Disclosure - Yes Or No?

[EastEnd]

My working assumption is that just about every high grade slab that I buy has likely been pressed... so for me personally, whether someone discloses or not isn't important. I think this pressing thing has gotten so pervasive that I likely couldn't actively participate and enjoy the hobby if I tried to limit myself to unpressed books (and this is only going to get worse). When I get a package in the mail, I am on occassion a little disappointed when I find that crushed spine look that an amateurishly pressed book will sometimes have... but otherwise I don't really let the pressing uncertainy get to me. You really can't definitely tell when a well-pressed book has been pressed so how can I let it get to me? It's probably a sad statement to make, but I've come to accept that there's simply nothing I can do about pressing in the hobby... at this point thousands and thousands of high grade books have been pressed... the genie is out of the bottle and is not going back in.

 

...and this was more or less the point that I was trying to make.

 

I'd rather arm myself from a position of absolute truth (ie. "I know for sure this book wasn't pressed") than one of relative truth (ie. "I didn't personally press this book").

 

...but that's just me.

 

 

If you're selling a book that you KNOW is pressed....pro-actively disclose that the book was pressed when you market it.

 

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Tell the truth....and move on.

 

I think that's fine conceptually... but I guess what I'm really asking is what exactly is accomplished by that disclosure? You avoid buying that specific pressed book... but the buyer that is concerned about pressing still likely has many many pressed books in their collection and is inevitably going to buy more. If you're going to participate in the high grade end of this hobby, it's unavoidable. Note, I'm not saying that a seller shouldn't disclose... I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

The seller gives the buyer information relevant to the potential transaction.

 

Again, that's fine... the buyer can avoid buying that specific pressed book... but that same buyer will still buy plenty of pressed books if they're going to continue in the hobby.

 

There's also one very troubling aspect to that disclosure that no one seems to be talking about: it notifies pressers whether a book may be a good candidate for an upgrade. The disclosure ironically ENCOURAGES pressing.

[bluechip]

Overall this has been a very rational thread. Part of the discussion, as always, focuses on whether pressing should be called restoration. Ultimately even that distinction doesn't matter as much as whether it's described that way with simple words that have universally agreed definitions or with colored labels that are subjective and highly emotion-charged because they are routinely used to denote a book that is "bad" or "not an investment." But it's very easy to find examples of labels where the color creates the counter-intuitive impression.

 

Would any average normal person consider this book "restored"

 

 

And that this book is NOT restored?

 

 

 

I think the answer is obvious.

 

But the comic investment conventional wisdwom says the first book, with only a couple hundred known copies and the first appearance of a world-famous character in the Batman mythos, is "restored" (and therefore "not for investment'), while the second book, a good book but not remotely rare and, in fact, enormously common, is worth far more because it can be slabbed with a blue label and a much higher number.

 

I don't think the guy who pressed out the FF 112 did anything wrong so long as he tells the buyer he pressed it and I think if he does tell people he pressed the book most people wouldn't really care -- UNLESS that book were put in a special colored label and the buyer had been told the label color means the book is "just for collectors" or "not for investment."

 

 

 

 

 

You're like a broken record and unfortunately, stuff like this gets threads derailed.

 

Which, considering we've for once managed to conduct this like perfect gentlemen so far, isn't too great an idea.

 

I don't know what was ungentlemanly about the post, but if you took offense at any of it because you feel it's a "broken record" comment, I'd have to say that many of the comments made here have been made many times before and many repeated here in this same thread. I am sure they appreciate your not terming their comments a "broken record" or otherwise outside of gentlemanly discussion. .

 

This is your personal hobby-horse. You raise it time and time again. It doesn't have a lot of support. It certainly has no relevance to this discussion and poll.

 

Thread derailing always ends in tears.

 

Actually, I voted "yes" on your poll.

 

This was to clarify that:

disclosing of pressing is probably a good thing.

Noting pressing on labels could go either way.

Pressing as another thing to divined/described/demonized with colors would probably not be so good.

 

people in this thread have suggested all of the above, and this was only in response to that.

 

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

My working assumption is that just about every high grade slab that I buy has likely been pressed... so for me personally, whether someone discloses or not isn't important. I think this pressing thing has gotten so pervasive that I likely couldn't actively participate and enjoy the hobby if I tried to limit myself to unpressed books (and this is only going to get worse). When I get a package in the mail, I am on occassion a little disappointed when I find that crushed spine look that an amateurishly pressed book will sometimes have... but otherwise I don't really let the pressing uncertainy get to me. You really can't definitely tell when a well-pressed book has been pressed so how can I let it get to me? It's probably a sad statement to make, but I've come to accept that there's simply nothing I can do about pressing in the hobby... at this point thousands and thousands of high grade books have been pressed... the genie is out of the bottle and is not going back in.

 

...and this was more or less the point that I was trying to make.

 

I'd rather arm myself from a position of absolute truth (ie. "I know for sure this book wasn't pressed") than one of relative truth (ie. "I didn't personally press this book").

 

...but that's just me.

 

 

If you're selling a book that you KNOW is pressed....pro-actively disclose that the book was pressed when you market it.

 

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Tell the truth....and move on.

 

I think that's fine conceptually... but I guess what I'm really asking is what exactly is accomplished by that disclosure? You avoid buying that specific pressed book... but the buyer that is concerned about pressing still likely has many many pressed books in their collection and is inevitably going to buy more. If you're going to participate in the high grade end of this hobby, it's unavoidable. Note, I'm not saying that a seller shouldn't disclose... I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

The seller gives the buyer information relevant to the potential transaction.

 

Again, that's fine... the buyer can avoid buying that specific pressed book... but that same buyer will still buy plenty of pressed books if they're going to continue in the hobby.

 

There's also one very troubling aspect to that disclosure that no one seems to be talking about: it notifies pressers whether a book may be a good candidate for an upgrade. The disclosure ironically ENCOURAGES pressing.

 

 

What form of disclosure encourages pressing?

 

 

[thirdgreenham]

Fine.

 

Someone sells a book and they say that they had it pressed. People buy accordingly.

 

Someone sells a book and they say they didn't have it pressed. People buy accordingly (more people, the pro and anti pressing crowd for different reasons)...except the book may have been pressed 25 times before that. Nobody really knows for certain but people buy it as an unpressed book.

 

Sounds like an uncertain declaration. Nobody really knows but they buy as though it should be an unpressed book.

 

Finally, someone sells a book and they personally guarantee that the book has never been pressed.

 

Now you're actively disclosing something concrete and unequivocal.

 

First, Roy, I'm not unsympathetic to your position, in fact a large part of me agrees with this. That's why I'm against a policing aspect. My point is, look, if you know, then you ought to say it. For instance, if you actually had the book pressed, you should say so. You shouldn't sell a book that you had pressed or pressed yourself, and then say, well it either hasn't been pressed or I don't know if it's been pressed. That'd be wrong to me.

 

If you don't know a book's history, you say, I have no idea.

 

It's just saying what the honest answer is. I don't want witch hunts over it either, but I would like some basic integrity and I think that we're throwing up arguments of scenarios of well... what if... to obfuscate the basic principle, if you know, disclose.

 

I agreeing with you 100%.

 

I'm not trying to obfuscate, but I anticipate a new scenario being created as a side effect of proactive disclosure, and that being one of people assuming that non disclosed books have not been pressed.

 

If you agree with Foolkiller about disclosing, then why aren't you disclosing in your eBay auctions?

 

I see, in the promo section of the CGC boards, that you mentioned these books were pressed, but not in the eBay auctions themselves. What cracks me up is your description of that ASM 64 CGC 9.8;

 

The book looks like it traveled through time straight from the presses.

 

 

Please forgive me if I'm jumping the gun here, but it looks kind of bad. Hopefully, you just forgot to disclose in the auction descriptions.

 

Andy

[EastEnd]

My working assumption is that just about every high grade slab that I buy has likely been pressed... so for me personally, whether someone discloses or not isn't important. I think this pressing thing has gotten so pervasive that I likely couldn't actively participate and enjoy the hobby if I tried to limit myself to unpressed books (and this is only going to get worse). When I get a package in the mail, I am on occassion a little disappointed when I find that crushed spine look that an amateurishly pressed book will sometimes have... but otherwise I don't really let the pressing uncertainy get to me. You really can't definitely tell when a well-pressed book has been pressed so how can I let it get to me? It's probably a sad statement to make, but I've come to accept that there's simply nothing I can do about pressing in the hobby... at this point thousands and thousands of high grade books have been pressed... the genie is out of the bottle and is not going back in.

 

...and this was more or less the point that I was trying to make.

 

I'd rather arm myself from a position of absolute truth (ie. "I know for sure this book wasn't pressed") than one of relative truth (ie. "I didn't personally press this book").

 

...but that's just me.

 

 

If you're selling a book that you KNOW is pressed....pro-actively disclose that the book was pressed when you market it.

 

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Tell the truth....and move on.

 

I think that's fine conceptually... but I guess what I'm really asking is what exactly is accomplished by that disclosure? You avoid buying that specific pressed book... but the buyer that is concerned about pressing still likely has many many pressed books in their collection and is inevitably going to buy more. If you're going to participate in the high grade end of this hobby, it's unavoidable. Note, I'm not saying that a seller shouldn't disclose... I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

The seller gives the buyer information relevant to the potential transaction.

 

Again, that's fine... the buyer can avoid buying that specific pressed book... but that same buyer will still buy plenty of pressed books if they're going to continue in the hobby.

 

There's also one very troubling aspect to that disclosure that no one seems to be talking about: it notifies pressers whether a book may be a good candidate for an upgrade. The disclosure ironically ENCOURAGES pressing.

 

 

What form of disclosure encourages pressing?

 

 

"Encourages" is probably the wrong word... "facilitates" is better.

[VintageComics]

The book looks like it traveled through time straight from the presses.

 

 

Please forgive me if I'm jumping the gun here, but it looks kind of bad. Hopefully, you just forgot to disclose in the auction descriptions.

 

Andy

 

I'm disclosing among forum members because that is what forum members want. Let's not start policing the internet. If someone asks I answer honestly.

 

And for the record and to the best of my knowledge, the ASM #64 that you lifted that quote from was actually never pressed.

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

 

The book looks like it traveled through time straight from the presses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[VintageComics]

 

The book looks like it traveled through time straight from the presses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like I said, that book was never pressed as long as it's been in my ownership.

 

[thirdgreenham]

The book looks like it traveled through time straight from the presses.

 

 

Please forgive me if I'm jumping the gun here, but it looks kind of bad. Hopefully, you just forgot to disclose in the auction descriptions.

 

Andy

 

I'm disclosing among forum members because that is what forum members want. Let's not start policing the internet. If someone asks I answer honestly.

 

And for the record and to the best of my knowledge, the ASM #64 that you lifted that quote from was actually never pressed.

 

 

Sorry Roy, I just saw the humour and had to post it.

[comicwiz]

As far as detection of pressing is concerned, I believe that we may already have the instrumentation to do it. The difficulty would be interpreting the results in a definitive way.

 

As far as I know, silica isn't introduced anywhere, from the time a book is printed off the press, to the time it is stored in a box, bag and/or backing. The only time silica would otherwise be introduced is when a comic is pressed. There is no doubt that the transfer of silica on a comic book cover (front/rear/inside covers) would leave residue.

 

Where is silica coming from--you mean from wax paper? Are you sure any rubs off on the comic?

 

Paper coated with silica is what facilitates the release properties in standard silica, mylar and other release papers.

 

And yes. There is a distinct sheen loss that can be seen with the naked eye on release paper post-pressing. That silica coating doesn't just evaporate into thin air.

 

Of course this is also dependent on a number of variables, including type of press, materials (including release papers), processes used on comics from different eras, etc. Ultimately, you would have a minimum of 6 areas for each book to survey for residue (for books with inserts, it would be more).

[thirdgreenham]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

[THE_BEYONDER]

My working assumption is that just about every high grade slab that I buy has likely been pressed... so for me personally, whether someone discloses or not isn't important. I think this pressing thing has gotten so pervasive that I likely couldn't actively participate and enjoy the hobby if I tried to limit myself to unpressed books (and this is only going to get worse). When I get a package in the mail, I am on occassion a little disappointed when I find that crushed spine look that an amateurishly pressed book will sometimes have... but otherwise I don't really let the pressing uncertainy get to me. You really can't definitely tell when a well-pressed book has been pressed so how can I let it get to me? It's probably a sad statement to make, but I've come to accept that there's simply nothing I can do about pressing in the hobby... at this point thousands and thousands of high grade books have been pressed... the genie is out of the bottle and is not going back in.

 

...and this was more or less the point that I was trying to make.

 

I'd rather arm myself from a position of absolute truth (ie. "I know for sure this book wasn't pressed") than one of relative truth (ie. "I didn't personally press this book").

 

...but that's just me.

 

 

If you're selling a book that you KNOW is pressed....pro-actively disclose that the book was pressed when you market it.

 

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Tell the truth....and move on.

 

I think that's fine conceptually... but I guess what I'm really asking is what exactly is accomplished by that disclosure? You avoid buying that specific pressed book... but the buyer that is concerned about pressing still likely has many many pressed books in their collection and is inevitably going to buy more. If you're going to participate in the high grade end of this hobby, it's unavoidable. Note, I'm not saying that a seller shouldn't disclose... I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

The seller gives the buyer information relevant to the potential transaction.

 

Again, that's fine... the buyer can avoid buying that specific pressed book... but that same buyer will still buy plenty of pressed books if they're going to continue in the hobby.

 

There's also one very troubling aspect to that disclosure that no one seems to be talking about: it notifies pressers whether a book may be a good candidate for an upgrade. The disclosure ironically ENCOURAGES pressing.

 

 

What form of disclosure encourages pressing?

 

 

"Encourages" is probably the wrong word... "facilitates" is better.

 

A hi-res scan/pic that clearly illustrates a pressable defect can both encourage & facilitate pressing.

 

You're looking at disclosure in terms of its results rather than in terms of its value, ethicality, etc., in and of itself.

[EastEnd]

My working assumption is that just about every high grade slab that I buy has likely been pressed... so for me personally, whether someone discloses or not isn't important. I think this pressing thing has gotten so pervasive that I likely couldn't actively participate and enjoy the hobby if I tried to limit myself to unpressed books (and this is only going to get worse). When I get a package in the mail, I am on occassion a little disappointed when I find that crushed spine look that an amateurishly pressed book will sometimes have... but otherwise I don't really let the pressing uncertainy get to me. You really can't definitely tell when a well-pressed book has been pressed so how can I let it get to me? It's probably a sad statement to make, but I've come to accept that there's simply nothing I can do about pressing in the hobby... at this point thousands and thousands of high grade books have been pressed... the genie is out of the bottle and is not going back in.

 

...and this was more or less the point that I was trying to make.

 

I'd rather arm myself from a position of absolute truth (ie. "I know for sure this book wasn't pressed") than one of relative truth (ie. "I didn't personally press this book").

 

...but that's just me.

 

 

If you're selling a book that you KNOW is pressed....pro-actively disclose that the book was pressed when you market it.

 

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Tell the truth....and move on.

 

I think that's fine conceptually... but I guess what I'm really asking is what exactly is accomplished by that disclosure? You avoid buying that specific pressed book... but the buyer that is concerned about pressing still likely has many many pressed books in their collection and is inevitably going to buy more. If you're going to participate in the high grade end of this hobby, it's unavoidable. Note, I'm not saying that a seller shouldn't disclose... I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

The seller gives the buyer information relevant to the potential transaction.

 

Again, that's fine... the buyer can avoid buying that specific pressed book... but that same buyer will still buy plenty of pressed books if they're going to continue in the hobby.

 

There's also one very troubling aspect to that disclosure that no one seems to be talking about: it notifies pressers whether a book may be a good candidate for an upgrade. The disclosure ironically ENCOURAGES pressing.

 

 

What form of disclosure encourages pressing?

 

 

"Encourages" is probably the wrong word... "facilitates" is better.

 

A hi-res scan/pic that clearly illustrates a pressable defect can both encourage & faciltate pressing.

 

You're looking at disclosure in terms of its results rather than in terms of its value, ethicality, etc., in and of itself.

 

Telling a presser that a book hasn't been pressed is extremely useful information. I'm looking at it practically and realistically.

[comicdonna]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

[rza808]

My working assumption is that just about every high grade slab that I buy has likely been pressed... so for me personally, whether someone discloses or not isn't important. I think this pressing thing has gotten so pervasive that I likely couldn't actively participate and enjoy the hobby if I tried to limit myself to unpressed books (and this is only going to get worse). When I get a package in the mail, I am on occassion a little disappointed when I find that crushed spine look that an amateurishly pressed book will sometimes have... but otherwise I don't really let the pressing uncertainy get to me. You really can't definitely tell when a well-pressed book has been pressed so how can I let it get to me? It's probably a sad statement to make, but I've come to accept that there's simply nothing I can do about pressing in the hobby... at this point thousands and thousands of high grade books have been pressed... the genie is out of the bottle and is not going back in.

 

...and this was more or less the point that I was trying to make.

 

I'd rather arm myself from a position of absolute truth (ie. "I know for sure this book wasn't pressed") than one of relative truth (ie. "I didn't personally press this book").

 

...but that's just me.

 

 

If you're selling a book that you KNOW is pressed....pro-actively disclose that the book was pressed when you market it.

 

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Tell the truth....and move on.

 

I think that's fine conceptually... but I guess what I'm really asking is what exactly is accomplished by that disclosure? You avoid buying that specific pressed book... but the buyer that is concerned about pressing still likely has many many pressed books in their collection and is inevitably going to buy more. If you're going to participate in the high grade end of this hobby, it's unavoidable. Note, I'm not saying that a seller shouldn't disclose... I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

The seller gives the buyer information relevant to the potential transaction.

 

Again, that's fine... the buyer can avoid buying that specific pressed book... but that same buyer will still buy plenty of pressed books if they're going to continue in the hobby.

 

There's also one very troubling aspect to that disclosure that no one seems to be talking about: it notifies pressers whether a book may be a good candidate for an upgrade. The disclosure ironically ENCOURAGES pressing.

 

 

What form of disclosure encourages pressing?

 

 

"Encourages" is probably the wrong word... "facilitates" is better.

This is true. Wouldn't that help those looking specifically for pressing candidates? I understand the issue here but beleive it is being discussed on 2 separate levels disclose if you know I dont have a problem with that nor would I be upset if a seller didnt disclose. I dunno maybe only the big timers care

[THE_BEYONDER]

My working assumption is that just about every high grade slab that I buy has likely been pressed... so for me personally, whether someone discloses or not isn't important. I think this pressing thing has gotten so pervasive that I likely couldn't actively participate and enjoy the hobby if I tried to limit myself to unpressed books (and this is only going to get worse). When I get a package in the mail, I am on occassion a little disappointed when I find that crushed spine look that an amateurishly pressed book will sometimes have... but otherwise I don't really let the pressing uncertainy get to me. You really can't definitely tell when a well-pressed book has been pressed so how can I let it get to me? It's probably a sad statement to make, but I've come to accept that there's simply nothing I can do about pressing in the hobby... at this point thousands and thousands of high grade books have been pressed... the genie is out of the bottle and is not going back in.

 

...and this was more or less the point that I was trying to make.

 

I'd rather arm myself from a position of absolute truth (ie. "I know for sure this book wasn't pressed") than one of relative truth (ie. "I didn't personally press this book").

 

...but that's just me.

 

 

If you're selling a book that you KNOW is pressed....pro-actively disclose that the book was pressed when you market it.

 

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Tell the truth....and move on.

 

I think that's fine conceptually... but I guess what I'm really asking is what exactly is accomplished by that disclosure? You avoid buying that specific pressed book... but the buyer that is concerned about pressing still likely has many many pressed books in their collection and is inevitably going to buy more. If you're going to participate in the high grade end of this hobby, it's unavoidable. Note, I'm not saying that a seller shouldn't disclose... I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

The seller gives the buyer information relevant to the potential transaction.

 

Again, that's fine... the buyer can avoid buying that specific pressed book... but that same buyer will still buy plenty of pressed books if they're going to continue in the hobby.

 

There's also one very troubling aspect to that disclosure that no one seems to be talking about: it notifies pressers whether a book may be a good candidate for an upgrade. The disclosure ironically ENCOURAGES pressing.

 

 

What form of disclosure encourages pressing?

 

 

"Encourages" is probably the wrong word... "facilitates" is better.

 

A hi-res scan/pic that clearly illustrates a pressable defect can both encourage & faciltate pressing.

 

You're looking at disclosure in terms of its results rather than in terms of its value, ethicality, etc., in and of itself.

 

Telling a presser that a book hasn't been pressed is extremely useful information. I'm looking at it practically and realistically.

 

Telling a presser that a book has pressable defects is useful information. Just because a book hasn't been pressed....it doesn't necessarily follow that the book is improvable.

 

That aside....

 

 

I understand your point. Why tell pressers that a book is a good pressing candidate if you're opposed to the practice of pressing in the 1st place?

 

There's no obligation to disclose that one has nothing to disclose.

[fantastic_four]

A VOC meter would likely pick-up silica, however as you start to move towards more sensitive meters (some measure parts per billion), it would be difficult to isolate the compound that is triggering a reading or alarm.

 

If you follow your link, there's a list of 252 compounds that VOC meter can detect, but silica isn't on the list. Are you sure it's silica that forms the slick surface of release paper? I found those things cost around $4000...I'm guessing you worked somewhere in the past that had one?

 

I've got a roll of release paper right here that's been sitting unused for 5+ years, but I'm not sure I can see lost sheen in the areas I was using. I was doing spot pressing and haven't used a dry mount press because I don't own one...what were you doing when you've seen the sheen come off of release paper? What temperature was the heat source at?

[EastEnd]

My working assumption is that just about every high grade slab that I buy has likely been pressed... so for me personally, whether someone discloses or not isn't important. I think this pressing thing has gotten so pervasive that I likely couldn't actively participate and enjoy the hobby if I tried to limit myself to unpressed books (and this is only going to get worse). When I get a package in the mail, I am on occassion a little disappointed when I find that crushed spine look that an amateurishly pressed book will sometimes have... but otherwise I don't really let the pressing uncertainy get to me. You really can't definitely tell when a well-pressed book has been pressed so how can I let it get to me? It's probably a sad statement to make, but I've come to accept that there's simply nothing I can do about pressing in the hobby... at this point thousands and thousands of high grade books have been pressed... the genie is out of the bottle and is not going back in.

 

...and this was more or less the point that I was trying to make.

 

I'd rather arm myself from a position of absolute truth (ie. "I know for sure this book wasn't pressed") than one of relative truth (ie. "I didn't personally press this book").

 

...but that's just me.

 

 

If you're selling a book that you KNOW is pressed....pro-actively disclose that the book was pressed when you market it.

 

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Tell the truth....and move on.

 

I think that's fine conceptually... but I guess what I'm really asking is what exactly is accomplished by that disclosure? You avoid buying that specific pressed book... but the buyer that is concerned about pressing still likely has many many pressed books in their collection and is inevitably going to buy more. If you're going to participate in the high grade end of this hobby, it's unavoidable. Note, I'm not saying that a seller shouldn't disclose... I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

The seller gives the buyer information relevant to the potential transaction.

 

Again, that's fine... the buyer can avoid buying that specific pressed book... but that same buyer will still buy plenty of pressed books if they're going to continue in the hobby.

 

There's also one very troubling aspect to that disclosure that no one seems to be talking about: it notifies pressers whether a book may be a good candidate for an upgrade. The disclosure ironically ENCOURAGES pressing.

 

 

What form of disclosure encourages pressing?

 

 

"Encourages" is probably the wrong word... "facilitates" is better.

 

A hi-res scan/pic that clearly illustrates a pressable defect can both encourage & faciltate pressing.

 

You're looking at disclosure in terms of its results rather than in terms of its value, ethicality, etc., in and of itself.

 

Telling a presser that a book hasn't been pressed is extremely useful information. I'm looking at it practically and realistically.

 

Telling a presser that a book has pressable defects is useful information. Just because a book hasn't been pressed....it doesn't necessarily follow that the book is improvable.

 

That aside....

 

 

I understand your point. Why tell pressers that a book is a good pressing candidate if you're opposed to the practice of pressing in the 1st place?

 

There's no obligation to disclose that one has nothing to disclose.

 

 

 

 

 

That's right, I don't see disclosure as a black and white issue (though as a collector I agree with the general principle that more information and honest interaction should be the norm) ... there are grayer implications that need to be considered as well. Not all buyers are innocent collectors; some are pressers looking to flip. And disclosing in a sales thread that you're offering an "unpressed" high grade collection is going to attract a lot of the latter.

[COI]

I'm questioning what utility it has to a collector when pressing is so rampant... and identification so difficult. At the end of the day, we have to deal with the realities of the market.

 

Sadly, I completely agree with this.

[VintageComics]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

 

Because I believe that disclosing which books are unequivocally unpressed is much more useful, more material and more concrete than saying "these books were pressed by me" all the while falsely putting all undisclosed/possibly pressed/maybe unpressed books in the unpressed category when in fact it is just an illusion.

 

There's becoming less and less maybe about it. Borock was right.