How in the world did this go unnoticed???

[Paratrooper]

holy , you guys are still talking about this? ADHD comic collectors don't have

[sckao]

 

I just sensed a glitch in the Matrix...

[Old Fashion PB and J]

I just sensed a glitch in the Matrix...

Me too.

[Paratrooper]

typing on my palm pre in a sushi joint, little glitchy here

[sckao]

I just sensed a glitch in the Matrix...

Me too.

 

Okay, you stay down here and hold off the agents. I'll head upstairs with Neo...

 

Cue exit

 

Agent Smith: I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually comic collectors. Every comic collector on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you pro-pressers do not. You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural comic book is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus. Pro-Pressers are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we are the cure.

 

Agent Smith: Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability.

 

Agent Smith: Never send a human to do a machine's job.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[tth2]

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.

Thus confirming the Jeff Goldblum character`s point in "The Big Chill" about the importance of rationalizations.

[tth2]

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.

 

Ooh, ooh, this one`s too easy.

 

So are you saying that CGC should only recognize work on books when they`re capable of catching all such work with 100% accuracy?

 

So just say, for the sake of hypothetical argument, because it couldn`t possibly have happened, that CGC labeled only some books as trimmed while others get a clean bill of health because they slip through the system. Are you saying that CGC should therefore simply throw up its hands and stop trying to detect trimming and PLOD-ing books that it catches?

[tth2]

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.

I was just answering Roy`s question on what else could be done short of everyone stopping pressing. I never said I really expect it to happen.

 

But to answer your question, if CGC were to propose keeping the blue label but designating a book as "pressed", sure, I would think that`s better than nothing (i.e., the current situation).

[tth2]

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.

 

I don't agree with your outlook on pressing, and certainly not that their is something unscrupulous about it, but I will at least give you credit for actually standing up what you believe in.

 

Now....you got any books you want to sell?

(thumbs u

 

[tth2]

Wouldn't adding the designation "PRESSED" to the label, even if pressing is not considered restoration help to further that goal?

 

The CGC response would be something like this:

 

We wouldn't put pressed on the label because it would infer that books without the designation were NOT pressed. Rather than provide a limited amount of information on a limited number of books, this would create more confusion and misconception in the marketplace.

 

So we can expect to see 'trimmed' dropped from what they look for and label shortly?

[tth2]

[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.

[tth2]

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?

 

Asked and answered, Roy. It just wasn`t an answer that you wanted to hear. I`m not really sure what you wanted to hear.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Forgive me for breaking up the fun, but I have a serious question for Tim, Nick, and anyone else inherently opposed to pressing -- and I assure you this is not patronizing.

 

If there was a CGC 9.4 book you wanted, and it was unpressed and not improvable by pressing, and it was then pressed with no visible change, resubbed, and came back as a CGC 9.4, would you still object to the book?

 

Still trying to catch up with this thread.....

 

There was a CGC 9.2 of a book I'd like for my collection posted in the marketplace the other day. The seller cracked a 9.2...had it pressed...it came back 9.2

 

The seller disclosed the pressing.

 

 

I felt the need to pass. Whether or not the CGC grade was altered is irrelevant to me.

 

 

 

[hikeeba-migration]

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.

 

 

If that is the reason given, it is a very lame one.

 

I can't believe the average (or even somewhat below average) collector is so unsophisticated as to assume that corollary.

 

You would think that, but apparently some buyers are very unsophisticated. Here's one of the reasons CGC took the Alpha grade off the label:

 

"We have gotten calls from people who are new to comics and hate anything with a minus next to it. One guy did not care that his book was a 3.5, he just did not understand why he had a minus sign, what he called a negitive, on his book. "

 

[MrBedrock]

• Revisit and re-think hammering nano-defects during grading that aren't actual/factual permanent damage. Maybe unmarred absolute flatness isn't the best indicator of "yep, it's damaged"... if pressing is so effective at re-flattening.

(thumbs u

A retailer and consumer both agreeing on that single point is very encouraging. (thumbs u A sliver of "hope".

 

Maybe the chasm isn't as wide as it appeared first blush.

Or perhaps its narrowing as both sides experience the full impact of the phenomenon.

One of the biggest problems I have had with the parameters CGC used when establishing their grading criteria was the incredible emphasis put on "defects" which are so microscopic in nature that they were not necessarily considered defects prior to CGC's inception. It was very disheartening getting some of my first submissions back and realizing that the golden age books that I had searched for years for, seen practically every copy available, and knew were some of the best preserved examples, were being downgraded for something that was not only ridiculously minor but also correctable.

So you hit the nail on the head as far as I'm concerned.

[tth2]

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.

It has been fixed only because someone showed them photographic evidence that trimming had happened, and then once they re-examined the books knowing that they were supposed to find something, CGC finally figured out how it was done and how to look for it in the future (or so they tell us). If "Methuselah" had never ID`d the books, who knows if CGC would ever have ID`d the trimming, and Ewert might have gotten a whole lot more books in the system, thus making CGC`s accuracy in identifying trimmed books a whole lot less than you`d like to believe. For that matter, how do you know someone else hasn`t been passing thousands of undetected trimmed books through CGC for which there was no Methuselah to tip them off, and therefore the accuracy rate is actually 10% rather than the 98% that you currently believe? You can`t know what you don`t know.

 

This is not a dig at CGC, by the way. I wasn`t outraged when they missed the Ewert books, because the work was really good. In fact, I understand that CGC are just people and make mistakes.

 

Which is why I`m amused when I read arguments such as yours, which ASSUME a high degree of infallibility to CGC. Or maybe I should say places a lot of FAITH in them, because there`s understandably a lot of vested interest in having FAITH in CGC`s accurcy.

 

I don`t ascribe such a high degree of infallibility to CGC, so wouldn`t mind that they will definitely miss some pressed books so long as they do note the ones that they do positively ID, in the same way that I don`t mind that they will definitely miss some trimmed or restored books so long as they do note the ones that they do positively ID.

 

Would you want imperfect people to guess at pressed books?

Not guess. I would like imperfect people to note the ones that they in good faith really believe are pressed.

[tth2]

Because while NOD isn't about pressing - it is about "disclosure", whatever that is - the only message EVER disseminated by NOD and the very vocal NOD members is that pressing is bad. For you to believe anything else is fallacy.

How can you possibly say that, Dan? NOD elected as its president a guy who has always been pro-pressing (with disclosure) and now offers a pressing service. Hardly the actions of a constituency that is anti-pressing.

 

In fact, one of the reasons I never joined NOD was they weren`t extreme enough. I WANTED them to take an anti-pressing and restoration stance, but they would never take a stance on the rightness or wrongness of pressing or restoration. They would only say that it should be disclosed.

[THE_BEYONDER]

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%.

 

 

98-99% ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mschmidt]

[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.

 

Equating trimming with pressing is laughable.

[Freddie-migration]

[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.

 

Equating trimming with pressing is laughable.

 

Almost as ridiculous (but not quite I think) as trivialising murder and comparing that to pressing. Now that is x 10