Manufactured Gold

[nearmint]

Do we even know if Matt submits books that he owns and has worked on? If not, I'm not sure why you're asking the question.

 

Yes, he does.

 

And he claims that if you ask him what was done to a book before he submitted it, he will give you the precise details.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're referring to books he's pressed. We're talking about work that CGC considers restoration.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Are you suggesting that Matt doesn't own any of the books he works on & submits to CGC?

 

Now you're just being silly...

 

I'm sure Matt submits books he's pressed and wants to sell on eBay. But if you're talking about books he owns and restores, why would Matt waste the $$ submitting them to CGC? If he wants to sell such a book, he's certainly more qualified to detail what work was done, because he did the work. What does he need CGC for?

 

Now you've lost me. Let's just agree to disagree so I can get on with my evening.

[nearmint]

Are you suggesting that Matt doesn't own any of the books he works on & submits to CGC?

 

Now you're just being silly...

 

I'm sure Matt submits books he's pressed and wants to sell on eBay. But if you're talking about books he owns and restores, why would Matt waste the $$ submitting them to CGC? If he wants to sell such a book, he's certainly more qualified to detail what work was done, because he did the work. What does he need CGC for?

 

Now you've lost me. Let's just agree to disagree so I can get on with my evening.

 

Have a nice night. Think I'll go for a walk with the wife.

[THE_BEYONDER]

[Flaming_Telepath]

Do we even know if Matt submits books that he owns and has worked on? If not, I'm not sure why you're asking the question.

 

Yes, he does.

 

And he claims that if you ask him what was done to a book before he submitted it, he will give you the precise details.

 

 

You're referring to books he's pressed. We're talking about work that CGC considers restoration.

 

GIven the recent 'disassembly isn't restoration' declaration, are we sure that what Matt does is limited to NDP?

[nearmint]

Do we even know if Matt submits books that he owns and has worked on? If not, I'm not sure why you're asking the question.

 

Yes, he does.

 

And he claims that if you ask him what was done to a book before he submitted it, he will give you the precise details.

 

 

You're referring to books he's pressed. We're talking about work that CGC considers restoration.

 

GIven the recent 'disassembly isn't restoration' declaration, are we sure that what Matt does is limited to NDP?

 

In regards to this discussion, it doesn't matter. We're talking about whether Matt tries to pass restored books off as unrestored when he submits to CGC. If CGC doesn't consider disassembly pressing to be resto, then Matt, or any other resto expert, wouldn't need to pass it off.

 

Your right that Matt doesn't disclose pressing unless asked, but I've never heard anyone accuse him of not fully disclosing restoration(as CGC defines it).

[Flaming_Telepath]

Do we even know if Matt submits books that he owns and has worked on? If not, I'm not sure why you're asking the question.

 

Yes, he does.

 

And he claims that if you ask him what was done to a book before he submitted it, he will give you the precise details.

 

 

You're referring to books he's pressed. We're talking about work that CGC considers restoration.

 

GIven the recent 'disassembly isn't restoration' declaration, are we sure that what Matt does is limited to NDP?

 

In regards to this discussion, it doesn't matter. We're talking about whether Matt tries to pass restored books off as unrestored when he submits to CGC. If CGC doesn't consider disassembly pressing to be resto, then Matt, or any other resto expert, wouldn't need to pass it off.

 

Your right that Matt doesn't disclose pressing unless asked, but I've never heard anyone accuse him of not fully disclosing restoration(as CGC defines it).

 

Me neither...but then again, I hadn't heard anything other than 'he presses his books' before the Jason scandal broke.

 

Not an accusation, but it always make me a bit twitchy when someone in the resto game is also shipping trunk-loads of his own books to CGC. Conflict of interest? I personally think so.

[nearmint]

Do we even know if Matt submits books that he owns and has worked on? If not, I'm not sure why you're asking the question.

 

Yes, he does.

 

And he claims that if you ask him what was done to a book before he submitted it, he will give you the precise details.

 

 

You're referring to books he's pressed. We're talking about work that CGC considers restoration.

 

GIven the recent 'disassembly isn't restoration' declaration, are we sure that what Matt does is limited to NDP?

 

In regards to this discussion, it doesn't matter. We're talking about whether Matt tries to pass restored books off as unrestored when he submits to CGC. If CGC doesn't consider disassembly pressing to be resto, then Matt, or any other resto expert, wouldn't need to pass it off.

 

Your right that Matt doesn't disclose pressing unless asked, but I've never heard anyone accuse him of not fully disclosing restoration(as CGC defines it).

 

Me neither...but then again, I hadn't heard anything other than 'he presses his books' before the Jason scandal broke.

 

Not an accusation, but it always make me a bit twitchy when someone in the resto game is also shipping trunk-loads of his own books to CGC. Conflict of interest? I personally think so.

 

I think it boils down to whether you have a visceral reaction to the practice of pressing. I don't, so it doesn't bother me. But I completely understand those that do.

[esquirecomics]

If there is someone out there who is routinely sneaking restoration past CGC, I find it impossible to believe that this individual is then submitting the labels to CGC, admitting what he has done. And if this were happening, then shame on CGC for allowing this individual to continue to submit books to them in the first place.

 

Matt Nelson returns labels to CGC on books he's worked on, but not immediately. As a result, CGC wouldnt know who submitted the book to Matt to have work done, so there's no one for CGC to ban from submitting. They can't exactly assume it was the person who initially had the book slabbed, as if that person was likely to have the book restored, they logically would have done it prior to submitting it to CGC.

 

This last page of text made me laugh as you guys went round and round in circles to be so careful about who is accusing who of something when no one even accused anyone of anything!!

 

Jeff started it all off by making the simple comment above as an aside and then everyone went off accusing someone, without saying who, of singling Matt out as doing something wrong. Geez people, don't be so sensitive!

 

However, the statement is intriguing. Jeff, is this something Matt has told you personally? How do you know this?

 

Is this only for books he was hired to work on or includes his own?

 

Why would he return labels after the fact for books he has worked on? Sometimes? Always?

[nearmint]

However, the statement is intriguing. Jeff, is this something Matt has told you personally? How do you know this?

 

Is this only for books he was hired to work on or includes his own?

 

Why would he return labels after the fact for books he has worked on? Sometimes? Always?

 

He either told me via email when I was inquiring about getting my America's Best #7 pressed, or he posted it on the boards in one of his attempts to describe the process of having a book pressed.

 

I assume that he returns the labels for the same reason we would, to keep the census reasonably accurate. Some here on the boards see Matt as being all about the $$, but I think he really loves comics.

[Red Hook]

Some here on the boards see Matt as being all about the $$, but I think he really loves comics.

 

[Silver Surfer]

Why would he return labels after the fact for books he has worked on? Sometimes? Always?

 

Mark I have considered sending in books for resubs where I think they are undergraded and while I haven't done it yet, if I did, I would probably send the label in after the fact because I wouldn't want it to infleunce the grading. I know CGC says that the graders are not aware of the label when a resubmit comes in but I don't fully buy that because its in CGC's best interest to stay consistent with their grading. "Working" on books and then resubmitting them is a whole different barrell of apples.

[esquirecomics]

I know CGC says that the graders are not aware of the label when a resubmit comes in but I don't fully buy that because its in CGC's best interest to stay consistent with their grading. "Working" on books and then resubmitting them is a whole different barrell of apples.

 

I have continually stated I think resubbing is something CGC should steer away from exactly because of the point you mention above in bold. As far as instilling trust in a product consistency is the key.

 

The sad truth, however (IMHO), is that CGC encourages resubmissions in order to generate additional revenues. They have quietly done so since their inception as a commercial entity. It was part of their original business plan. This is a benefit to CGC, but not to the hobby. It is one of the areas where I believe CGC's business interests conflicts openly with the better interests of the hobby as a whole.

 

Of course, as a for-profit entity this is perfectly within CGC's right and completely understandable. What I really object to is the fact that they will not openly admit to it. State upfront that this is what is happening. Place it on the website that customers can challenge a grade and resubmit it, for a fee of course, to possibly attain a higher grade or pq. Articulate why this is not detrimental to the hobby to balance the fact that when many (not all and certainly at least some) collectors/investors find out they lose confidence in CGC. How is that a good thing for either CGC or the hobby?

[Ze-man]

 

I assume that he returns the labels for the same reason we would, to keep the census reasonably accurate. Some here on the boards see Matt as being all about the $$, but I think he really loves comics.

 

Yeah, he loves comics alright, all the way to the bank. He has chosen to tailor his career path to exploit how the current system is set up.

 

What's not to love!

 

He is a smart cookie I will give him that. But it IS about the money Jeff. I am actually tired of talking about him but your post pulled me back in.

 

 

Ze-

[nearmint]

 

I assume that he returns the labels for the same reason we would, to keep the census reasonably accurate. Some here on the boards see Matt as being all about the $$, but I think he really loves comics.

 

Yeah, he loves comics alright, all the way to the bank. He has chosen to tailor his career path to exploit how the current system is set up.

 

What's not to love!

 

He is a smart cookie I will give him that. But it IS about the money Jeff. I am actually tired of talking about him but your post pulled me back in.

 

 

Ze-

 

Well, he makes a living off of selling, pressing, and restoring comics, so you're right, it is about the money. But that doesn't preclude a passion for comics.

 

From my limited interaction with him, I believe he is as convinced that there is nothing wrong with what he is doing as you are that there is.

 

I understand his point of view, and I understand your point of view.

[esquirecomics]

From my limited interaction with him, I believe he is as convinced that there is nothing wrong with what he is doing as you are that there is.

 

Of course you do realize that this type of justification has been utilized to act in some very despicable ways in the anals of history.

 

I have little doubt Matt loves the hobby and the work but the fact that he may have convinced himself that he is doing nothing wrong with some of his actions doesn't make it so. Nor should it be used as a defense or a justification.

 

The bigger question is whether the community, not the individual, believes there is something wrong with a particular type of conduct. Time will tell.

[carcrawfordfan]

I know I am a newbie here, but have dealt (and still do deal) with sportscards for the past 15++ years. Grading and resubmitting has been common practice for the majority of the time and it is actively encouraged by the various compaines. The companies offer such services as REVIEW (where a card graded by that company is reviewed for a possible bump), Cross-Over (where a card from another company is reviewed to be put in a holder at a higher/lower/same grade) and also the obvious continual cracking out and resubmitting. These services are advertised and understood. Grading is clearly objective and everyone does know it and do not complain when a card gets a higher grade. Sportscards are easily trackable as many high end ones are serial numbered these days. Plenty of trimming and card pressing takes place and it seems as though people don't seem to care as much as they should. I guess what I am trying to say is that millions upon millions of $$$ have been invested in graded sportscards and will continue to be and this information has not really changed how people spend. I have no idea how full disclosure will change the comic book field, but eventually I think things will be back to normal in some manner. It might be a whole new way of looking at things, but I think people will reinvest in "high grade" comics. Just my 2 cents.

[FFB]

I know I am a newbie here, but have dealt (and still do deal) with sportscards for the past 15++ years. Grading and resubmitting has been common practice for the majority of the time and it is actively encouraged by the various compaines. The companies offer such services as REVIEW (where a card graded by that company is reviewed for a possible bump), Cross-Over (where a card from another company is reviewed to be put in a holder at a higher/lower/same grade) and also the obvious continual cracking out and resubmitting. These services are advertised and understood. Grading is clearly objective and everyone does know it and do not complain when a card gets a higher grade. Sportscards are easily trackable as many high end ones are serial numbered these days. Plenty of trimming and card pressing takes place and it seems as though people don't seem to care as much as they should. I guess what I am trying to say is that millions upon millions of $$$ have been invested in graded sportscards and will continue to be and this information has not really changed how people spend. I have no idea how full disclosure will change the comic book field, but eventually I think things will be back to normal in some manner. It might be a whole new way of looking at things, but I think people will reinvest in "high grade" comics. Just my 2 cents.

 

The problem is, you can't compare comic book collectors with baseball card collectors, stamp collectors, or coin collectors. Comic collectors, by their nature, have a flair for melodrama that collectors in other fields grew out of by the eighth grade.

[esquirecomics]

I know I am a newbie here, but have dealt (and still do deal) with sportscards for the past 15++ years. Grading and resubmitting has been common practice for the majority of the time and it is actively encouraged by the various compaines. The companies offer such services as REVIEW (where a card graded by that company is reviewed for a possible bump), Cross-Over (where a card from another company is reviewed to be put in a holder at a higher/lower/same grade) and also the obvious continual cracking out and resubmitting. These services are advertised and understood. Grading is clearly objective and everyone does know it and do not complain when a card gets a higher grade. Sportscards are easily trackable as many high end ones are serial numbered these days. Plenty of trimming and card pressing takes place and it seems as though people don't seem to care as much as they should. I guess what I am trying to say is that millions upon millions of $$$ have been invested in graded sportscards and will continue to be and this information has not really changed how people spend. I have no idea how full disclosure will change the comic book field, but eventually I think things will be back to normal in some manner. It might be a whole new way of looking at things, but I think people will reinvest in "high grade" comics. Just my 2 cents.

 

You are totally right. It is a very interesting dichotomy between the different hobbies. Certain favored aspects in one are completely taboo in another, even though some of the collectors overlap.

 

It is not at all surprising that CGC has adopted certain policies as it was created from the ranks of the coin and card grading companies. The majority owners of CCG are from the coin and card industries. Thus, no surprise that they have sought to slide over similar policies from those hobbies into ours.

 

However, for whatever reason, right or wrong, the comic book community is quite different from cards and coins. If the leadership of CGC/CCG wishes to modify our thinking they would be best be served by articulating their policies and objectives rather than implementing them unnoticed as if we should expect or desire it unhesitatingly. All that does is foster discontent rather than support.

 

You hit upon the problem in our community in your text I have bolded as it is simply not the case with CGC that consumers fully understand what is actually occuring because CGC does not openly advertise or educate the public regarding certain business practices.

[esquirecomics]

I know I am a newbie here, but have dealt (and still do deal) with sportscards for the past 15++ years. Grading and resubmitting has been common practice for the majority of the time and it is actively encouraged by the various compaines. The companies offer such services as REVIEW (where a card graded by that company is reviewed for a possible bump), Cross-Over (where a card from another company is reviewed to be put in a holder at a higher/lower/same grade) and also the obvious continual cracking out and resubmitting. These services are advertised and understood. Grading is clearly objective and everyone does know it and do not complain when a card gets a higher grade. Sportscards are easily trackable as many high end ones are serial numbered these days. Plenty of trimming and card pressing takes place and it seems as though people don't seem to care as much as they should. I guess what I am trying to say is that millions upon millions of $$$ have been invested in graded sportscards and will continue to be and this information has not really changed how people spend. I have no idea how full disclosure will change the comic book field, but eventually I think things will be back to normal in some manner. It might be a whole new way of looking at things, but I think people will reinvest in "high grade" comics. Just my 2 cents.

 

The problem is, you can't compare comic book collectors with baseball card collectors, stamp collectors, or coin collectors. Comic collectors, by their nature, have a flair for melodrama that collectors in other fields grew out of by the eighth grade.

 

Now that is a warm and fuzzy description for your fellow collectors!

 

I presume you include yourself in that comment as well.