How in the world did this go unnoticed???

[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.

 

 

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.

 

The comparisons between trimming and pressing need to stop.

 

They are not related, they are not analogous to one another.

 

Almost the entire hobby agrees that trimming is destructive and hate it. It is also detectable the majority of the time. It can be positively identified.

 

The hobby is split over the idea of pressing. Further more it is only detectable a small percentage of the time.

 

Even if NASA type technology were used I'd be willing to put money on the fact that detection would not get better than 50/50 because a pressed book *might* exhibit exposure to heat/humidity/pressure, but a book can be exposed to all of those things in more instances than just pressing, and a machine (unless it is a time machine) will never detect intent.

 

We just can't draw any comparisons or analogies between trimming and pressing. It's a dead end street.

 

 

 

[VintageComics]

"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"?

 

 

Big time

 

The bolded part is particularly incisive. (thumbs u

 

I agree with both of you. Very much. It would definitely offer people much more info and choice. The problem is that even if you are labeling 50% of the books that are pressed and detected as such (and that is a high percentage IMO) you will still be allowing 50% of the books to slide through with the notion that they are NOT pressed when they very well could be.

 

This would simply enable people who press books to now direct their energy on the unpressed ones with more focus.

 

And again, I just don't see how you can ask a company to make 50/50 judgment calls.

 

Until there is a study whereby somebody can prove that properly pressed books on proper candidates CAN be detected and detected consistently, I'm going to automatically default to the 50/50 scenario (at best) every time.

 

No offense intended to anyone.

 

[Old Fashion PB and J]

[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.

 

The comparisons between trimming and pressing need to stop.

 

They are not related, they are not analogous to one another.

 

Almost the entire hobby agrees that trimming is destructive and hate it. It is also detectable the majority of the time. It can be positively identified.

 

The hobby is split over the idea of pressing. Further more it is only detectable a small percentage of the time.

 

Even if NASA type technology were used I'd be willing to put money on the fact that detection would not get better than 50/50 because a pressed book *might* exhibit exposure to heat/humidity/pressure, but a book can be exposed to all of those things in more instances than just pressing, and a machine (unless it is a time machine) will never detect intent.

 

We just can't draw any comparisons or analogies between trimming and pressing. It's a dead end street.

 

 

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

[skypinkblu]

 

 

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.

 

What is an absurd amount of money? Do you ever buy books from someone else and make absurd amounts of money? If someone else is selling a book and you think it's undergraded, or too cheap, do you mention it, or grab it?

 

For one thing, I'm very glad I collect low grade books...because I collect comics because I like them. I know people have made money off ones I have sold, and that's fine. As long as they don't manipulate me by telling me they "need it for their collection" so I sell it to them for the price I paid, and then they sell it, I have no problem with someone else selling a book...after all...a very smart friend of mine, often quotes Bernard Baruch's wise advice about never losing money by taking a profit.

[VintageComics]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

 

[VintageComics]

If that still ruffles too many feathers (and I honestly can't see why it would amongst fair minded souls) than it should at least be available in the grader's notes.

 

One more possibility:

 

CGC could add a spot for submitters to voluntarily state that a book has been pressed, and in such cases add it to the label.

 

I can't imagine a member of NOD having a problem with that.

 

I think that would be a positive step. However, that has been asked of CGC by the NOD in past years and it was shot down.

 

...and it was shot down because it would create a false impression that unlabeled books would all be unpressed. Very simple.

 

 

[Monstro]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

 

What would make the pro pressers happy? That we put out tail between our legs and go away?

[VintageComics]

Why? It is a dead on statement. Instead of doing a CPR on a book all dealers/collectors alike would need to do is re-sub and hope for the best.

 

It may be a "dead on statement", I just can't believe the the Board of Directors Chairman of the "Network of Disclosure" could make a statement like that. What does his organization stand for?

 

Perhaps they need to change the name to "Network of Selective Disclosure" or something along those lines.

 

It's not the statement, it's who made the statement.

 

Alec, Brent is simply stating as an opinion about what he thinks would happen in such a scenario.

 

NOD is about proactively disclosing work done to books. To be a member, you have to agree to proactively disclose any work that you know has been done to a book. Since Brent discloses he is a member in good standing.

 

What other people do after CGC labels a book pressed or unpressed, and how Brent perceives the change will affect the marketplace has no relation to his standing in NOD or NOD itself.

 

 

[Old Fashion PB and J]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

Yes, stellar job on the Ewert books

[VintageComics]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

 

What would make the pro pressers happy? That we put out tail between our legs and go away?

 

Please do not imply that I said anything negative or malicious or that I tried to mock anybody.

 

The whole debate is centered about what both sides want.

 

Since pressing is not detectable the majority of the time (or accurately) and is not going away I am asking what would make APA happy.

 

It's the best question we can answer because it will eliminate all of these stupid threads.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

Yes, stellar job on the Ewert books

 

Nice deflection. Nobody is perfect. That has been fixed.

 

Would you want imperfect people to guess at pressed books?

 

 

[Old Fashion PB and J]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

Yes, stellar job on the Ewert books

 

Nice deflection. Nobody is perfect. That has been fixed.

 

Would you want imperfect people to guess at pressed books?

 

They do the same with trimmed. Bob Siman sent in an OO book and it got marked as trimmed

[VintageComics]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

Yes, stellar job on the Ewert books

 

Nice deflection. Nobody is perfect. That has been fixed.

 

Would you want imperfect people to guess at pressed books?

 

They do the same with trimmed. Bob Siman sent in an OO book and it got marked as trimmed

 

I'll bet their record on trimmed books is 98-99%+ so it's a completely different discussion. Nobody is 100%.

 

 

[alecholland]

"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"?

 

 

Big time

 

The bolded part is particularly incisive. (thumbs u

 

I agree with both of you. Very much. It would definitely offer people much more info and choice. The problem is that even if you are labeling 50% of the books that are pressed and detected as such (and that is a high percentage IMO) you will still be allowing 50% of the books to slide through with the notion that they are NOT pressed when they very well could be.

 

This would simply enable people who press books to now direct their energy on the unpressed ones with more focus.

 

And again, I just don't see how you can ask a company to make 50/50 judgment calls.

 

Until there is a study whereby somebody can prove that properly pressed books on proper candidates CAN be detected and detected consistently, I'm going to automatically default to the 50/50 scenario (at best) every time.

 

No offense intended to anyone.

 

 

I think it's important to note that we can disagree about something and still like each other at the end of the day. I tell my coworkers that all the time. That's all it is, a difference of opinion. I don't think anyone here is the devil, we just perceive things differently.

 

With that said, my question would be - isn't making judgment calls pretty much what the entire business of grading is all about? CGC is making a judgment call every time they grade a book. If it isn't a judgment call, then grades would never change upon resubmission of books. A 9.0 would be a 9.0 every time it was submitted, barring any work done to the book, but that is not the case.

 

When you submit a book to CGC, you are paying them to make a judgment call, albeit a more educated judgment call, but a judgment call nevertheless. Why couldn't they add detecting pressing to the list of "unique characteristics" they look for when grading?

[Old Fashion PB and J]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

Yes, stellar job on the Ewert books

 

Nice deflection. Nobody is perfect. That has been fixed.

 

Would you want imperfect people to guess at pressed books?

 

They do the same with trimmed. Bob Siman sent in an OO book and it got marked as trimmed

 

I'll bet their record on trimmed books is 98-99%+ so it's a completely different discussion. Nobody is 100%.

 

I would shocked at 75%. And regardless of percentage, explain Bobs book? Can you honestly say either pressing or trimming can ever be that high of a percentage that they can not make mistakes? No. So to argue that Most of the time are good enough results for one and not the other is ridonkulous.

[Monstro]

Im with Nick here. Manipulation is manipulation. Your perception of what is acceptable, or the hobby as a whole bears no weight. One is changing the appearance of the book, while the other is also changing the appearance of a book. It's apples to apples roy.

 

Not when it comes to detection, it is not apples to apples.

 

Again I ask, short of there being no pressed books in the world, what is going to make APA happy?

 

 

What would make the pro pressers happy? That we put out tail between our legs and go away?

 

Please do not imply that I said anything negative or malicious or that I tried to mock anybody.

 

The whole debate is centered about what both sides want.

 

Since pressing is not detectable the majority of the time (or accurately) and is not going away I am asking what would make APA happy.

 

It's the best question we can answer because it will eliminate all of these stupid threads.

 

 

I don't understand this argument. The exact same thing can be said about trimming, which has been proven. Yet they still note that on the label in the cases where they detect it.

[Pirate]

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.

[alecholland]

Why? It is a dead on statement. Instead of doing a CPR on a book all dealers/collectors alike would need to do is re-sub and hope for the best.

 

It may be a "dead on statement", I just can't believe the the Board of Directors Chairman of the "Network of Disclosure" could make a statement like that. What does his organization stand for?

 

Perhaps they need to change the name to "Network of Selective Disclosure" or something along those lines.

 

It's not the statement, it's who made the statement.

 

Alec, Brent is simply stating as an opinion about what he thinks would happen in such a scenario.

 

NOD is about proactively disclosing work done to books. To be a member, you have to agree to proactively disclose any work that you know has been done to a book. Since Brent discloses he is a member in good standing.

 

What other people do after CGC labels a book pressed or unpressed, and how Brent perceives the change will affect the marketplace has no relation to his standing in NOD or NOD itself.

 

 

Admittedly, my second line was a bit harsh and I do apologize for the smart remark. However, I will say again that coming from the leader of the NOD organization, that really seems like a defeatist attitude.

 

They seem to have set themselves up as an organization that is intended to help police (if you will) the hobby and make sure that "any form of restoration or enhancement known to exist" is disclosed in an effort "to foster both a greater level of confidence and sense of security within the marketplace." Yet their board chairman is essentially saying there is going to be undisclosed restoration or enhancements no matter what we do, so why even try.

 

To me, that is kind of like saying why have police because there is going to be crime no matter what we do.

[drbanner]

Well, one thing's for sure...it's no longer gone unnoticed!

[Monstro]