Action 5, CGC 9.4 blue on CLINK

[skypinkblu]

That's interesting, though...do you think that most people who crack out books, mail in the labels?

 

[skypinkblu]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4603262

[nearmint]

The Hit #3 8.5 is recent -- it's the Billy Wright copy.

Exactly. Could just be someone cracked a book out and turned label in

 

It was CGC'd when it was sold onthe forum and it was NOT on the census at that time...I know, I looked then and a month and 2 months later. I thought maybe it was new and didn't hit the census yet.

 

It's an old label, so couldn't have been a new sub when it sold just last year.

[damonwad]

 

My earlier use of the term "flippers" was not correct as I was really referring to buyers who purchase books, surreptitiously manipulate them, and then resell them without any disclosure even though the work that was done is legally okay from CGC's point of view.

 

I use the word laundering because their very behaviour leaves the impression that is exactly what they are doing as evident by Jeff's comment below:

 

. I'm sure the 8.5 label will be submitted after the auction is over.

 

Since it's actually okay to press and resubmit books according to CGC, then I don't understand why they simply don't turn in the label at the time of resub, instead of waiting until the auction is over. This key difference in timing leaves the impression that the seller himself believes that what he is doing is not totally above board and honest. If he felt what he was doing is okay, shouldn't he also have the balls to MANNUP and turn in the old label up front instead of waiting until the auction is over.

 

 

Lou, you're proceeding from the assumption that the book's owner is the one that cracked it out, rather then the person pressing the book. My understanding from Matt is that he does send labels in, but who knows how often.

 

I usually do submit the old label with the books, sometimes I do not. It all depends on the situation. But if I don't, will gather them up at some point and send them to CGC to remove from the census. I'm a strong supporter of an accurate census, and go to great lengths to make sure CGC eventually gets all of their old tags. Even though there might be some important old labels that never got back to CGC over the years, I wouldn't say CGC's census is wildly inaccurate. There's not many people cracking out expensive books. I know many of them, and we all agree that getting the old grades off the census is in everyone's best interest. More copies on the census simply means more percieved supply, which can adversely affect a book's value.

 

But there can be many reasons why a tag would not go back with the book when it's submitted to CGC a second time.

 

Unless I'm missing something, he says that he always sends the label in. Just not always with the book.

 

I sent my book to Matt in the case (mostly because I'm afraid I'll damage one if I crack it out). Not sure this is the case with most people, they may crack them out before sending them in. He may get a number of them without the labels.

 

My use of the word "wildly" was based on my own experiences. I may have been a bit "wild" using "wildly" ...as I said, my experiences are just a very small sample. I also never made a study of anything, these were just things I noticed because I was curious in these specific cases. A small sample, but the ones* I* specifically looked at were not accurate.

 

I didn't notice your post a few pages back where you said he told you he "tossed it". Maybe he has an explanation. I know he's turned the labels in without me asking on the 3 or 4 books I sent him.

It also wouldn't surprise me if the census numbers on some books are "wildly" off.

[skypinkblu]

The Hit #3 8.5 is recent -- it's the Billy Wright copy.

Exactly. Could just be someone cracked a book out and turned label in

 

It was CGC'd when it was sold onthe forum and it was NOT on the census at that time...I know, I looked then and a month and 2 months later. I thought maybe it was new and didn't hit the census yet.

 

It's an old label, so couldn't have been a new sub when it sold just last year.

 

Thanks, Jeff...see, I learn something every day, never thought of that.

 

 

[tth2]

Unless I'm missing something, he says that he always sends the label in. Just not always with the book.

Or when, as with Sharon's book, he just "tossed it". I don't think that was a case where Sharon asked him not to submit the label.

[skypinkblu]

 

My earlier use of the term "flippers" was not correct as I was really referring to buyers who purchase books, surreptitiously manipulate them, and then resell them without any disclosure even though the work that was done is legally okay from CGC's point of view.

 

I use the word laundering because their very behaviour leaves the impression that is exactly what they are doing as evident by Jeff's comment below:

 

. I'm sure the 8.5 label will be submitted after the auction is over.

 

Since it's actually okay to press and resubmit books according to CGC, then I don't understand why they simply don't turn in the label at the time of resub, instead of waiting until the auction is over. This key difference in timing leaves the impression that the seller himself believes that what he is doing is not totally above board and honest. If he felt what he was doing is okay, shouldn't he also have the balls to MANNUP and turn in the old label up front instead of waiting until the auction is over.

 

 

Lou, you're proceeding from the assumption that the book's owner is the one that cracked it out, rather then the person pressing the book. My understanding from Matt is that he does send labels in, but who knows how often.

 

I usually do submit the old label with the books, sometimes I do not. It all depends on the situation. But if I don't, will gather them up at some point and send them to CGC to remove from the census. I'm a strong supporter of an accurate census, and go to great lengths to make sure CGC eventually gets all of their old tags. Even though there might be some important old labels that never got back to CGC over the years, I wouldn't say CGC's census is wildly inaccurate. There's not many people cracking out expensive books. I know many of them, and we all agree that getting the old grades off the census is in everyone's best interest. More copies on the census simply means more percieved supply, which can adversely affect a book's value.

 

But there can be many reasons why a tag would not go back with the book when it's submitted to CGC a second time.

 

Unless I'm missing something, he says that he always sends the label in. Just not always with the book.

 

I sent my book to Matt in the case (mostly because I'm afraid I'll damage one if I crack it out). Not sure this is the case with most people, they may crack them out before sending them in. He may get a number of them without the labels.

 

My use of the word "wildly" was based on my own experiences. I may have been a bit "wild" using "wildly" ...as I said, my experiences are just a very small sample. I also never made a study of anything, these were just things I noticed because I was curious in these specific cases. A small sample, but the ones* I* specifically looked at were not accurate.

 

I didn't notice your post a few pages back where you said he told you he "tossed it". Maybe he has an explanation. I know he's turned the labels in without me asking on the 3 or 4 books I sent him.

It also wouldn't surprise me if the census numbers on some books are "wildly" off.

 

This was a number of years ago. I was concerned because the book went down in grade, so it would have looked like there was a higher example that didn't exist, otherwise, I probably would not have thought to ask...and no, I did not ask him not to submit it, ... .

[AJD]

The Hit #3 8.5 is recent -- it's the Billy Wright copy.

 

 

thanks:) I guess I missed Billy Wright, ...the only Billy I follow is parker;)

 

Edit....I wish I could do searches better, I KNOW the book sold in the forum...I was discussing POSSIBLY selling my copy at the time and I was surprised when this other one showed up.

 

.

 

Here you are Sharon.

 

(Don't use the search engine on the boards - I went to Google and typed

 

"hit comics #3" site:http://boards.collectors-society.com

 

and it was the second hit.)

[sacentaur]

That's interesting, though...do you think that most people who crack out books, mail in the labels?

 

I've only cracked and (years later) re-subbed one book, and did indeed include the prior label.

 

Otherwise, I always keep the label with the de-slabbed book - if it ever leaves my possession, I want the new owner to have full disclosure (i.e., knowing CGC's take on the book) whether I agree with them or not.

 

I've purchased quite a few books that have been de-slabbed yet still have their label (my preferred method of buying, actually).

[markseifert]

Otherwise, I always keep the label with the de-slabbed book - if it ever leaves my possession, I want the new owner to have full disclosure (i.e., knowing CGC's take on the book) whether I agree with them or not.

 

I've purchased quite a few books that have been de-slabbed yet still have their label (my preferred method of buying, actually).

 

Yep. I do both of these things as well for exactly the same reason.

[Cat-Man_America]

 

You weren't there.

 

Point taken, but trust me, I'm catching up.

[lou_fine]

Actually, there might be a simple, cost effective solution to improving the census tally that insures every future book graded or resubmitted would be recognized.

 

It involves placing a very small invisible ink stamp on the back cover of every CGC graded book that would fluoresce under a black light. Something like this (see the stamp, half way down) only much smaller...

 

http://www.fake-proof.com/

 

Each time a book was resubmitted it would receive a small ink stamp that would fluoresce a different color.

 

First, of course, any questions about marking valuable comics with invisible ink would need to be addressed, but if these issues are resolvable I foresee secondary advantages to improving the census, such as the ability to track valuable books that are stolen, cracked out and resold, etc.

 

The link above is just a site I quickly researched while considering this idea; other sites which discuss watermarking valuables with invisible ink may go into greater detail and discuss the pros and cons. It does seem like an interesting idea though.

 

Opinions?

 

I think if you do a search, it's been brought up before, and suggestions were also made that the mark be on the centerfold.

 

I like it because of the theft aspect,but I'm wondering how people who love very high grade books would feel OR people who want to press books and not disclose the fact that they were pressed..

 

Thanks Sha. The search functions on this site are difficult, at least for me.

 

I'm not at all surprised that I'm not the first person to bring up this topic, but this seems like a good idea and the right time and place to revisit it.

 

It has indeed been discussed here, but a lot of people went ballistic at the idea of even a microdot of invisible ink being put on their comics.

 

I think you both may have hit upon the biggest concern of folks who are steadfast in their vocal dissent ...barring any documented problems arising from the application of a minuscule amount of invisible fluorescing ink.

 

It really shouldn't be an issue if a small invisible ink stamp is safe for the comics. OTOH, if disclosure is the concern then one has to factor in profit motivation. Is the real issue the invisible ink or deceiving potential customers about a CGC grade bump?

 

Don't even bother wasting your time with these kinds of ideas as it will never fly with the CGC generation of collectors. I initially came up with a proposal similar to this several years ago during the height of the pressing and Jason Ewert fiasco and was soundly castigated by almost everybody here on the boards.

 

My idea centered around having all of the restorers professionally certified, with all books being checked by certified restorers for restoration and invisibly coded accordingly. In addition, all future work done on a book would also be invisibly coded right onto the book. Any restorer caught not coding their work would lose their desigantion and not be able to practive their craft anymore. The idea was to have an invisible audit trail right on the book to disclose any work that had been done on a book, whether it be pressing right up to extensive rework.

 

I was vehemently accused of proposing a system that would defaced and scarred valuable and collectible comics to the point that they would be like worthless toilet paper. The sheer venom and disgust with this proposal was so extreme that it gave the appearance their must have been more self-serving reasons for this strong opposition.

 

For the life of me, I can't think of any,but let me give it a try anyways:

 

1) Restorers would lose future business as it would remove the incentive for undisclosed work to be done on a book;

 

2) CGC would lose business as the number of resubs would drop like a rock; and

 

3) Majority of collectors would also be dead set against it as they would lose the ability to crack, press, and resell the books for huge profits without proper disclosure.

 

 

 

[Ze-man]

For the life of me, I can't think of any,but let me give it a try anyways:

 

1) Restorers would lose future business as it would remove the incentive for undisclosed work to be done on a book;

 

2) CGC would lose business as the number of resubs would drop like a rock; and

 

3) Majority of collectors would also be dead set against it as they would lose the ability to crack, press, and resell the books for huge profits without proper disclosure.

 

 

 

 

I think you should have said this, to make it even sillier.

 

1) Certified Restorers would see increased business due to massive desire for removal of invisible audit stamps.

 

2) CGC would gain a ton of business when they announce their new customized, invisible Stan Lee audit stamp.

 

3) Majority of collectors would embrace the invisible audit stamp to prevent a few people from selling undisclosed pressed comics.

[sfcityduck]

What is wrong with pressing a comic book?

 

Seriously.

 

[Scrooge]

What is wrong with pressing a comic book?

 

Seriously.

 

Oh no, you didn't

 

 

(First time using the new smiley )

[adamstrange]

What is wrong with pressing a comic book?

 

Seriously.

 

Three concerns:

 

1) Some are concerned that pressing damages the books. There was even a very limited before/after structural analysis study done on this that was discussed in the General Forum.

 

2) Some do not like it because it is mostly not disclosed, thus preventing them from having confidence that they have purchased an unmanipulated comic.

 

3) Some do not like it because it increases the quantity of higher graded copies, potentially devaluing existing copies.

[comicdonna]

What is wrong with pressing a comic book?

 

Seriously.

What's wrong with disclosing a comic has been pressed?

 

Seriously.

[lou_fine]

What is wrong with pressing a comic book?

 

Seriously.

 

Nothing really........but the mere fact that the people who are pressing their books and trying to hide this fact gives the distinct impression that these people themselves believe they are doing something underhanded and wrong.

 

If there is nothing wrong with pressing a comic, then why are they doing their best to conceal this activity from the marketplace. Especially when Borock himself have stated empatically that any rational person would pay full price for a book based upon the CGC grade itself, irregardless of whether a book had been pressed and upgraded or not.

 

Buy the label, not the book.

[MrBedrock]

 

Nothing really........but the mere fact that the people who are pressing their books and trying to hide this fact gives the distinct impression that these people themselves believe they are doing something underhanded and wrong.

I usually try to hide the fact that I'm taking a dump. I close the door. I liberally apply air-freshener when I'm done. I hope I'm not giving people the wrong impression.

[sfcityduck]

What is wrong with pressing a comic book?

 

Seriously.

 

Three concerns:

 

1) Some are concerned that pressing damages the books. There was even a very limited before/after structural analysis study done on this that was discussed in the General Forum.

 

2) Some do not like it because it is mostly not disclosed, thus preventing them from having confidence that they have purchased an unmanipulated comic.

 

3) Some do not like it because it increases the quantity of higher graded copies, potentially devaluing existing copies.

 

I really don't get the disclosure issue. Essentially every Mile High pedigree book was pressed, right? The natural state of a comic book is not "flat." Any "flat" comic has been "manipulated," whether intentionally or not. Under that thinking, merely putting a comic in certain types of bags or holders would constitute "manipulation," as would packing comics in tight in boxes or stacking them.

 

If this dissing of pressing originates from folks trying to preserve a pecking order and not out of a concern for the comics themselves, then it is hard for me to respect it.