When did pressing a comic before every sub become the norm?

[DamageInc-migration]

Book was owned and sold by a board member...

 

Jamie Graham, no?

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2850677&fpart=1

[DamageInc-migration]

Book was owned and sold by a board member and the current owner, who has owned it for some time now, is happy with his purchase. He's a terribly nice guy and I actually feel bad for him when the book gets discussed.

 

Borock admits he gave the book the wrong grade but it is what it is. Considering the owner bought the book a long time ago, he's probably going to do OK with it regardless.

 

 

I'm sure he'll do more than okay, even if he paid 2.5 FMV at the time. I wouldn't feel too bad, as it's the kind of obvious flaw where the buyer is going to be buying the book not the label. Yeah, some may be cavalier in throwing around appellations like "fugly", but considering some folks are willing to pay considerably for loose pages from this book, it's a sweet book to own, regardless of how it's labeled, and you have the added bonus of having such a notorious copy

 

In the link above it shows the book selling for $35,650 in July 2004.

[VintageComics]

Don't think he ever owned it but I could be wrong.

[fantastic_four]

My comment was purely a response to comicwiz's remarks, which have merit irrespective of the intended meaning of your . In terms of legal culpability, there are questions about whether the CGC's disclaimer would hold up in court because they are sending a mixed message to consumers simply by virtue of their name. They're basically saying "we guarantee the grade...except we don't...but we do...but not really."

 

Except that they don't--they're the Comics Guaranty Corporation, not the Comics Guarantee Corporation. A guaranty isn't the same thing as a guarantee--look up "guaranty" for clarification.

[comicwiz]

guaranty (guar·an·ty) - the act of giving security.

 

Use guaranty in a sentence:

 

The comics guaranty company must think comic collectors are stupid.

[Davenport]

My comment was purely a response to comicwiz's remarks, which have merit irrespective of the intended meaning of your . In terms of legal culpability, there are questions about whether the CGC's disclaimer would hold up in court because they are sending a mixed message to consumers simply by virtue of their name. They're basically saying "we guarantee the grade...except we don't...but we do...but not really."

 

Except that they don't--they're the Comics Guaranty Corporation, not the Comics Guarantee Corporation. A guaranty isn't the same thing as a guarantee--look up "guaranty" for clarification.

"Guaranty" sounds even more binding. Like a pledge to step up and take any hit coming, as security.

[comicwiz]

My comment was purely a response to comicwiz's remarks, which have merit irrespective of the intended meaning of your . In terms of legal culpability, there are questions about whether the CGC's disclaimer would hold up in court because they are sending a mixed message to consumers simply by virtue of their name. They're basically saying "we guarantee the grade...except we don't...but we do...but not really."

 

Except that they don't--they're the Comics Guaranty Corporation, not the Comics Guarantee Corporation. A guaranty isn't the same thing as a guarantee--look up "guaranty" for clarification.

"Guaranty" sounds even more binding. Like a pledge to step up and take any hit coming, as security.

 

Right. And the whole spine shifting mess is akin to hiring Butch Cassidy, Jesse James and Chaz Williams as security guards at Fort Knox.

[revat]

guaranty (guar·an·ty) - the act of giving security.

 

Use guaranty in a sentence:

 

The comics guaranty company must think comic collectors are stupid.

 

I think they think there is a market for an objective third party comic grader. I think they think that they are the first company to establish themselves in that market. I think they think that they should do their best, but they don't have to be and cannot be perfectly accurate and consistent in every situation. I think that sentiment is exacerbated by the fact that despite the complaints of many rich and influential people who are both collectors and successful businessmen, none of them have fronted the time and money to become a viable alternative or competitor to them.

They think they are a business whose goal is to achieve profit. ANd with any business, if you can operate at 80% of peak to achieve 95% percent of the money you would get working at 100% of peak, most people and companies are going to work at 85%, especially if there are no competitors.

 

I'm sure they're trying to review and improve when possible, but its slow, and it doesn't have to be fast because no other company is pushing them.

[fantastic_four]

My comment was purely a response to comicwiz's remarks, which have merit irrespective of the intended meaning of your . In terms of legal culpability, there are questions about whether the CGC's disclaimer would hold up in court because they are sending a mixed message to consumers simply by virtue of their name. They're basically saying "we guarantee the grade...except we don't...but we do...but not really."

 

Except that they don't--they're the Comics Guaranty Corporation, not the Comics Guarantee Corporation. A guaranty isn't the same thing as a guarantee--look up "guaranty" for clarification.

"Guaranty" sounds even more binding. Like a pledge to step up and take any hit coming, as security.

 

They explicitly don't guarantee the grade on the back label--what they guarantee is that it's not a fake and that at least three people grade the book (click the link to see a large image of the back label text).

[comicwiz]

That's a fair argument. But try telling that to the poor guy/girl who gets stuck with an over graded comic where the difference between the actual grade and what they ended-up with is thousands of dollars.

 

I'll buy the resting on their laurels bit, but the ace in their back pocket up until last year has been that comics weren't in the same league as coins or baseball cards.

 

Now that comics fielded their own million dollar club, the shakedown that took place in coins and cards will arrive on the doorstep of this hobby as well.

 

It will be merely a matter of time. And this idea that there hasn't been a need to make a push for change due to a lack of competition will be the death knell for certification.

[revat]

That's a fair argument. But try telling that to the poor guy/girl who gets stuck with an over graded comic where the difference between the actual grade and what they ended-up with is thousands of dollars.

 

I'll buy the resting on their laurels bit, but the ace in their back pocket up until last year has been that comics weren't in the same league as coins or baseball cards.

 

Now that comics fielded their own million dollar club, the shakedown that took place in coins and cards will arrive on the doorstep of this hobby as well.

 

It will be merely a matter of time. And this idea that there hasn't been a need to make a push for change due to a lack of competition will be the death knell for certification.

 

I agree, competition is good. Ideally one of the more established and respected graders of another collectible item, be it coins, or stamps, or trading cards, gets into the comic grading business. I don't know that it will affect the pressing question at all (since its still can't be consistently detected), but real competition generally does benefit consumers, which most of us are.

[VintageComics]

And the whole spine shifting mess is akin to hiring Butch Cassidy, Jesse James and Chaz Williams as security guards at Fort Knox.

 

Which one represents Haspel?

[VintageComics]

I think they think there is a market for an objective third party comic grader. I think they think that they are the first company to establish themselves in that market. I think they think that they should do their best, but they don't have to be and cannot be perfectly accurate and consistent in every situation. I think that sentiment is exacerbated by the fact that despite the complaints of many rich and influential people who are both collectors and successful businessmen, none of them have fronted the time and money to become a viable alternative or competitor to them.

They think they are a business whose goal is to achieve profit. ANd with any business, if you can operate at 80% of peak to achieve 95% percent of the money you would get working at 100% of peak, most people and companies are going to work at 85%, especially if there are no competitors.

 

I'm sure they're trying to review and improve when possible, but its slow, and it doesn't have to be fast because no other company is pushing them.

 

Very well put.

[Sqeggs]

I think they think there is a market for an objective third party comic grader. I think they think that they are the first company to establish themselves in that market. I think they think that they should do their best, but they don't have to be and cannot be perfectly accurate and consistent in every situation. I think that sentiment is exacerbated by the fact that despite the complaints of many rich and influential people who are both collectors and successful businessmen, none of them have fronted the time and money to become a viable alternative or competitor to them.

They think they are a business whose goal is to achieve profit. ANd with any business, if you can operate at 80% of peak to achieve 95% percent of the money you would get working at 100% of peak, most people and companies are going to work at 85%, especially if there are no competitors.

 

I'm sure they're trying to review and improve when possible, but its slow, and it doesn't have to be fast because no other company is pushing them.

 

Very well put.

 

Absolutely. As I stated above in response to Comicwiz's assertion that CGC is open to a lawsuit, all they are offering is their opinion of a book's grade. People can accept the opinion or not, as they choose. As problems have been brought to their attention, they have changed some of their practices. Not as quickly as they probably would have if they had competition, but at least they are responsive.

 

Unfortunately, these days "I'm unhappy about something" = "I'm gonna sue!"

[comicwiz]

I think they think there is a market for an objective third party comic grader. I think they think that they are the first company to establish themselves in that market. I think they think that they should do their best, but they don't have to be and cannot be perfectly accurate and consistent in every situation. I think that sentiment is exacerbated by the fact that despite the complaints of many rich and influential people who are both collectors and successful businessmen, none of them have fronted the time and money to become a viable alternative or competitor to them.

They think they are a business whose goal is to achieve profit. ANd with any business, if you can operate at 80% of peak to achieve 95% percent of the money you would get working at 100% of peak, most people and companies are going to work at 85%, especially if there are no competitors.

 

I'm sure they're trying to review and improve when possible, but its slow, and it doesn't have to be fast because no other company is pushing them.

 

Very well put.

 

Absolutely. As I stated above in response to Comicwiz's assertion that CGC is open to a lawsuit

 

I was not the person who suggested this - it was another boardie that wondered about the possibility of being sued. I simply suggested the areas which would be most concerning as far as consumers possibly being misled by misrepresented grades assigned to books.

 

How it got to the point of even discussing this was my assertion that CGC is a license for people to have their books over graded. This was contested, and immediately the critics fell silent after I brought up the spine shifted books. Even with photographic evidence the tin foil sails were billowing.

 

Personally, the way I see it is that wherever and whenever large sums of money are involved, people will not just accept being screwed and will take the necessary action to ensure their interests are protected. With the level of manipulation and money being thrown around in this hobby, it would be naive to think it can't happen.

[Prince Namor]

I wonder if those guys who offer 'expert advice' on what to bet vs the spread in football games has ever gotten sued because they were wrong.

[porcupine48]

[slym2none]

I wonder if those guys who offer 'expert advice' on what to bet vs the spread in football games has ever gotten sued because they were wrong.

 

Sued, doubt it.

 

Thumbs broken with a hammer? Probably.

 

 

 

-slym

[jimbo_707]

I wonder if those guys who offer 'expert advice' on what to bet vs the spread in football games has ever gotten sued because they were wrong.

The analogy is a poor one because nobody has suggested that the CGC is culpable for being "wrong"; it's been suggested that the CGC may be culpable for being negligent in overlooking crucial information that is manifest.

[Prince Namor]

I wonder if those guys who offer 'expert advice' on what to bet vs the spread in football games has ever gotten sued because they were wrong.

The analogy is a poor one because nobody has suggested that the CGC is culpable for being "wrong"; it's been suggested that the CGC may be culpable for being negligent in overlooking crucial information that is manifest.

 

Good luck proving what is 'manifest' in something as subjective as grading. Who's right? Who's wrong? CGC isn't the be all, end all to grading. They offer an opinion, and the market has, SOMEWHAT, accepted them as creating a level playing field. That's on the market. That's on us.

 

You can word it however you want. It comes down to them selling their 'opinion', encased in plastic, which is what you are purchasing.

Trying to imply they are somehow culpable is just irresponsible.

And doing it on their own forum is just... Well it's just poor manners.