told that, unless I could produce a confession, signed in blood by Steve Borock, I would not be believed and I had no right to besmirch the good name of the Sarasota boys.

 

Anyone remember PCS?

 

As far as I'm concerned, carry on with the educated speculation...

 

Sorry Nick, but PCS did not validate that CGC was already operating an "in-house book manipulation arm of CGC" before they made the PCS announcement. I can pull up the old threads, but you were not personally hung, drawn, and quartered. In fact, I confirmed that you told me that CGC would be starting such a service before CGC made the announcement.

 

I believe the rumor of CGC pressing books in-house for select customers PRIOR to PCS has been looked into by others, and to date, has never been confirmed.

[THE_BEYONDER]

[Red Hook]

I remember two years ago being personally hung, drawn and quartered by the masses for suggesting the existence of an in-house book manipulation arm of CGC. I was repeatedly told that, unless I could produce a confession, signed in blood by Steve Borock, I would not be believed and I had no right to besmirch the good name of the Sarasota boys.

 

Anyone remember PCS?

 

As far as I'm concerned, carry on with the educated speculation...

 

Sorry Nick, but PCS did not validate that CGC was already operating an "in-house book manipulation arm of CGC" before they made the PCS announcement. I can pull up the old threads, but you were not personally hung, drawn, and quartered. In fact, I confirmed that you told me that CGC would be starting such a service before CGC made the announcement.

 

I believe the rumor of CGC pressing books in-house for select customers PRIOR to PCS has been looked into by others, and to date, has never been confirmed.

 

I directly asked Steve Borock if CGC and/or Chris Freisen had been involved in that type of operation. I asked it openly, here on the boards. He refused to answer me. He had the opportunity to refute what I had heard from several sources and he chose not to do so.

 

Them's the facts. Draw your own conclusion.

[drbanner]

I remember two years ago being personally hung, drawn and quartered by the masses for suggesting the existence of an in-house book manipulation arm of CGC. I was repeatedly told that, unless I could produce a confession, signed in blood by Steve Borock, I would not be believed and I had no right to besmirch the good name of the Sarasota boys.

 

Anyone remember PCS?

 

As far as I'm concerned, carry on with the educated speculation...

 

Sorry Nick, but PCS did not validate that CGC was already operating an "in-house book manipulation arm of CGC" before they made the PCS announcement. I can pull up the old threads, but you were not personally hung, drawn, and quartered. In fact, I confirmed that you told me that CGC would be starting such a service before CGC made the announcement.

 

I believe the rumor of CGC pressing books in-house for select customers PRIOR to PCS has been looked into by others, and to date, has never been confirmed.

 

I directly asked Steve Borock if CGC and/or Chris Freisen had been involved in that type of operation. I asked it openly, here on the boards. He refused to answer me. He had the opportunity to refute what I had heard from several sources and he chose not to do so.

 

Them's the facts. Draw your own conclusion.

 

These rumors were discussed at length in the "Is this where the hobby is going?" and the "Answers from Steve Borock" thread (among others), and on one of those threads, you yourself said it was time for the source of the rumor to lay their cards on the table regarding this allegation, but no hand was ever dealt.

 

I'm not going to get into it again here, other than to say they remain in the "unsubstantiated rumors" category. However, I will point out that this is exactly what Tim and Bullet are referring to when they say:

 

What I don't like is when people going beyond the facts to speculate in a harmful manner because there are no repercussions for them doing so.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Just because someone won't hand you the smoking gun on a silver platter, doesn't mean they are speculating.