How in the world did this go unnoticed???

[VintageComics]

nevermind. F_T already replied to Joey

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

I thought it was a fair questions and at the heart of this entire thread.

 

 

What was actually at the heart of this thread was the Chairman/CEO/Top Cheese at an organisation advocating full disclosure now adding more books to the market that will be sold without full disclosure.

 

The rest is just the usual waffle.

[asteroid-comix]

I thought it was a fair questions and at the heart of this entire thread.

 

 

The rest is just the usual waffle.

 

waffles

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

Short of stopping pressing all together, how far is anyone going to have to go to please anti-pressing advocates to make them happy? Is there anything else that can be done to satisfy anti pressing advocates?

 

I guess nobody wanted to answer this question?

Well, by qualifying your question with "Short of stopping pressing all together", you've already tried to steer anti-pressers towards some middle ground and thus made the question not really worth answering.

 

But to answer your question, I guess CGC putting a PLOD on books known to be pressed would be a good start.

 

Which is precisely why I didn't answer it.

 

'Short of stopping people being murdered, how would you propose that we stop people being murdered?'

 

 

 

 

I don't understand what is so about the question.

 

Since pressing is not going to stop I thought qualifying it as such was being realistic.

 

Anything else is not going to be.

 

It used to be that people asked for disclosure. Now that is not enough.

 

Since pressing is not going to stop, what would make you happy?

 

I thought it was a fair questions and at the heart of this entire thread.

 

 

Murder is an unaccepted practice in society.

 

According to CGC's rules pressing is accepted. In the eyes of CGC no foul has been done. To ask them to change the stance they have always taken after 10 years of business is just not going to happen. The same way society will never accept murder.

 

To actually stop murder is impossible as we know it. We would have to isolate or eliminate anyone who has murdered and then deal with the new ones on a case by case basis.

 

While drastically reducing the murder rate it will never eliminate it. And this is with using the most drastic measure.

 

Moreover, if you want to follow that line of thinking, if we didn't have the technology to effective put away every murder suspect accurately, we should put away as many as we think have committed murder, because 100% accuracy (or as close to it) is not important.

 

I know my statement sounds ridiculous, but if you want to draw parallels....

 

You just can not detect pressing 100% (or close to it) so you are asking CGC to guess.

 

 

CGC can't detect micro-trimming 100% of the time, either, but they still look for it and note it when they do.

 

No different to pressing. You can look for it and note it and I'd wager that their success rates would be very similar.

 

And whilst my 'murder' comment was not a comparison, it suddenly works very well. We can't identify and convict every murderer...but it doesn't stop us trying and doing it when we can.

[VintageComics]

I thought it was a fair questions and at the heart of this entire thread.

 

 

What was actually at the heart of this thread was the Chairman/CEO/Top Cheese at an organisation advocating full disclosure now adding more books to the market that will be sold without full disclosure.

 

The rest is just the usual waffle.

 

The heart of this thread is about disclosure and how far we need to police it.

 

So again, how responsible will you be in policing which of your books get pressed?

 

Since you are a known "anti-pressing advocate" (hereby known as APA), and you will be feeding the market with raw material for the sharks, how far as an APA are you willing to go to prevent your books from getting pressed?

 

What if eventually one of your books ends up pressed? Will you be to blame, knowing that your books will be perfect candidates for pressing?

 

The idea that Brent can be held responsible for someone else's actions is no different than holding you responsible for adding to the pool of books for pressers to choose from.

 

That is the line of thinking that this thread is following and I don't agree with it because making me responsible for someone else's actions just isn't fair.

 

 

[VintageComics]

CGC can't detect micro-trimming 100% of the time, either, but they still look for it and note it when they do.

 

No different to pressing. You can look for it and note it and I'd wager that their success rates would be very similar.

 

And whilst my 'murder' comment was not a comparison, it suddenly works very well. We can't identify and convict every murderer...but it doesn't stop us trying and doing it when we can.

 

Nick, I'd be willing to bet that CGC can't detect pressing 50% of the time.

 

Some pressed books would be labeled as unpressed and visa versa.

 

Is that what you want? a 50/50 guess on all books?

 

[Old Fashion PB and J]

I thought it was a fair questions and at the heart of this entire thread.

 

 

What was actually at the heart of this thread was the Chairman/CEO/Top Cheese at an organisation advocating full disclosure now adding more books to the market that will be sold without full disclosure.

 

The rest is just the usual waffle.

 

The heart of this thread is about disclosure and how far we need to police it.

 

So again, how responsible will you be in policing which of your books get pressed?

 

Since you are a known "anti-pressing advocate" (hereby known as APA), and you will be feeding the market with raw material for the sharks, how far as an APA are you willing to go to prevent your books from getting pressed?

 

What if eventually one of your books ends up pressed? Will you be to blame, knowing that your books will be perfect candidates for pressing?

 

The idea that Brent can be held responsible for someone else's actions is no different than holding you responsible for adding to the pool of books for pressers to choose from.

 

That is the line of thinking that this thread is following and I don't agree with it because making me responsible for someone else's actions just isn't fair.

 

Holding you responsible for other peoples actions IS fair. Everything is your fault Roy.

[Flaming_Telepath]

CGC can't detect micro-trimming 100% of the time, either, but they still look for it and note it when they do.

 

No different to pressing. You can look for it and note it and I'd wager that their success rates would be very similar.

 

And whilst my 'murder' comment was not a comparison, it suddenly works very well. We can't identify and convict every murderer...but it doesn't stop us trying and doing it when we can.

 

Nick, I'd be willing to bet that CGC can't detect trimming 50% of the time.

 

Some pressed books would be labeled as unpressed and visa versa.

 

Is that what you want? a 50/50 guess on all books?

 

Well, according to you, that's already their success rate with trimming, so where's the problem?

 

And it wouldn't be a 'guess'. They would positively identify a portion, but not all.

 

But I know why you used the word 'guess'. Very disparaging, Roy, but it ain't going to work.

[FlyingDonut]

I thought it was a fair questions and at the heart of this entire thread.

 

 

What was actually at the heart of this thread was the Chairman/CEO/Top Cheese at an organisation advocating full disclosure now adding more books to the market that will be sold without full disclosure.

 

The rest is just the usual waffle.

 

Like I said a week ago:

 

 

Oh, no, this is awesome.

 

A circlejerk if there ever was one. The head of NOD, an organization that has spent the last three years lighting people on fire for pressing is now pressing? Too rich.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I thought it was a fair questions and at the heart of this entire thread.

 

 

What was actually at the heart of this thread was the Chairman/CEO/Top Cheese at an organisation advocating full disclosure now adding more books to the market that will be sold without full disclosure.

 

The rest is just the usual waffle.

 

The heart of this thread is about disclosure and how far we need to police it.

 

So again, how responsible will you be in policing which of your books get pressed?

 

Since you are a known "anti-pressing advocate" (hereby known as APA), and you will be feeding the market with raw material for the sharks, how far as an APA are you willing to go to prevent your books from getting pressed?

 

What if eventually one of your books ends up pressed? Will you be to blame, knowing that your books will be perfect candidates for pressing?

 

The idea that Brent can be held responsible for someone else's actions is no different than holding you responsible for adding to the pool of books for pressers to choose from.

 

That is the line of thinking that this thread is following and I don't agree with it because making me responsible for someone else's actions just isn't fair.

 

 

See bolded paragraph...

 

I've already answered this in full earlier, but just for you...

 

Brent cannot be held responsible...it is unreasonable and unrealistic.

 

However, knowing full well that he can't be responsible for what happens after, he shouldn't be creating the ing problem in the first place.

 

Not whilst he holds the position that he does, which is dedicated to lessening the problem.

[VintageComics]

Nick, my apologies.

 

 

I was having an intense discussion with the lady here at the same time as my post was made and put trimming in there by mistake.

 

 

I meant to say pressing.

 

I believe that trimming is much more detectable than pressing. It's pretty much black and white (or as close as humanly possible). I believe pressing is more gray.

 

Sorry about that.

 

 

[Old Fashion PB and J]

Nick, my apologies.

 

 

I was having an intense discussion with the lady here at the same time as my post was made and put trimming in there by mistake.

 

 

I meant to say pressing.

 

I believe that trimming is much more detectable than pressing. It's pretty much black and white (or as close as humanly possible). I believe pressing is more gray.

 

Sorry about that.

 

And books that have easily been tracked as pressed? All the mound city resubmits, the Pac Coasts, and the other pedigrees that are so easily identified? Those books would not be guesses, its common knowledge. And if you try and argue that cgc can not be positive they were pressed upon resubmission I may as well sell off my slabs now as I am pretty sure they have grading that blows with the wind.

[DrWatson]

I thought it was a fair questions and at the heart of this entire thread.

 

 

What was actually at the heart of this thread was the Chairman/CEO/Top Cheese at an organisation advocating full disclosure now adding more books to the market that will be sold without full disclosure.

 

The rest is just the usual waffle.

 

Like I said a week ago:

 

 

Oh, no, this is awesome.

 

A circlejerk if there ever was one. The head of NOD, an organization that has spent the last three years lighting people on fire for pressing is now pressing? Too rich.

Every day is just like reading this thread from page one... again.

[october]

The reality has come to this: If you don't want someone else to take advantage of you, you need to be pressing books. Whether you agree or disagree, if you don't press major books, many times you are facilitating the wealth of a select few who will target you and purchase books knowing you don't press.

 

That's really what it all boils down to. I press now for that exact reason. Set aside all of the histrionics, soapbox preaching and ethical debates...when someone buys a 9.4 from me for $800, presses it into a 9.6 and flips it for $3000, things need to change in my selling model. Period. Nobody likes playing the sucker or the mark, and I'd rather have that profit riding on my hip. I don't know too many people in this hobby, collectors or dealers, who are in this to make other people money.

I won't do it. If I make a sufficient profit out of selling a book unpressed, I'm content, even if I'm potentially leaving money on the table for someone with less scruples. Squeezing every last possible dollar out of a book isn't worth sacrificing my principles.

 

"Principles", in the buying and selling of pressed comic books, are the luxury of those who do not depend on the money made from them. I press, I disclose and I save the ethical hand wringing for things of actual consequence.

[october]

 

 

That's really what it all boils down to. I press now for that exact reason. Set aside all of the histrionics, soapbox preaching and ethical debates...when someone buys a 9.4 from me for $800, presses it into a 9.6 and flips it for $3000, things need to change in my selling model. Period. Nobody likes playing the sucker or the mark, and I'd rather have that profit riding on my hip. I don't know too many people in this hobby, collectors or dealers, who are in this to make other people money.

 

 

No, there is no NEED for your selling model to change. Selling books at a price that you are comfortable with and provides you with a profit does not make one a "sucker" or a "mark" if someone else makes more money on it, manipulated or otherwise. You've just gone over the edge to bitter and feeling entitled, and at such a young age.

 

So you sell books at lower prices to people who immediately manipulate them and sell them for double or triple their investment, and YOU are laughing at ME?

 

That pretty much defines "sucker". Hate to break it to you.

[VintageComics]

[And books that have easily been tracked as pressed? All the mound city resubmits, the Pac Coasts, and the other pedigrees that are so easily identified? Those books would not be guesses, its common knowledge. And if you try and argue that cgc can not be positive they were pressed upon resubmission I may as well sell off my slabs now as I am pretty sure they have grading that blows with the wind.

 

I have no doubt that those books were pressed, but do you want CGC guessing at all the other books?

 

 

Do you want CGC labeling only some books as pressed while others get a clean bill of health because they slip through the system?

 

Think about it.

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

 

 

That's really what it all boils down to. I press now for that exact reason. Set aside all of the histrionics, soapbox preaching and ethical debates...when someone buys a 9.4 from me for $800, presses it into a 9.6 and flips it for $3000, things need to change in my selling model. Period. Nobody likes playing the sucker or the mark, and I'd rather have that profit riding on my hip. I don't know too many people in this hobby, collectors or dealers, who are in this to make other people money.

 

 

No, there is no NEED for your selling model to change. Selling books at a price that you are comfortable with and provides you with a profit does not make one a "sucker" or a "mark" if someone else makes more money on it, manipulated or otherwise. You've just gone over the edge to bitter and feeling entitled, and at such a young age.

 

So you sell books at lower prices to people who immediately manipulate them and sell them for double or triple their investment, and YOU are laughing at ME?

 

That pretty much defines "sucker". Hate to break it to you.

 

No it doesn't, Andy.

 

You're basically saying that anyone who holds to their principles whilst the next person along doesn't have any is a mug.

 

I'd say that their principles are simply more important than money.

 

What's actually wrong with that?

[alecholland]

Short of stopping pressing all together, how far is anyone going to have to go to please anti-pressing advocates to make them happy? Is there anything else that can be done to satisfy anti pressing advocates?

 

I guess nobody wanted to answer this question?

Well, by qualifying your question with "Short of stopping pressing all together", you've already tried to steer anti-pressers towards some middle ground and thus made the question not really worth answering.

 

But to answer your question, I guess CGC putting a PLOD on books known to be pressed would be a good start.

 

Since CGC doesn't consider the type of pressing we're talking about to be restoration, I don't know if that would ever happen.

 

What I have been suggesting is that they simply add the designation "PRESSED" to the blue label of a book they know to be pressed. To me, that seems like the best solution.

 

This is straight from the page on their website that talks about a commitment to hobby enrichment:

 

"To Build Advantages for the Collector... by revealing the unique characteristics of each book we grade, so that a more informed buyer can confidently pay as much as he believes the book to be worth to his collection."

 

Wouldn't adding the designation "PRESSED" to the label, even if pressing is not considered restoration help to further that goal? Wouldn't pressing be a "unique characteristic"? Wouldn't knowing if a book was pressed or not help the buyer be more informed so that they can "confidently pay as much as he (she) believes the book to be worth to his (her) collection"?

 

I'm really not sure why this can't be done. It seems to be to be in accordance with the goals of CGC. It would help make potential buyers of a book more knowledgeable in regard to their potential purchase, and if there is nothing wrong with pressing to achieve a higher grade, then the people who press books would have nothing to worry about. Everyone is happy!

 

Everyone talks about how this hobby is evolving, but they don't seem to want CGC to evolve. If pressing is here to stay and it is becoming more and more prevalent, then I think a company like CGC needs to evolve in order to keep up with where the hobby is heading. Even if it is only 1/3 of the collectors who care whether a book has been pressed or not, no business can afford to lose 1/3 of their potential customers, IMHO.

 

It's just a thought. You guys are clearly more knowledgeable about all this stuff than me.

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

[And books that have easily been tracked as pressed? All the mound city resubmits, the Pac Coasts, and the other pedigrees that are so easily identified? Those books would not be guesses, its common knowledge. And if you try and argue that cgc can not be positive they were pressed upon resubmission I may as well sell off my slabs now as I am pretty sure they have grading that blows with the wind.

 

I have no doubt that those books were pressed, but do you want CGC guessing at all the other books?

 

 

Do you want CGC labeling only some books as pressed while others get a clean bill of health because they slip through the system?

 

Think about it.

 

 

Yes I do, because it already happens with trimming.

 

And stop with the 'guessing'...CGC can positively identify a good proportion of pressed books. If they had some sort of tracking in place, they'd also be able to identify books that have been manipulated, so there's some more for the pot.

[october]

 

 

That's really what it all boils down to. I press now for that exact reason. Set aside all of the histrionics, soapbox preaching and ethical debates...when someone buys a 9.4 from me for $800, presses it into a 9.6 and flips it for $3000, things need to change in my selling model. Period. Nobody likes playing the sucker or the mark, and I'd rather have that profit riding on my hip. I don't know too many people in this hobby, collectors or dealers, who are in this to make other people money.

 

 

No, there is no NEED for your selling model to change. Selling books at a price that you are comfortable with and provides you with a profit does not make one a "sucker" or a "mark" if someone else makes more money on it, manipulated or otherwise. You've just gone over the edge to bitter and feeling entitled, and at such a young age.

 

So you sell books at lower prices to people who immediately manipulate them and sell them for double or triple their investment, and YOU are laughing at ME?

 

That pretty much defines "sucker". Hate to break it to you.

 

No it doesn't, Andy.

 

You're basically saying that anyone who holds to their principles whilst the next person along doesn't have any is a mug.

 

I'd say that their principles are simply more important than money.

 

What's actually wrong with that?

 

Nothing is wrong with it. He can sell in any way he chooses. just as I can sell in a way that ensures that I am not leaving absurd amounts of money on the table. I use the word "absurd" for a reason. Unlike the "squeeze every dollar out of a book" strawman that Tim loves to throw around, I don't care about someone making some money on the comics I sell. I DO care about people making money that would have an appreciable impact on my financial situation if I was making it instead. $100 profit to the buyer? No worries. $2000 profit to the buyer? Worries.

 

Anyway, I am going to work. Can't believe I let myself get sucked into one of these threads.