Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[mschmidt]

"Internal pressing company"? When looking on CGC web page I don't see this. I can email CGC and ask, but I'm sure some information is in this thread. It has just become very long now.

 

Is this company in CGC or does it have its own website?

 

Here's the CCS website: http://www.ccspaper.com/

 

The legalese is "in conjunction with":

"CCS offers its services in conjunction with CGC, which gives collectors and dealers a streamlined submission process that saves them both time and money."

 

All the companies in the Certified Collectibles Group are "independent members", independent business/tax entities. That doesn't mean CGC and CCS aren't marketing partners cross-serving a shared clientele.

"You may submit comic books if you are a paid member of the CGC Collectors Society".

"or submit through a CGC Authorized Member Dealer"

 

You know it's interesting, their example on their website shows the same phenomena that has been identified in this thread (expansion of the body beyond the cover) on an All Star 6:

 

http://www.ccspaper.com/work_examples.php

Also note the examples of books that have been "Un-Restored" to achieve a blue label, which everyone needs to know is different from a book that was never restored in the 1st place.

 

It's really time for CGC to step up and be honest about what these books have gone through before they gave them the blue label, whether it's pressing, dry cleaning, spine realignment, color touch removal, tear seal un-sealing, etc.,.. This is yet another perfect application of the "Pre-Grading Prepwork" label notes. (thumbs u

 

If I (gently) scrape off some CT from a book and mail the book to CGC, how would CGC know that this book previously had CT?

[Bomber-Bob]

FYI, I just checked out the advertised books from an OO collection that Schmell is putting in his Grand Auction. They do NOT look like Shaves !

Maybe, the presser for these books heeded this thread and turned it down a notch OR..... since these were OO books they were only pressed once.

[ciorac]

"Internal pressing company"? When looking on CGC web page I don't see this. I can email CGC and ask, but I'm sure some information is in this thread. It has just become very long now.

 

Is this company in CGC or does it have its own website?

 

Here's the CCS website: http://www.ccspaper.com/

 

The legalese is "in conjunction with":

"CCS offers its services in conjunction with CGC, which gives collectors and dealers a streamlined submission process that saves them both time and money."

 

All the companies in the Certified Collectibles Group are "independent members", independent business/tax entities. That doesn't mean CGC and CCS aren't marketing partners cross-serving a shared clientele.

"You may submit comic books if you are a paid member of the CGC Collectors Society".

"or submit through a CGC Authorized Member Dealer"

 

You know it's interesting, their example on their website shows the same phenomena that has been identified in this thread (expansion of the body beyond the cover) on an All Star 6:

 

http://www.ccspaper.com/work_examples.php

Also note the examples of books that have been "Un-Restored" to achieve a blue label, which everyone needs to know is different from a book that was never restored in the 1st place.

 

It's really time for CGC to step up and be honest about what these books have gone through before they gave them the blue label, whether it's pressing, dry cleaning, spine realignment, color touch removal, tear seal un-sealing, etc.,.. This is yet another perfect application of the "Pre-Grading Prepwork" label notes. (thumbs u

 

CGC should grade the book in front of them, period.

 

Asking them to deal differently with books that come from their sister company by adding verbiage to the label, when it won't happen for anyone else submitting books sounds more like a personal vendetta on your part against CCS than being an ombudsman for the hobby.

 

I'm not in the "we" you refer to in your "asks" of CGC, and I'm sure many others here and in absentia are not either

 

Again you continue to assume that CGC knows which books come from CCS at the grader level and what has or hasn't been done to them. I don't think there is any evidence to support that assertion and Mark Zaid's on site inspection verified that it wasn't happening.

 

 

[batman_fan]

FYI, I just checked out the advertised books from an OO collection that Schmell is putting in his Grand Auction. They do NOT look like Shaves !

Maybe, the presser for these books heeded this thread and turned it down a notch OR..... since these were OO books they were only pressed once.

 

A few of the ones I looked at appear iffy. I know I wouldn't chance buying anything off Doug.

[Bomber-Bob]

 

Again you continue to assume that CGC knows which books come from CCS at the grader level and what has or hasn't been done to them. I don't think there is any evidence to support that assertion and Mark Zaid's on site inspection verified that it wasn't happening.

 

 

If you actually read this thread where this was discussed, 'we' did not say the graders know or need to know the book came from CCS.

CGC should grade the book in front of them. However, the clerical side of CGC knows where the books come from and what was done.

 

Let me ask you a question, in theory should CCS know what grades the book got ? BTW, I don't see anywhere in this thread where Mark Zaid reported on results from an onsite inspection. Personally I don't care whether anybody knows anything over there. I just want to see the production of Shaves stopped. Whatever it takes.

[ciorac]

Fair enough, I'm not a fan of the process either.

 

But asking CGC to require something of a sister company that could put them at a material disadvantage to their competition for the sake of appeasing the zealotry of a few boardies is not a reasonable request of CGC or their parent company CCG.

 

And there was an entire thread dedicated to Mark Zaid being retained by CGC to inspect the process and is well documented on these boards, if you actually read them that is..

[drbanner]

CGC should grade the book in front of them. However, the clerical side of CGC knows where the books come from and what was done.

Exactly, and they need to start telling the truth and be honest about the processes they put these books through before grading them by providing that information on the label. It's not really that complicated. (thumbs u

[Randall Dowling]

Cover's not shrinking, pages are swelling. GOD BLESS.....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

+1, this is the only thing that makes sense to me.

 

Like a baker rolling out dough.

[Randall Dowling]

I just want to see the production of Shaves stopped. Whatever it takes.

 

Fair enough, I'm not a fan of the process either.

 

+2. For many years now, I've heard a lot of people say that pressing doesn't damage books, it just makes them better. I think what the books in this thread show, is that isn't the case. Some damage is occurring. Either in staple stress or body expansion or that heat / humidity weaken the bond between the ink and the cover of the book, something negative to the preservation of the book is happening.

 

As to whether or not CGC can detect it 100% of the time, I think that's a false expectation / requirement. However, I don't believe they can detect many other abuses 100% of the time either. Things like Micro trimming, cleaning, etc. Just like in professional sports and steroid use, as long as there is a system of detection, there will be those that game the system to avoid detection. But that doesn't mean that you stop looking for it or stop calling it out when you do see it.

 

If they know it has taken place (i.e. their sister company works on the book or they see a book that looks like the ones in this thread). Then they should note it on the label. At the very least, it will help other people that are looking for books to "improve" know which books to avoid and thence avoid multiple pressings of the same book.

 

I also think that when CCS does serious restoration to a book (color touch, piece replacement, etc) they probably send a list of work performed with the book to be noted on the label. Why wouldn't you?

[CatskillMike]

Look, CGC will NEVER include notes about their in house pressing, etc. Since it would only apply to "their own" books, it isn't going to happen. It puts "their" books at a marketing disadvantage.

 

This part of the argument is THAT simple. It won't happen.

[Randall Dowling]

Look, CGC will NEVER include notes about their in house pressing, etc. Since it would only apply to "their own" books, it isn't going to happen. It puts "their" books at a marketing disadvantage.

 

This part of the argument is THAT simple. It won't happen.

 

I think it's been established in this thread that CGC doesn't have an "in house pressing" division. CCS is owned by the same parent company but it is a separate company, correct? All I'm suggesting is that they treat all books from all sources the same, whether they come from CCS or elsewhere.

 

I'm curious, if what I've read is correct, that most of the people that do pressing recommend against multiple pressings of the same book, do they not also want the work to be noted on the label to prevent it from happening again unwittingly? Perhaps Joeypost could give his on this.

 

And I would also like to thank Joey for his testing out the phenomena and posting results. Very generous and very helpful.

[Garlanda]

 

I'm curious, if what I've read is correct, that most of the people that do pressing recommend against multiple pressings of the same book, do they not also want the work to be noted on the label to prevent it from happening again unwittingly? Perhaps Joeypost could give his on this.

 

 

I must've read the same things you read, which suggested that multiple pressings can cause new and obvious flaws to emerge. The problem is that no one is really sure how many is too many, and there are anecdotes of books being pressed once and going from 8.5 to 9.2, then pressed again to go to 9.4, then pressed again to go to 9.6. As long as there are stories like this, sellers will be tempted to roll the dice again and again. They press until the grade gets high enough, and if the grade drops then they crack it out and sell it raw with the "suggestion" that the book is "CGC ready!" or "a good pressing candidate!" Check eBay for those phrases, or check these message boards for unscrupulous sellers.

 

My point is, as a collector and comics fan, I agree that I would like to know whether or not my comic has been pressed and how many times. However, I do not see how CGC could realistically be capable of noting this. As stated, if they noted pressing by CCS, that would put CCS at a disadvantage to any other pressing agency whose work would be unverifiable. The only thing CGC can do is grade the book in front of them, and if they see impacted staples, reverse spine roll, staple tears, fanning of pages, pages that have shrunk/expanded or whatever, that should be reflected in the grade.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

 

I'm curious, if what I've read is correct, that most of the people that do pressing recommend against multiple pressings of the same book, do they not also want the work to be noted on the label to prevent it from happening again unwittingly? Perhaps Joeypost could give his on this.

 

 

I must've read the same things you read, which suggested that multiple pressings can cause new and obvious flaws to emerge. The problem is that no one is really sure how many is too many, and there are anecdotes of books being pressed once and going from 8.5 to 9.2, then pressed again to go to 9.4, then pressed again to go to 9.6. As long as there are stories like this, sellers will be tempted to roll the dice again and again. They press until the grade gets high enough, and if the grade drops then they crack it out and sell it raw with the "suggestion" that the book is "CGC ready!" or "a good pressing candidate!" Check eBay for those phrases, or check these message boards for unscrupulous sellers.

 

My point is, as a collector and comics fan, I agree that I would like to know whether or not my comic has been pressed and how many times. However, I do not see how CGC could realistically be capable of noting this. As stated, if they noted pressing by CCS, that would put CCS at a disadvantage to any other pressing agency whose work would be unverifiable. The only thing CGC can do is grade the book in front of them, and if they see impacted staples, reverse spine roll, staple tears, fanning of pages, pages that have shrunk/expanded or whatever, that should be reflected in the grade.

 

You can find info on a DD7 I believe a Pacific Coast that was pressed from 8.5 to 9.6 after 4-5 tries.

[skypinkblu]

Fair enough, I'm not a fan of the process either.

 

But asking CGC to require something of a sister company that could put them at a material disadvantage to their competition for the sake of appeasing the zealotry of a few boardies is not a reasonable request of CGC or their parent company CCG.

 

And there was an entire thread dedicated to Mark Zaid being retained by CGC to inspect the process and is well documented on these boards, if you actually read them that is..

 

I understand and I don't Bill.

 

On one hand, I understand and admire your loyalty to Matt I know you have been friends forever and you don't want him singled out. However, on the other hand, if there is nothing wrong with pressing, or dry cleaning, what is the big deal ABOUT putting it on the label? When CCS does work, the facts are right there.

 

I'm not saying that it should be required for just Matt. I'm certain we have other people who are honest who would also disclose when they press a book or dry clean it, or whatever else it is they do.

 

Maybe CGC needs to just ask on the submission forms. Have you treated this book in any way, applied heat, moisture, pressure, chemicals, etc? .

 

I get that it can't always be detected, so if some others are going to cheat and not mention it, does that mean that we should ignore facts when they are known so that the people who hide what they do don't "benefit"?

 

Why would those that hide what they do they "benefit"so much if just a "few" people care?

 

You know I don't mind restoration and certainly not "conservation". I think sealing a split spine can help a book stay together longer. However, my issue all along has been disclosure. That way people can make an informed choice of what books they want to buy.

 

I was never a member of NOD, but you were and I believe you were even an officer, so your stance, kind of confuses me.

 

That was what it was all about, wasn't it? Disclosure.

 

 

I do completely agree about what you said about grading the book in front of you. I think that's the bottom line, however, we need to remove loopholes regarding "manufacturing defects". That should level the playing field.

 

If you are looking at one entity having an advantage over another, even if Mark did see that CCS and CGC are separate, can anyone also say that Matt is not now completely privy to how grades are decided and what things are currently ignored as possible "manufacturing defects":? Does everyone else know that, too?

 

I know I never saw the memo if it was shared.

[BEAUMONTS]

I think that the end game is if the comic looks fugly like the original comics of this post, they should be hammered in grading not rewarded. They have to think to themselves what would the guy's at "CVA" think is it "sticker worthy"

[mschmidt]

"Internal pressing company"? When looking on CGC web page I don't see this. I can email CGC and ask, but I'm sure some information is in this thread. It has just become very long now.

 

Is this company in CGC or does it have its own website?

 

Here's the CCS website: http://www.ccspaper.com/

 

The legalese is "in conjunction with":

"CCS offers its services in conjunction with CGC, which gives collectors and dealers a streamlined submission process that saves them both time and money."

 

All the companies in the Certified Collectibles Group are "independent members", independent business/tax entities. That doesn't mean CGC and CCS aren't marketing partners cross-serving a shared clientele.

"You may submit comic books if you are a paid member of the CGC Collectors Society".

"or submit through a CGC Authorized Member Dealer"

 

You know it's interesting, their example on their website shows the same phenomena that has been identified in this thread (expansion of the body beyond the cover) on an All Star 6:

 

http://www.ccspaper.com/work_examples.php

Also note the examples of books that have been "Un-Restored" to achieve a blue label, which everyone needs to know is different from a book that was never restored in the 1st place.

 

It's really time for CGC to step up and be honest about what these books have gone through before they gave them the blue label, whether it's pressing, dry cleaning, spine realignment, color touch removal, tear seal un-sealing, etc.,.. This is yet another perfect application of the "Pre-Grading Prepwork" label notes. (thumbs u

 

CGC should grade the book in front of them, period.

 

Asking them to deal differently with books that come from their sister company by adding verbiage to the label, when it won't happen for anyone else submitting books sounds more like a personal vendetta on your part against CCS than being an ombudsman for the hobby.

 

I'm not in the "we" you refer to in your "asks" of CGC, and I'm sure many others here and in absentia are not either

 

Again you continue to assume that CGC knows which books come from CCS at the grader level and what has or hasn't been done to them. I don't think there is any evidence to support that assertion and Mark Zaid's on site inspection verified that it wasn't happening.

 

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

Look, CGC will NEVER include notes about their in house pressing, etc. Since it would only apply to "their own" books, it isn't going to happen. It puts "their" books at a marketing disadvantage.

 

This part of the argument is THAT simple. It won't happen.

 

Nobody cares about pressing. Why would putting it on the label create a disadvantage?

[Comicopolis]

Look, CGC will NEVER include notes about their in house pressing, etc. Since it would only apply to "their own" books, it isn't going to happen. It puts "their" books at a marketing disadvantage.

 

This part of the argument is THAT simple. It won't happen.

 

Nobody cares about pressing. Why would putting it on the label create a disadvantage?

 

I was told that pressing is good for a book - it makes it look better.

 

You'd think that people would want to shout about that, no?

[Comicopolis]

Look, CGC will NEVER include notes about their in house pressing, etc. Since it would only apply to "their own" books, it isn't going to happen. It puts "their" books at a marketing disadvantage.

 

This part of the argument is THAT simple. It won't happen.

 

Nobody cares about pressing. Why would putting it on the label create a disadvantage?

 

Actually, you are correct. I was also told that the majority of collectors either don't care about pressing or don't know what it is and that it would be either too much trouble to educate the uninformed or it would just confuse the masses.

[lizards2]

Kool-Aid is served!