What's your CGC hang-up?

[fantastic_four]

Basically, it looks like Trace is saying that he's developed a way to detect ALL restoration, and considers Hammer an expert on it (big suprise there) and claims that CGC labels resto when there isnt any, and sometimes misses resto when there is some and apparently wanted to know exactly how they do resto check.

 

No, I think you're reading it wrong, which isn't surprising since the pasted email is difficult to decipher. It looks to me like the lines with two brackets ( >> ) in front of them are Hammer, and the ones with one bracket ( > ) in front of them are Tracey. I think it was Hammer who was praising Tracey on his restoration skills.

[fantastic_four]

So far you have highlighted something that appears to be an innocent situation.

 

The e-mail looks rather innocent to me as well.

 

Steve, what's your issue with Tracey's email? I don't see that it can be with his pointing out that CGC noted restoration on a book he worked on that he didn't think he had performed. I can see how you would prickle at the "I've heard that it is their policy to grade suspected books as restored - just in case" comment, but it's just speculation in private e-mail. Additionally, it looks like Hammer really started the speculative vein in that e-mail and Tracey just added to it.

 

Is it the thing about Tracey starting a competitive grading service?

[deathlok]

So far you have highlighted something that appears to be an innocent situation.

 

The e-mail looks rather innocent to me as well.

 

Steve, what's your issue with Tracey's email? I don't see that it can be with his pointing out that CGC noted restoration on a book he worked on that he didn't think he had performed. I can see how you would prickle at the "I've heard that it is their policy to grade suspected books as restored - just in case" comment, but it's just speculation in private e-mail. Additionally, it looks like Hammer really started the speculative vein in that e-mail and Tracey just added to it.

 

Is it the thing about Tracey starting a competitive grading service?

 

Why would he have to respond to you FF? This is obviously a case of things being said/done behind the scenes to which not all is mentioned here. Regardless of your Junior Batman Detective skills, this is a matter which should be better left off the boards. Which is the way Steve would like it. It should take long for the mods to perhaps pull this thread.

[fantastic_four]

Why would he have to respond to you FF? This is obviously a case of things being said/done behind the scenes to which not all is mentioned here. Regardless of your Junior Batman Detective skills, this is a matter which should be better left off the boards. Which is the way Steve would like it. It should take long for the mods to perhaps pull this thread.

 

Kiss my arse. If he wanted it left off the boards, he wouldn't have posted it ON the boards. Both Steve and Tracey have talked about this privately with me in the past, and I couldn't figure out what the issue was until Steve posted this e-mail. I got between them a few years ago because I kept encouraging Tracey to post here but he wouldn't because he thought Steve wouldn't allow him to due to this bad blood between them. Now that I see what the bad blood was over, I don't exactly get it except that Steve views Tracey as a competitor and that it's purely a business thing.

 

You don't want to read it, then don't read it, but if Steve wanted to bring this up publicly, I can't imagine why a mod would have any reason to pull it.

[supapimp]

[sborock]

Why would he have to respond to you FF? This is obviously a case of things being said/done behind the scenes to which not all is mentioned here. Regardless of your Junior Batman Detective skills, this is a matter which should be better left off the boards. Which is the way Steve would like it. It should take long for the mods to perhaps pull this thread.

 

Kiss my arse. If he wanted it left off the boards, he wouldn't have posted it ON the boards. Both Steve and Tracey have talked about this privately with me in the past, and I couldn't figure out what the issue was until Steve posted this e-mail. I got between them a few years ago because I kept encouraging Tracey to post here but he wouldn't because he thought Steve wouldn't allow him to due to this bad blood between them. Now that I see what the bad blood was over, I don't exactly get it except that Steve views Tracey as a competitor and that it's purely a business thing.

 

You don't want to read it, then don't read it, but if Steve wanted to bring this up publicly, I can't imagine why a mod would have any reason to pull it.

 

O.K., quick bottom line and then my daughter and I are off to my grandmother's.

 

Tracey was working with the AACC to compare our holder to other materials used in our hobby. I was talking with him VERY OPENLY about or product, restoration check, and grading services. I contacted Hammer because Tracey said he was bad mouthing us. Hammer then sent me their back and forth emails where tracey clearly states that he has intended all along to get investors and start another certification (and in his opinion better) service. After that, I did not trust Tracey because at no time while asking about CGC's product and workings, did he state he is trying to become a future competitor and the fact that he seemed friendly with one of the worst thieves in our hobby.

 

I only brought this up because he came on the boards and said that we won't work with him in a manner that suggested we just did not care about changing the way we rate restoration. This is untrue, we just won't work with Tracey.

 

Have a great weekend everybody!

[fantastic_four]

After that, I did not trust Tracey because at no time while asking about CGC's product and workings, did he state he is trying to become a future competitor and the fact that he seemed friendly with one of the worst thieves in our hobby.

 

I guess I can see your point of view from a business perspective, although not enough for you to break all ties with him. I've found at the small companies I've worked at, particularly my current one, that you should NEVER discount the possibility of a business partnership, PARTICULARLY with people who could become your direct competitors. It's always better to have someone on your side than against you. Having said that, it definitely would have been better if Tracey would have mentioned up front he was thinking of competing with CGC. It's obviously not my business WHO you choose to do business with so feel free to ignore me entirely--I'd say you're generally quite skilled at getting along with people.

 

I can't see you holding his communication with Hammer against him--you were doing the same thing to a more limited extent. So have I, and I continue to converse with him when it's useful to do so, although it rarely is useful since he spreads disinformation whenever he thinks it will benefit him. It's also not clear that Tracey knew Koos was Dupcak, and in fact he maintains above that he DIDN'T know, which isn't hard to believe. In 2001 when these communications took place it's very possible that no one had filled him in, but even if they had, exchanging e-mails with him doesn't make him an ally since just because they agreed on a few issues. I still agree with Hammer on many of his ideas, although it's impossible to accept them at face value since he fabricates so many of them.

[DiceX]

Thanks for explaining the situation, Steve.

I agree with your point of view.

 

It sucks to be played for information, not knowing it will be used against you.

I've been on the receiving end of this, and it's no fun.

[Newerthannew]

 

O.K., quick bottom line and then my daughter and I are off to my grandmother's.

 

Tracey was working with the AACC to compare our holder to other materials used in our hobby. I was talking with him VERY OPENLY about or product, restoration check, and grading services. I contacted Hammer because Tracey said he was bad mouthing us. Hammer then sent me their back and forth emails where tracey clearly states that he has intended all along to get investors and start another certification (and in his opinion better) service. After that, I did not trust Tracey because at no time while asking about CGC's product and workings, did he state he is trying to become a future competitor and the fact that he seemed friendly with one of the worst thieves in our hobby.

 

I only brought this up because he came on the boards and said that we won't work with him in a manner that suggested we just did not care about changing the way we rate restoration. This is untrue, we just won't work with Tracey.

 

Have a great weekend everybody!

 

Steve

 

The information from our phone calls, that you supplied, was used in a neutral fashion. AACC approached me on the topic of plastic containers used to hold comic books. They approached me because of my scientific background and my interest in comic-books. I’m not even a member of the AACC. My research into the topic was completely neutral and it was in fairness to CGC that I contacted you for information. These were the questions I had planned to ask Steve Eichenbaum (as you suggested I do):

 

1) what is the inner container made of

2) what is the outer container made of

3) why was the material chosen? Were there any advantages over any other products?

4) would CGC be willing to provide information regarding performance tests.

 

It’s not like I started the conversation asking how life was going and then tried to ply you with alchohol and then asked “by the way, what were your performance tests?” I asked you, the company representative, if you could supply the information. You told me you couldn’t and that was fine with me. I didn’t make anything up, I didn’t leave anything out. In my report, I never made any negative conclusions on your business.

 

Science doesn’t make judgements, politics does. I took steps to avoid making any political or judgemental statements, for either side, publishing a report that was neutral in tone. The information that I offered could easily be used by anyone or by either side to promote their agenda. I have no agenda, just ethics, tons of ethics.

 

Steve, print the email where it says I want to start a direct competition business to CGC. At this point, all I’ve indicated is that I want to start a detailed restoration grading service which CGC does not currently offer. Please print any proof you have which might show that I was “fishing” for information in regard to this evolved restoration service as I don’t believe that it happened and I would have NO reason to approach yourself or your company about restoration information as I don’t think you have much that you could offer to someone with my training and background. If anything, it would have been an attempt for me to test if there was a reasonable future partnership with you and yourselves. Although I was disappointed with the interview with Eichenbaum at the genesis of CGC, I didn’t want to burn any bridges with CGC as I thought that my skills would lead to a possibility of future business and so I tried to remain open minded on the topic of CGC.

 

I’m thoroughly disgusted with the pathetic attempts to affiliate me with Danny D. I will say this once, I had no idea it was Danny D at the time I was communicating with him. What really concerns me is, in the same sentence, that you can condemn me with Dupcak words but then turn-around and completely question Dupcak’s honesty. Choose a side, either Dupcak is correct and you agree with what he says and believe in his honesty OR you believe that Dupcak is lying and you cannot take any of his comment’s at face value including the one where he says I am lying and the suggestion that I am trying to play you for information.

 

All I can see is that I was offering/developing/thinking about a service that CGC has YET to offer. I can see how you would view this as competition, if you were in the development of such a service but I never asked you about it or inquired for details about it. Now you come out and say that CGC is now developing a new system that address the needs of the hobby. Funny thing is, I have developed a system – maybe it’s perfect, maybe it’s not. I was still trying to discover if CGC was interested in working with me and its obvious that you are not. I’m still dismayed by the fact that you are holding a foundless grudge based on the questionable information of an ethically challenged individual. You have yet to directly condemn me with any substantial facts. Innuendo and rumours by Danny D should be weighted appropriately. Perhaps we can agree on that?

 

For those that didn’t see the report. Here is a link to the report that I submitted to AACC.

 

www.eclipsepaper.com/report.htm

 

Tracey Heft

PS

 

Just to point out:

 

You stated:

 

I only brought this up because he came on the boards and said that we won't work with him in a manner that suggested we just did not care about changing the way we rate restoration.

 

 

I never suggested that you didn’t care about changing the way you rate restoration, what I wrote was:

 

… since I can't seem to get CGwhoever to take an interest in anything I'm attached to, I'm holding onto the idea until I can bring it to market. If CGwhoever is interested in contacting me, they are more than welcome to do so.

 

This doesn’t exactly sound like I’m anti-CGC, in fact I openly offered an invitation. Thanks for clearing up CGC’s position when you posted:

This is untrue, we just won't work with Tracey.

[RS]

Wizard First

[supapimp]

it's easy to see who to believe here, danny boy is a liar......case closed.

[porcupine48]

dookie is poop,if im not mistaken

dookie to those who dont"press and tell"

prickr