Manufactured Gold

[Foolkiller]

I didn't get the label back for the Avengers 28 9.4 PC you pressed.

 

Okay, I'll check for it. If I have it, do you want it back, or sent to CGC?

 

Well, I'm the new owner of the book, so send it to Brad so I can get it!!!!

[Matt Nelson]

I didn't get the label back for the Avengers 28 9.4 PC you pressed.

 

Okay, I'll check for it. If I have it, do you want it back, or sent to CGC?

 

Well, I'm the new owner of the book, so send it to Brad so I can get it!!!!

 

I'll just send it to you then. PM me your address.

[Ze-man]

While you are here Matt, what do you think of the various resubbed books MasterChief has displayed in this thread?

 

We have all seen your quote in this thread about how CGC would plod a book that was disassembled, it appears that is not the case now.

 

Could you define as you see it this issue regarding the removal, disassembly of a book, and replacement of same, or similar era staples?

 

As an expert in the restoration field would you go on the record and outline what does, and what does not fall under restoration regarding the disassembly of a comic book. I may disagree with how you run your business , but that does not mean your opinion in not valued and needed by me, or the majority here.

 

Ze

[mica]

 

While you are here Matt, what do you think of the books MasterChief has displayed?

 

We have all seen your quote in this thread about CGc would plod a book that was disassembled, we now know otherwise.

 

Could you define as you see it this issue regarding the removal, disassembly of a book, and replacement of same, or similar era staples?

 

As an expert in the restoration field would you go on the record and outline what does, and what does not fall under restoration regarding the disassembly of a comic book. I may disagree with how you run your business , but that does not mean your opinion in not valued and needed by me or the majority here.

 

Ze

You're supposed to call. It's the tiny-brained way of doing things now. All the rage.

[Ze-man]

 

While you are here Matt, what do you think of the books MasterChief has displayed?

 

We have all seen your quote in this thread about CGc would plod a book that was disassembled, we now know otherwise.

 

Could you define as you see it this issue regarding the removal, disassembly of a book, and replacement of same, or similar era staples?

 

As an expert in the restoration field would you go on the record and outline what does, and what does not fall under restoration regarding the disassembly of a comic book. I may disagree with how you run your business , but that does not mean your opinion in not valued and needed by me or the majority here.

 

Ze

You're supposed to call. It's the tiny-brained way of doing things now. All the rage.

 

Ya know, I think I will.

 

Problem is when I talk on the phone, the other person can never get a word in edgewise. I never shut up.

Ask anyone.

 

So in the end it will not prove to be a very fruitful conversation.

 

Ze-

[Red Hook]

I didn't get the label back for the Avengers 28 9.4 PC you pressed.

 

Okay, I'll check for it. If I have it, do you want it back, or sent to CGC?

 

Thanks Matt.....please send it to me.....I'm selling the book and I believe the new owner would like the tag as proof of it's pedigree status when they resub it.

 

Brad

[Red Hook]

 

Problem is when I talk on the phone, the other person can never get a word in edgewise. I never shut up.

Ask anyone.

 

Ze-

 

Amazing but true.

[esquirecomics]

I think someone asked about my policy returning CGC labels. I absolutely return all of them to keep the census as accurate as possible, and I strongly urge everyone else to do the same if they ever have labels laying around.

 

I think it is great that you return the labels. It is in everyone's best interests to keep the census accurate.

 

At what point in time do you return the labels? With the book? Or separately?

 

Gee Mark, is that a rhetorical question?

 

Ze-

 

No, they are real, live questions. Why?

[Matt Nelson]

While you are here Matt, what do you think of the various resubbed books MasterChief has displayed in this thread?

 

We have all seen your quote in this thread about how CGC would plod a book that was disassembled, it appears that is not the case now.

 

Could you define as you see it this issue regarding the removal, disassembly of a book, and replacement of same, or similar era staples?

 

As an expert in the restoration field would you go on the record and outline what does, and what does not fall under restoration regarding the disassembly of a comic book. I may disagree with how you run your business , but that does not mean your opinion in not valued and needed by me, or the majority here.

 

Ze

 

Hi Ze, here's my understanding of disassembly and CGC. During the first years of CGC, when disassembly was suspected, there was almost always restoration found on the book, like water/solvent cleaning, rice paper, and color touch. Easy enough.

 

I think eventually CGC started seeing more books that they suspected were disassembled, and yet no restoration was found. At that point they had to make some decisions about how to treat only disassembly. It's a very slippery slope because, like other things they look for on books, they can't call something out unless they are certain it is what they think it is. So if the prongs on the staples of a book had possibly been tampered with, but they couldn't tell for sure, and there was no restoration found on the book, it probably ended up in a blue holder.

 

The problem, especially with Golden Age, is that staple prongs can face funny directions a lot of times. They poke up, they're crooked, they're bent the wrong way, and sometimes they're missing. There's no uniform way staples lie, and therefore it's very hard to tell for sure if prongs have been opened and re-closed. It's similar to the problem faced with trimmed books because their size always varies, so there's no consistency to establish a foolproof method of detection.

 

I don't believe disassembly by itself is restoration. But further investigation is necessary when a book has clearly been disassembled, and I would never want it to get to that point for any book I have CGC grade for myself or my clients.

[Matt Nelson]

I didn't get the label back for the Avengers 28 9.4 PC you pressed.

 

Okay, I'll check for it. If I have it, do you want it back, or sent to CGC?

 

Thanks Matt.....please send it to me.....I'm selling the book and I believe the new owner would like the tag as proof of it's pedigree status when they resub it.

 

Brad

 

Okay Brad, will do.

[esquirecomics]

I think someone asked about my policy returning CGC labels. I absolutely return all of them to keep the census as accurate as possible, and I strongly urge everyone else to do the same if they ever have labels laying around.

 

I think it is great that you return the labels. It is in everyone's best interests to keep the census accurate.

 

At what point in time do you return the labels? With the book? Or separately?

 

Either. Several factors go into the decision to submit books with or without tags. But regardless CGC gets their tag in the end.

 

Thanks for the prompt response Matt. Will you elaborate on what those factors are?

[infinite_comics-migration]

I don't believe disassembly by itself is restoration.

 

[Matt Nelson]

I think someone asked about my policy returning CGC labels. I absolutely return all of them to keep the census as accurate as possible, and I strongly urge everyone else to do the same if they ever have labels laying around.

 

I think it is great that you return the labels. It is in everyone's best interests to keep the census accurate.

 

At what point in time do you return the labels? With the book? Or separately?

 

Either. Several factors go into the decision to submit books with or without tags. But regardless CGC gets their tag in the end.

 

Thanks for the prompt response Matt. Will you elaborate on what those factors are?

 

Send me some books to press, and we'll discuss my submission philosophies. You didn't think you were going to get that information for free, did you?

[THE_BEYONDER]

Hey Matt,

 

Did you press that 9.8 DD 131 you recently auctioned, or was it a straight resub?

 

Chris

[nearmint]

The fact that CGC has chosen to permit resubmission is not based on their fallacies as human beings, but understandably on the profits that they derive from the practice.

 

There are 3010 certified copies of Hulk 181. How in the world is CGC supposed to determine when another copy is submitted whether they've already certified it or not?

 

There is likely no possible way using your example, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the point that was being discussed.

 

Now that's the silliest thing you've said all day. The discussion of why CGC has chosen to permit resubmission is completely moot, as it would be virtually impossible for them to not permit it.

 

So the multitude of HG pedigree copies that have passed through their hands on different occasions is not trackable?

 

In any event, we were not talking solutions to the issue, we were talking about the fact that it is promoted quietly rather than overtly and the impact that has in creating certain views.

 

When the "multitudes" of HG pedigree copies are compared to the vast number of non-pedigrees submitted, your multitudes become a drop in the bucket, and I'm talking a very large bucket.

 

I can't figure out what you want when it comes to the resub issue. You say you weren't talking about solutions, so what's the point of discussing it?

 

I forgot Jeff that you are one of the people who hates to discuss problems if no solutions are referenced at the same time. Forgive me.

 

I agree with other posters that resubbing is so obvious that there's no need for CGC to promote it.

 

Good for you. I disagree.

 

The idea that they've "quietly promoted it" is pure supposition on your part, and shouldn't be stated as fact.

 

You have no clue what you are talking about. Have you listened to the tape recordings of the sessions CGC had with certain dealers/collectors as it was beginning operations? I doubt it. On the other hand, I have personally listened to the tapes. It was stated emphatically and clearly. There was no mistakening it.

 

So, with all due respect, don't tell me what is fact or supposition when you have no idea what is either.

 

My, you're snippy today.

 

You and I just see things differently. For you, if CGC's resto detection team isn't posting on the boards, then they're "shrouded in mystery", while I just assume they're busy detecting resto.

 

For you, CGC not noting on their site that resubs are allowable is a problem. To me, a person would have to be a blithering *spoon* to not realize that they could crack a book and resub it. Tell me that a portion of the hobby doesn't know what pressing is, and I'll buy that. Tell me that a lot of folks aren't aware of the Ewert scandal, and I'll buy that, too. But I have NEVER heard of anyone that didn't know they could resub a book. Ever. It's a non-issue.

 

Filter made the relevant point. If CGC is telling a select few what can be done to a book and still achieve a blue label, then that's a HUGE problem.

[Ze-man]

While you are here Matt, what do you think of the various resubbed books MasterChief has displayed in this thread?

 

We have all seen your quote in this thread about how CGC would plod a book that was disassembled, it appears that is not the case now.

 

Could you define as you see it this issue regarding the removal, disassembly of a book, and replacement of same, or similar era staples?

 

As an expert in the restoration field would you go on the record and outline what does, and what does not fall under restoration regarding the disassembly of a comic book. I may disagree with how you run your business , but that does not mean your opinion in not valued and needed by me, or the majority here.

 

Ze

 

Hi Ze, here's my understanding of disassembly and CGC. During the first years of CGC, when disassembly was suspected, there was almost always restoration found on the book, like water/solvent cleaning, rice paper, and color touch. Easy enough.

 

I think eventually CGC started seeing more books that they suspected were disassembled, and yet no restoration was found. At that point they had to make some decisions about how to treat only disassembly. It's a very slippery slope because, like other things they look for on books, they can't call something out unless they are certain it is what they think it is. So if the prongs on the staples of a book had possibly been tampered with, but they couldn't tell for sure, and there was no restoration found on the book, it probably ended up in a blue holder.

 

The problem, especially with Golden Age, is that staple prongs can face funny directions a lot of times. They poke up, they're crooked, they're bent the wrong way, and sometimes they're missing. There's no uniform way staples lie, and therefore it's very hard to tell for sure if prongs have been opened and re-closed. It's similar to the problem faced with trimmed books because their size always varies, so there's no consistency to establish a foolproof method of detection.

 

I don't believe disassembly by itself is restoration. But further investigation is necessary when a book has clearly been disassembled, and I would never want it to get to that point for any book I have CGC grade for myself or my clients.

 

Thnx Matt, So is the detectability of a procedure dictating what IS, and is NOT considered restoration? I dont really like to lump all the various porcedures that can be done to a book under the same word..restoration. Some forms ARE clearly different then others. I have learned to accept that.

 

But it seems to me that depending on if a certain type of work is detectable or not, goes hand in hand with wether or not it is considered restoration. ..i.e pressing, staple removal etc

 

If these things WERE possible to detect consistantly, would you alter your stance about what we should call them?.. Be it restoration, conservation, modiffication.

 

I think many of us here are frustrated because things are being done to books that cannot be detected, so we are not told by the person doing the work, and or by CGC.

 

We as consumers just want to know what was done to a book. Especially when a person is spending, or HAS spent a large sum of money on a book that is not exactly what they think it to be.

 

Can you understand that frustration?

 

I also appreciate you at least coming on here to answer a few things. Lord knows I have poked you with enough sticks, but that is just my personal feelings coming to fore. I realize this should be talked about without personal feelings, if there is anything really positive to be gained..

 

Ze-

[FFB]

 

While you are here Matt, what do you think of the books MasterChief has displayed?

 

We have all seen your quote in this thread about CGc would plod a book that was disassembled, we now know otherwise.

 

Could you define as you see it this issue regarding the removal, disassembly of a book, and replacement of same, or similar era staples?

 

As an expert in the restoration field would you go on the record and outline what does, and what does not fall under restoration regarding the disassembly of a comic book. I may disagree with how you run your business , but that does not mean your opinion in not valued and needed by me or the majority here.

 

Ze

You're supposed to call. It's the tiny-brained way of doing things now. All the rage.

 

Totally! Only a real dweeb would make a phone call and get an immediate answer. The smart ones spend their time making a post that they know won't get an official response. I know that doesn't seem logical, but that's probably just because everyone's brain is too small to understand it. Kind of like quantum physics. If you want the information, DON'T do the thing that will get you the information. Keep doing the thing that hasn't been working, but expect a different result this time.

 

Hey, wasn't that one of Einstein's laws or something? Something to do with Einstein anyway....

[Matt Nelson]

While you are here Matt, what do you think of the various resubbed books MasterChief has displayed in this thread?

 

We have all seen your quote in this thread about how CGC would plod a book that was disassembled, it appears that is not the case now.

 

Could you define as you see it this issue regarding the removal, disassembly of a book, and replacement of same, or similar era staples?

 

As an expert in the restoration field would you go on the record and outline what does, and what does not fall under restoration regarding the disassembly of a comic book. I may disagree with how you run your business , but that does not mean your opinion in not valued and needed by me, or the majority here.

 

Ze

 

Hi Ze, here's my understanding of disassembly and CGC. During the first years of CGC, when disassembly was suspected, there was almost always restoration found on the book, like water/solvent cleaning, rice paper, and color touch. Easy enough.

 

I think eventually CGC started seeing more books that they suspected were disassembled, and yet no restoration was found. At that point they had to make some decisions about how to treat only disassembly. It's a very slippery slope because, like other things they look for on books, they can't call something out unless they are certain it is what they think it is. So if the prongs on the staples of a book had possibly been tampered with, but they couldn't tell for sure, and there was no restoration found on the book, it probably ended up in a blue holder.

 

The problem, especially with Golden Age, is that staple prongs can face funny directions a lot of times. They poke up, they're crooked, they're bent the wrong way, and sometimes they're missing. There's no uniform way staples lie, and therefore it's very hard to tell for sure if prongs have been opened and re-closed. It's similar to the problem faced with trimmed books because their size always varies, so there's no consistency to establish a foolproof method of detection.

 

I don't believe disassembly by itself is restoration. But further investigation is necessary when a book has clearly been disassembled, and I would never want it to get to that point for any book I have CGC grade for myself or my clients.

 

Thnx Matt, So is the detectability of a procedure dictating what IS, and is NOT considered restoration? I dont really like to lump all the various porcedures that can be done to a book under the same word..restoration. Some forms ARE clearly different then others. I have learned to accept that.

 

But it seems to me that depending on if a certain type of work is detectable or not, goes hand in hand with wether or not it is considered restoration. ..i.e pressing, staple removal etc

 

If these things WERE possible to detect consistantly, would you alter your stance about what we should call them?.. Be it restoration, conservation, modiffication.

 

I think many of us here are frustrated because things are being done to books that cannot be detected, so we are not told by the person doing the work, and or by CGC.

 

We as consumers just want to know what was done to a book. Especially when a person is spending, or HAS spent a large sum of money on a book that is not exactly what they think it to be.

 

Can you understand that frustration?

 

Ze-

 

I think CGC's job is to establish grading standards, and then grade books according to those standards. That's it.

 

This is obviously oversimplifying things, but I think some people take it further and envision CGC as the police in this hobby, and that is not the purpose of why they are here. Maybe they have fed that image by pumping up their restoration detection abilities, or when they banned Jason Ewert.

 

That being said, CGC is limited by what they see. They cannot make calls on issues that are undetectable. All theories of whether this or that is restoration can only be made practical for grading purposes if there is a consistent way to detect them. Otherwise CGC is grading based on assumptions and not proof.

 

I honestly have never had someone approach me and tell me that they felt burned because they bought a book, and later found out it was upgraded. I see some board members are frustrated, but in my everyday life in the comic business, I don't see this to be the case.

[Filter81]

I would like to apologize because several statements that I made in my last post were not totally accurate. Steve B was nice enough to give me a call and straighten me out on a few things. (Also, thanks Matt for the clarification regarding disassembly.)

 

The discussion I had with Steve regarding the Sensation comics w/ the two covers was pretty similar to what Matt wrote. "Disassembly is not restoration" is not a change in policy, but perhaps a poor choice of words was previously used to describe the policy. (And its up to everyone to decide how they feel about the policy, but its the same policy that has always been in place)

 

In speaking with Steve directly about the Sensation comics example, he explained to me why the book got a Green label one way and a blue label the other. Hopefully I have this right, but apparently CGC considers disassembly not to be restoration in part because if its done right it can not be detected. The reason the book was given a Green label the first time around, wasn't technically because of the disassembly, but was because of the position of the covers. (Something like ink transfer stains are supposed to be on the outside of a book, but since there was one on the interior cover, CGC knew the book had been altered by switching the covers so it got a qualified label.) The first time around they were not able to detect that the covers had been switched due to any evidence near the staples, they knew because of the transfer stain. So once the covers were switched back and the book was resubmitted, there was no longer any evidence that any work had been done, which is why it got the blue label the second time. Had there been evidence, CGC would've still given the book a blue label at that point, and downgraded it for any damage done to the spine of the book.

 

As far as staples being cleaned/replaced, I was incorrect. If I understand what I heard correctly, that will always get you a green label.

 

As far as some people having this information and others not having this information, I still think it would be better for everyone if CGC published it all somewhere. But at least the information is available to anyone who calls CGC and asks.

 

I still like my idea though for having a separate category for books that don't have restoration but have still been improved. (Books that have been cleaned, pressed, disassembled etc.) It could even be noted somewhere that things like this can't be detected 100% of the time. (I absolutely would not expect CGC to be able to detect every little thing on every little book... and the statistics regarding how many restored books would've been sold as unrestored before CGC compared to the number of restored or improved books that get by CGC now are impressive.) But in the instances where CGC IS able to definitely detect something, I still feel that it should be noted somewhere.

 

Getting back to my earlier example of the All Winners 1.. (where a CGC 9.2 sells for $32k+, then another CGC 9.2 that used to be a CGC 8.5 sells for $24k, and the owner of the first 9.2 suddenly loses an offer on his book as a result) I do believe there are examples where people can get hurt in this hobby because someone else decides to "improve" a book and not disclose it. Personally, I feel that a CGC 9.2 that used to be an 8.5, should be worth less than one that was always a 9.2. (Maybe worth somewhere in the middle, like 9.0 price) This would still give the press/resub people a chance to go ahead and do their thing and make some money, without hurting the value of peoples' collections who decide they would rather not have their books pressed. (And best of all everything would be out in the open for everyone to see)

 

At the same time though, I also believe it is important to keep in perspective that examples like these are much less prevelent than the number of people getting taken advantage of by people like Comic-keys prior to the creation of CGC. I don't think the current system is perfect, but its still better than no system at all. (Which by the way does not mean that I don't still have a problem with some of the people going out of their way to take advantage of the current system)

 

Anyway, sorry for the long post.

 

P.S. I asked Steve about Chris F, Steve said since PCS has shut down Chris's job with CGC has been to detect restoration on books that are submitted for grading.

[nearmint]

Thanks, Filter. Lots of good info.