Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[comicwiz]

[VintageComics]

So now you're trying to get it shut down by suggesting it's political?

 

[Silver Surfer]

I have no idea what your talking about. I don't think its a secret that these books were pressed and all I'm saying is that they are ugly, the proof is right in front of you. Not sure what bus your referring too?

 

Right, I agree that it's not as attractive as one without the peekthrough but my point (and Mike's) is that you don't know what the FF book looked like before it was pressed.

 

That's my point.

 

 

 

Roy how many more examples from a select batch of submissions do you need before you actually are willing to publicly say more than "its not as attractive as other books"? All we have heard from you is that its maybe its natural, I've seen many examples of peek through before, we don't know what it looked like before, etc, etc, etc. CGC/CCA or whatever have danced around this whole issue and have disappeared hoping that this will just go away.

 

Peter, it boggles my mind how irrational you can be because you are using emotion to think rather than logic. You are actually contradicting yourself at times and still continue to plod on (pun intended!)

 

When you see a book with peek through, then for you every book in that batch becomes a "select batch" even though they are not from the same batch as the Costanza books. Even if it was from 10 years ago, it's still from the select batch!

 

Also, again you are taking my posts out of context and twisting them to fit what you want them to say but since I can do this dance indefinitely, lets spell it out again from scratch.

 

It does occur naturally, but I never said the Schave books occurred naturally. I simply said that paper shrinks at the start of the thread in an effort to understand how the Schave books got to where they are now and to reverse engineer the flaw. This was said before we had any definitive proof of what happened to the books.

 

It's not as attractive as other books. I think everyone agrees on that. I don't know why you'd bring that post up.

 

CGC, CCA have not danced around the issue. They said it was a mistake and that they will take measures to try and make sure that it won't occur again.

 

The fact is that you don't know what some of the books you are accusing looked like before and it's at best a 50/50 coin flip at this point on whether it got 'the treatment' or not.

 

Can you imagine if everyone just flipped a coin to make every decision? Judging by the posts of some, I'm guessing you'd be OK if your comics were graded with a coin toss.

 

Finally, as mschmidt pointed out, if it was your mega book that was for sale and someone posted "I think Peter's book is Costanza'd" when they weren't sure if it was or not, you'd be all over that conversation correcting the hell out of them.

 

But carry on.

 

Emotion over logic? How about you use honestly for a change Roy instead of trying to get arse kissing points by pushing BS theories to deflect from what is really happening. Why don't you ask the direct question to the people who actually did the work instead of trying to steer the masses with endless posts about how these factors can happen naturally, etc? This is bindry chip theory deja vu all over again.

 

If they were my books for sale and they came into question I would be letting people know what kind of work was done to them and by who but I sure as hell know that you wouldn't.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Emotion over logic? How about you use honestly for a change Roy instead of trying to get arse kissing points by pushing BS theories to deflect from what is really happening. Why don't you ask the direct question to the people who actually did the work instead of trying to steer the masses with endless posts about how these factors can happen naturally, etc? This is bindry chip theory deja vu all over again.

 

If they were my books for sale and they came into question I would be letting people know what kind of work was done to them and by who but I sure as hell know that you wouldn't.

 

 

Ah, gotcha, so now you're going to bring my integrity into the discussion even though I haven't disagreed with you on a single thing except that you don't know how to debate in a respectful manner.

 

Peter,

 

The problem with public internet discussions is that people act very differently than they would in person.

 

Tell you what, since I have everything to lose and I'm a comic book dealer discussing on a comic book chat forum about comics, let's do this: I'd ask you to politely point out one 'arse kissing points' post or one 'BS theory' post to bolster your argument. Then we can have a conversations on solid ground and debate that post rather than go 'round in circles.

 

 

I think what you will find is that:

 

Nobody likes the Costanza look.

We all wish it would stop.

Matt has come on and said that it was a mistake and that they're taking measures to make sure it doesn't happen again.

 

I have a question for you: Have you asked a direct question to the people who actually did the work?

 

No, because it's much easier to be a pontificating keyboard armchair critic than it is to actually pick up the phone and get an answer.

 

I'll leave you with a wonderful quote that I read a few weeks ago on this chat forum that sums this thread up nicely

 

As Noam Chomsky said: "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum..."

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

The problem with public internet discussions is that people act very differently than they would in person.

 

That's a broad brush....

[slym2none]

400+ pages, most every one of them chock full of popcorn hulls & unpopped kernels. My grandpa used to call them "old maids" and my grandma would always hit him when he did.

 

 

 

 

-slym

[VintageComics]

The problem with public internet discussions is that people act very differently than they would in person.

 

That's a broad brush....

 

It's very true. Lots of people who come across as jerks on the internet do not come across the same way in person. I'm convinced that most of the time it's even unintentional.

 

 

You're a perfect example.

 

Just kidding.

 

Most people don't put in the amount of effort it takes to talk to people on the internet that they would in person. That's my opinion.

 

Where else would someone walk into a room and start spouting expletives and negatives about someone else? Nowhere except Jerry Springer and internet chat forums.

 

Until that context is established and that sort of social sensitivity becomes mainstream (and it's happening, I see the anti cyber-bullying ads on children's shows), internet discussions won't be productive between people who do not agree.

[THE_BEYONDER]

The problem with public internet discussions is that people act very differently than they would in person.

 

That's a broad brush....

 

It's very true. Lots of people who come across as jerks on the internet do not come across the same way in person. I'm convinced that most of the time it's even unintentional.

 

 

You're a perfect example.

 

Just kidding.

 

Most people don't put in the amount of effort it takes to talk to people on the internet that they would in person. That's my opinion.

 

Where else would someone walk into a room and start spouting expletives and negatives about someone else? Nowhere except Jerry Springer and internet chat forums.

 

Until that context is established and that sort of social sensitivity becomes mainstream (and it's happening, I see the anti cyber-bullying ads on children's shows), internet discussions won't be productive between people who do not agree.

 

I'm just giving ya a hard time. Often on-line personas differ greatly than real-life interactions.

 

I imagine most people feel I'm the exact same jerk in both venues though

[VintageComics]

I'm just giving ya a hard time. Often on-line personas differ greatly than real-life interactions.

 

I imagine most people feel I'm the exact same jerk in both venues though

 

Oh, I know you are. (thumbs u

 

I'm just a little defensive because I enjoy a good conversation and dissecting the details but some people can't just keep it to that. They prefer to throw dispersions on character than talk about the topic at hand.

 

batman_fan actually has me on ignore because I tried to convince him that grades and prices are actually separate things in a discussion a few months ago, but he still can't help but poke at me from time to time with his posts even if he has me on ignore.

 

Peter seems to think I disagree with him even though I'm full in his court. I just don't feel the need to pain the world dark like he does. My cup is half full in this case while his is half empty.

 

Are either of these guys a comic book dealer posting on a comic book chat forum in front of a zillion people? No, batman_fan has a wonderful still made of copper and brews his own booze (as he posted a few months ago), and is probably an accountant or something like that and Peter is a mortgage broker and both of them are probably terrific neighbors and family men (god bless them both in all sincerity) but none of those things keep either of them from mocking people and slinging mud on the internet with comments that have no value whatsoever except to show how much testosterone they can summon in a post.

 

And over paper. We are arguing and casting dispersions on people's livelihoods over paper.

 

I love conversations and I love giving to the community but sometimes I wonder if it's even worth contributing any more.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no hobby with a more passionate following than comics.

 

Sometimes you wonder if the passion is worth the trouble.

[jimbo_707]

I'm just giving ya a hard time. Often on-line personas differ greatly than real-life interactions.

 

I imagine most people feel I'm the exact same jerk in both venues though

 

Oh, I know you are. (thumbs u

 

I'm just a little defensive because I enjoy a good conversation and dissecting the details but some people can't just keep it to that. They prefer to throw dispersions on character than talk about the topic at hand.

 

batman_fan actually has me on ignore because I tried to convince him that grades and prices are actually separate things in a discussion a few months ago, but he still can't help but poke at me from time to time with his posts even if he has me on ignore.

 

Peter seems to think I disagree with him even though I'm full in his court. I just don't feel the need to pain the world dark like he does. My cup is half full in this case while his is half empty.

 

Are either of these guys a comic book dealer posting on a comic book chat forum in front of a zillion people? No, batman_fan has a wonderful still made of copper and brews his own booze (as he posted a few months ago), and is probably an accountant or something like that and Peter is a mortgage broker and both of them are probably terrific neighbors and family men (god bless them both in all sincerity) but none of those things keep either of them from mocking people and slinging mud on the internet with comments that have no value whatsoever except to show how much testosterone they can summon in a post.

 

And over paper. We are arguing and casting dispersions on people's livelihoods over paper.

 

I love conversations and I love giving to the community but sometimes I wonder if it's even worth contributing any more.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no hobby with a more passionate following than comics.

 

Sometimes you wonder if the passion is worth the trouble.

Roy, with all due respect, there are people whose despicable character is to blame for this debacle.

 

You want to believe that everyone is basically good. I get it. However, there are some very Machiavellian people in this hobby. They are terrific dissemblers in that they give lip service to complaints while carrying on business as usual. They protect themselves not by doing the right thing and earning a reputation for integrity, but by cultivating friendships with influential dealers and collectors, and by presenting themselves as very gentle and affable so that when they are accused of anything, they can feign righteous indignation. They are good actors, so a lot of people fall for it. They are not necessarily malicious, but their narcissism prevents them from having a normal understanding of right and wrong. They truly care only about their own aggrandizement, so anything that contributes to that goal is by definition the right thing to do.

 

If everybody in this hobby had integrity, this Cole Schave situation would not have arisen because the very first time a book was pressed and exhibited cover shrinkage, the money machine would have immediately come to a screeching halt until the problem was solved. There would be exactly one Costanza'd book out there, not dozens or hundreds (possibly thousands; let's not forget that lesser degrees of shrinkage have been seen on books pressed long before the Cole Schave examples entered the shop). Remember, no attempt was made to address this problem until the perpetrators were caught red-handed and confronted with the evidence.

 

So, you see, character, or the lack of it, is at the very heart of this issue.

[batman_fan]

I'm just giving ya a hard time. Often on-line personas differ greatly than real-life interactions.

 

I imagine most people feel I'm the exact same jerk in both venues though

 

Oh, I know you are. (thumbs u

 

I'm just a little defensive because I enjoy a good conversation and dissecting the details but some people can't just keep it to that. They prefer to throw dispersions on character than talk about the topic at hand.

 

batman_fan actually has me on ignore because I tried to convince him that grades and prices are actually separate things in a discussion a few months ago, but he still can't help but poke at me from time to time with his posts even if he has me on ignore.

 

Peter seems to think I disagree with him even though I'm full in his court. I just don't feel the need to pain the world dark like he does. My cup is half full in this case while his is half empty.

 

Are either of these guys a comic book dealer posting on a comic book chat forum in front of a zillion people? No, batman_fan has a wonderful still made of copper and brews his own booze (as he posted a few months ago), and is probably an accountant or something like that and Peter is a mortgage broker and both of them are probably terrific neighbors and family men (god bless them both in all sincerity) but none of those things keep either of them from mocking people and slinging mud on the internet with comments that have no value whatsoever except to show how much testosterone they can summon in a post.

 

And over paper. We are arguing and casting dispersions on people's livelihoods over paper.

 

I love conversations and I love giving to the community but sometimes I wonder if it's even worth contributing any more.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no hobby with a more passionate following than comics.

 

Sometimes you wonder if the passion is worth the trouble.

 

Roy, as usual you have numerous things wrong. I have you on ignore because I don't enjoy reading your post. My interpretation is that you always have an alternative motive. So rather than get into a back and forth with you, I put you on ignore. Personally I thought it was a good path to go down.

 

Second thing, I don't make my own booze. That is illegal and I would appreciate it if you didn't post that I am doing something illegal. I have purchased a still plus a lot of other equipment for distilling but I am not distilling until I have my permits so once again, please don't accuse me of illegal activity.

 

I am not an accountant which I assume is a backhand slap against me. I won't try to describe what I do as that would take too long and serves no purpose.

 

[Foolkiller]

I'm just giving ya a hard time. Often on-line personas differ greatly than real-life interactions.

 

I imagine most people feel I'm the exact same jerk in both venues though

 

Oh, I know you are. (thumbs u

 

I'm just a little defensive because I enjoy a good conversation and dissecting the details but some people can't just keep it to that. They prefer to throw dispersions on character than talk about the topic at hand.

 

batman_fan actually has me on ignore because I tried to convince him that grades and prices are actually separate things in a discussion a few months ago, but he still can't help but poke at me from time to time with his posts even if he has me on ignore.

 

Peter seems to think I disagree with him even though I'm full in his court. I just don't feel the need to pain the world dark like he does. My cup is half full in this case while his is half empty.

 

Are either of these guys a comic book dealer posting on a comic book chat forum in front of a zillion people? No, batman_fan has a wonderful still made of copper and brews his own booze (as he posted a few months ago), and is probably an accountant or something like that and Peter is a mortgage broker and both of them are probably terrific neighbors and family men (god bless them both in all sincerity) but none of those things keep either of them from mocking people and slinging mud on the internet with comments that have no value whatsoever except to show how much testosterone they can summon in a post.

 

And over paper. We are arguing and casting dispersions on people's livelihoods over paper.

 

I love conversations and I love giving to the community but sometimes I wonder if it's even worth contributing any more.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no hobby with a more passionate following than comics.

 

Sometimes you wonder if the passion is worth the trouble.

Roy, with all due respect, there are people whose despicable character is to blame for this debacle.

 

You want to believe that everyone is basically good. I get it. However, there are some very Machiavellian people in this hobby. They are terrific dissemblers in that they give lip service to complaints while carrying on business as usual. They protect themselves not by doing the right thing and earning a reputation for integrity, but by cultivating friendships with influential dealers and collectors, and by presenting themselves as very gentle and affable so that when they are accused of anything, they can feign righteous indignation. They are good actors, so a lot of people fall for it. They are not necessarily malicious, but their narcissism prevents them from having a normal understanding of right and wrong. They truly care only about their own aggrandizement, so anything that contributes to that goal is by definition the right thing to do.

 

If everybody in this hobby had integrity, this Cole Schave situation would not have arisen because the very first time a book was pressed and exhibited cover shrinkage, the money machine would have immediately come to a screeching halt until the problem was solved. There would be exactly one Costanza'd book out there, not dozens or hundreds (possibly thousands; let's not forget that lesser degrees of shrinkage have been seen on books pressed long before the Cole Schave examples entered the shop). Remember, no attempt was made to address this problem until the perpetrators were caught red-handed and confronted with the evidence.

 

So, you see, character, or the lack of it, is at the very heart of this issue.

 

The problem concerning integrity unfortunately pre-dates Schave etc. It's a long, long history in our hobby which -- for some people -- is only becoming worse. It certainly seems that way in terms of scale. I wonder if it's really that more people want to make attempts at the manipulation or simply that it's more accessible for everyone to become part of the party.

[batman_fan]

The problem concerning integrity unfortunately pre-dates Schave etc. It's a long, long history in our hobby which -- for some people -- is only becoming worse. It certainly seems that way in terms of scale. I wonder if it's really that more people want to make attempts at the manipulation or simply that it's more accessible for everyone to become part of the party.

 

I think I am leaning towards the more accessible side. It seems there are a lot more people doing work on books today than there were say 10 years ago. Also with how much money there is to improve a books appearance, there are even more people doing it themselves.

[Mark Zaid]

I know Mark Zaid posted saying he was in a dialogue with CGC and would post here agaqin, but I have not seen him come back here, did I miss a post?

 

Mark? what happened to the dialogue? I hope no one tar and feathered you or anything.

 

Nah, they just figured if they waited it out, the problems would just magically disappear, and the boards would lose interest. It's hard to sustain negative emotions over a long period of time, which has happened here.

 

A few posts of lip service to slightly quell the mob seems to have sufficed in this instance.

 

With all due respect, I don't give lip service to anything or anyone. Nor do I let anything fade away without being addressed as promised.

 

My apologies to everyone for the delay but that is on me, not CGC. I have been very occupied in dealing with Benghazi issues. I trust the murder of a US Ambassador is understandably a legitimate distraction.

 

I will be back on this issue as soon as I can.

[MasterChief]

The problem concerning integrity unfortunately pre-dates Schave etc. It's a long, long history in our hobby which -- for some people -- is only becoming worse. It certainly seems that way in terms of scale. I wonder if it's really that more people want to make attempts at the manipulation or simply that it's more accessible for everyone to become part of the party.

 

I think I am leaning towards the more accessible side. It seems there are a lot more people doing work on books today than there were say 10 years ago. Also with how much money there is to improve a books appearance, there are even more people doing it themselves.

 

Totally agree.

 

And it is the CGC business model of ignoring non-additive procedures that opened the Pandora's Box of renewed manipulation upon the hobby.

 

The quest for synthetic grades fuels the alteration game. And artifacts supporting the assertion are traceable thanks to the digital age.

 

The Wilson-ized example below is but another that displays the characteristics discussed herein and elsewhere.

 

Acquired in a state of age produced by years of ownership, it underwent reconstructive treatment which created an apparent high-grade appearance.

 

Initially sold as a raw FN/VF copy via Heritage, it resurfaced as a CGC 9.2 in the recent Beverly Hills auction. However, that was not before pgcmint attempted to liquidate same via eBay in September of this year.

 

 

 

 

All-American Comics #65 (DC, 1945) Condition: FN/VF

 

All-American Comics #65 (DC, 1945) CGC NM- 9.2 Off-white pages

 

 

 

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

I know Mark Zaid posted saying he was in a dialogue with CGC and would post here agaqin, but I have not seen him come back here, did I miss a post?

 

Mark? what happened to the dialogue? I hope no one tar and feathered you or anything.

 

Nah, they just figured if they waited it out, the problems would just magically disappear, and the boards would lose interest. It's hard to sustain negative emotions over a long period of time, which has happened here.

 

A few posts of lip service to slightly quell the mob seems to have sufficed in this instance.

 

With all due respect, I don't give lip service to anything or anyone. Nor do I let anything fade away without being addressed as promised.

 

My apologies to everyone for the delay but that is on me, not CGC. I have been very occupied in dealing with Benghazi issues. I trust the murder of a US Ambassador is understandably a legitimate distraction.

 

I will be back on this issue as soon as I can.

 

The mighty backhand of triviality unleashed!

[comicwiz]

The problem concerning integrity unfortunately pre-dates Schave etc. It's a long, long history in our hobby which -- for some people -- is only becoming worse. It certainly seems that way in terms of scale. I wonder if it's really that more people want to make attempts at the manipulation or simply that it's more accessible for everyone to become part of the party.

 

I think I am leaning towards the more accessible side. It seems there are a lot more people doing work on books today than there were say 10 years ago. Also with how much money there is to improve a books appearance, there are even more people doing it themselves.

 

Totally agree.

 

And it is the CGC business model of ignoring non-additive procedures that opened the Pandora's Box of renewed manipulation upon the hobby.

 

The quest for synthetic grades fuels the alteration game. And artifacts supporting the assertion are traceable thanks to the digital age.

 

The Wilson-ized example below is but another that displays the characteristics discussed herein and elsewhere.

 

Acquired in a state of age produced by years of ownership, it underwent reconstructive treatment which created an apparent high-grade appearance.

 

Initially sold as a raw FN/VF copy via Heritage, it resurfaced as a CGC 9.2 in the recent Beverly Hills auction. However, that was not before pgcmint attempted to liquidate same via eBay in September of this year.

 

 

 

 

All-American Comics #65 (DC, 1945) Condition: FN/VF

 

All-American Comics #65 (DC, 1945) CGC NM- 9.2 Off-white pages

 

 

 

 

Thanks MasterChief! So pgcmint not only waited about 3 months to sneak it under the radar by moving it to Heritage, but this book was graded over 4 months (07/23/2013) after the Avengers 1 was discovered. The detection methods aren't working, and there's a long list of options for this deceptive element to fence these wrecks.

 

I can't think of a single reason why this submitter shouldn't be banned from CGC. Assuming this is Mark Wilson, family and/or their cohorts, they need to be relegated into the same hobby wrongdoers clan as Dupcak and Ewart!

[THE_BEYONDER]

For clarity:

 

The interior pages were trimmed along the bottom edge....correct?

[namisgr]

Really? A lot of the responsibility for face-jobs is on CGC. If they would grade these types of books appropriately (considering that the defects are being moved rather than eliminated), then there would be no incentive to continue this spine manipulative technique.

 

Fixing spine rolls on lower grade comics is another matter, since there the pressing often results in a much better looking comic. It's different than what's being done with these face-jobs.

[comicwiz]

Really? A lot of the responsibility for face-jobs is on CGC. If they would grade these types of books appropriately (considering that the defects are being moved rather than eliminated), then there would be no incentive to continue this spine manipulative technique.

 

There are a couple of ways to respond to this using a tell-it-as-it-is approach. First, if blame snowballed and took both into a lake of fire, I really believe we would all be better off. Jimmy crack corn...

 

Second, and most importantly is this appears to be the same individual who was named the first time around, and told to cease this practice, but didn't. I'm not saying CGC is blameless, which is why I made the point of mentioning their detection methods aren't working. But whatever formal announcement and awareness efforts were directed to Dupcak and Ewart to hurt their image and reputations should again be considered in dealing with the practice perpetuating, and damaged goods being moved by the same individual who was first caught in March.