Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[Sqeggs]

I remain puzzled by the assertion -- repeated many times by a couple of people -- that just because prior to this thread page fanning was not much discussed, objecting to it now is inappropriate. That view assumes that grading criteria are static, which, of course, they aren't.

 

There were books that circa 1970 most people -- including me -- would have considered "mint." Many of those books would now be considered very fine, at best. How would you respond to someone who says, "Wait, you can't grade my a book a very fine. The defects you note weren't considered serious enough in 1970 to keep the book from being graded mint."

 

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the hobby (and CGC) to change how important they consider certain defects to be. In this case, not only is page fanning ugly but current grading criteria may well result in its proliferation.

[drbanner]

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the hobby (and CGC) to change how important they consider certain defects to be.

(thumbs u

 

And as it is now with tape, so shall it now be with Costanza'd-Cover-Syndrome (CCS) books.

[thirdgreenham]

Thanks, Bob, for your input here.

 

As far as the name of the collector goes, I cannot help but read "Close Shave" instead of "Cole Schave" whenever I see this thread title. Seems appropriate.

 

Dan

 

I see "cool shave", myself.

[VintageComics]

I remain puzzled by the assertion -- repeated many times by a couple of people -- that just because prior to this thread page fanning was not much discussed, objecting to it now is inappropriate. That view assumes that grading criteria are static, which, of course, they aren't.

 

There were books that circa 1970 most people -- including me -- would have considered "mint." Many of those books would now be considered very fine, at best. How would you respond to someone who says, "Wait, you can't grade my a book a very fine. The defects you note weren't considered serious enough in 1970 to keep the book from being graded mint."

 

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the hobby (and CGC) to change how important they consider certain defects to be. In this case, not only is page fanning ugly but current grading criteria may well result in its proliferation.

 

I guess that depends on what you consider change for the better.

 

To me personally, dinging something (and dinging it heavily) that nobody had a problem with until last month (that's after 43 years of OSPG's and 80 years of comics) is a little over the top.

 

I don't terribly disagree with CGC's decision of not dinging obviously visual defects like printer's creases and white spines (and "peek through") because it's painfully obvious - the market decides whether they like it or not.

 

To do it as a prevention so that nobody every presses a book improperly again is to me akin to arresting people with glassy red eyes in an effort to reduce drug and alcohol abuse in the general public.

 

Well, I'm laughing but it's not funny. It's bordering on McCarthyism now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[VintageComics]

If it really is just Nelson and he actually does mend his ways, then presumably the problem has already been resolved. My guess is, though, that whatever Nelson was doing to cause the problem other pressers can do. To keep our eye on the ball here, this technique -- whatever it is -- worked in the sense that it delivered higher grades.

 

I would argue that most of the books Doug Schmell submits benefit from higher grades because it's Doug Schmell just as much as the fact that they were pressed by CCS.

 

Doug seems to get grades nobody else can.

[jimbo_707]

Am I the only one that went through all of the offerings from this collection in the last Pedigree auction?

 

While the scans are no longer available on the Pedigree website, the shrunken covers were on a high proportion of the SA that was pressed and graded recently. Essentially all of the books that were part of the 119771... submission suffered from exposed interior pages. It wasn't a problem with the books from the collection that had been graded awhile ago.

All 68 of them?

 

No, Richard, many of Cole's books were slabbed and graded much earlier.

 

The 119771 submission included JIM #83, 88, and 93, TOS #39, Avengers #4, and ASM #10 and 14, among others.

I'm sorry if these questions sound inane but in the interest of getting it close to exact...about how many books were in this submission and what percentage of them had shrinkage?

 

Without current access to the scans, I can't answer you except with estimates: I recall seeing about a dozen books from this submission, and they all had shrunken covers.

 

I looked through all of the books before the auction was taken down, and this is what I found:

 

67 books listed as being from the Cole Schave collection (I'm not sure if I missed one, or if one just wasn't in the auction)

 

51 books were from the 119771 submission:

- 1197715001 - 5008, 1197715013 - 5025 (Express tier)

- 1197716001 - 6029 (Walk-through tier)

- 1197717001 (Standard tier)

 

The other 16 were from other submissions.

 

I didn't save any scans, but I don't recall seeing any of the 119771 books that did not have a shrunken cover.

 

Before I go back to lurking, I'd just like to say thank you to the board members that brought this problem to light. I was going to bid on the Avengers #4 and I didn't notice the exposed pages due to the white cover. I don't know whether I would have won or just made it more expensive for the winner, but I would have been very disappointed if I had won and a Constanza book showed up at my doorstep.

 

I just wanted to take a second and thank you for taking the time to record this information.

 

I too had shown interest in a book, a JIM pedigree copy, however my previously stored scan alerted me early on that the book had been altered.

Since i am currently focused solely on JIM/Thor pedigrees i was not aware the extent of the damage done to other Cole books until Bob started this thread.

 

To those that have spent much time and effort gathering information, before and after scans, thank you as well.

 

To the few that for some reason have no issue with the shrunken covers and the mystifying corresponding grades assigned to books that clearly have lost their visual appeal, feel free to collect and add these books to your personal collections and take them out of circulation. To endlessly post how you don't understand where the problem lies is disingenuous at best and to continually attempt to deflect away from the topic at hand by introducing non related issues calls into question your motives, and, in the end, your character. The books have been structurally altered, it is plain to see, and the eye appeal the books once displayed is lost.

 

To the individual responsible for the damage done to the books, and specifically pedigree copies in general, please stop. You have either made a technical error that you refuse to acknowledge or you have made an error in judgement that unfortunately was rewarded by CGC. How CGC graders came to the final conclusion when visually grading these books in hand i will never know and will not speculate.

 

 

 

[skypinkblu]

I remain puzzled by the assertion -- repeated many times by a couple of people -- that just because prior to this thread page fanning was not much discussed, objecting to it now is inappropriate. That view assumes that grading criteria are static, which, of course, they aren't.

 

There were books that circa 1970 most people -- including me -- would have considered "mint." Many of those books would now be considered very fine, at best. How would you respond to someone who says, "Wait, you can't grade my a book a very fine. The defects you note weren't considered serious enough in 1970 to keep the book from being graded mint."

 

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the hobby (and CGC) to change how important they consider certain defects to be. In this case, not only is page fanning ugly but current grading criteria may well result in its proliferation.

 

I guess that depends on what you consider change for the better.

 

To me personally, dinging something (and dinging it heavily) that nobody had a problem with until last month (that's after 43 years of OSPG's and 80 years of comics) is a little over the top.

I don't terribly disagree with CGC's decision of not dinging obviously visual defects like printer's creases and white spines (and "peek through") because it's painfully obvious - the market decides whether they like it or not.

 

To do it as a prevention so that nobody every presses a book improperly again is to me akin to arresting people with glassy red eyes in an effort to reduce drug and alcohol abuse in the general public.

 

Well, I'm laughing but it's not funny. It's bordering on McCarthyism now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I doubt the books or the graders are being accused of anti American activities.

 

We didn't have scanners or useful computers 80 years ago, No scanners 40 years ago. Overstreet guidelines that were published 43 years ago are vastly different than grading standards now, they are much more refined now.

 

It's much easier now to share information, to track it, save it and of course to blow up pictures and compare things.

 

 

Books were not encased in hard plastic 10 years ago.

 

There was no "guarantee company"

 

We changed grading from just letters to numbers.

 

 

I was perfectly happy with the letters, but I understand that things change, so I adapt.

 

As new nuances are discovered in the way the paper in comic books can be treated, then there needs to be updates in grading standards.

 

You don't see many horses and buggies around now do you? There were a few around 80 years ago;)

 

Stuff changes.

[DR.X]

Doug seems to get grades nobody else can.

 

 

And just how does that happen, because lots of people are wondering the same thing.

[seanfingh]

I remain puzzled by the assertion -- repeated many times by a couple of people -- that just because prior to this thread page fanning was not much discussed, objecting to it now is inappropriate. That view assumes that grading criteria are static, which, of course, they aren't.

 

There were books that circa 1970 most people -- including me -- would have considered "mint." Many of those books would now be considered very fine, at best. How would you respond to someone who says, "Wait, you can't grade my a book a very fine. The defects you note weren't considered serious enough in 1970 to keep the book from being graded mint."

 

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the hobby (and CGC) to change how important they consider certain defects to be. In this case, not only is page fanning ugly but current grading criteria may well result in its proliferation.

 

I guess that depends on what you consider change for the better.

 

To me personally, dinging something (and dinging it heavily) that nobody had a problem with until last month (that's after 43 years of OSPG's and 80 years of comics) is a little over the top.

 

I don't terribly disagree with CGC's decision of not dinging obviously visual defects like printer's creases and white spines (and "peek through") because it's painfully obvious - the market decides whether they like it or not.

 

To do it as a prevention so that nobody every presses a book improperly again is to me akin to arresting people with glassy red eyes in an effort to reduce drug and alcohol abuse in the general public.

 

Well, I'm laughing but it's not funny. It's bordering on McCarthyism now.

 

 

 

Nobody had a problem with it because, in the wild, only a production defect or (presumably) wildly changing climatic conditions could have caused it. Leading to it being rare.

 

It looks now like the move du jour is to add so much moisture and so much heat that is actually causing the covers to shrink. Think about that. Books that have manged to survive the ravages of time are being shrunk in pursuit of a better number and more bread.

 

I am not Dav or MasterChief or F_T. I have never been a collector of high grade Silver and I have never worried about nor been against pressing. Once I understood the CPR game, I did get out of high grade Bronze because it is all a game now.

 

I say all that to say this - The fact that these covers are being shrunk is shocking, amazing and saddening. They are still just comics, so not the most important thing in the world. But still important enough that we all spend time together talking about them and collecting them.

Arguing that because some covers have shrunk in the past no one should get up in arms reminds me of Bob Knight's deplorable comments about rape.

[Bomber-Bob]

 

I would argue that most of the books Doug Schmell submits benefit from higher grades because it's Doug Schmell just as much as the fact that they were pressed by CCS.

 

Doug seems to get grades nobody else can.

 

Serious question here, wouldn't a fresh off the press book handed to CGC to grade have it's advantages ? Assuming Doug uses Matt and submits many books with a Walkthru tier, the books may still be hot when handed over. Nothing tastes better than fresh off the grill.

[Silver Surfer]

I remain puzzled by the assertion -- repeated many times by a couple of people -- that just because prior to this thread page fanning was not much discussed, objecting to it now is inappropriate. That view assumes that grading criteria are static, which, of course, they aren't.

 

There were books that circa 1970 most people -- including me -- would have considered "mint." Many of those books would now be considered very fine, at best. How would you respond to someone who says, "Wait, you can't grade my a book a very fine. The defects you note weren't considered serious enough in 1970 to keep the book from being graded mint."

 

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the hobby (and CGC) to change how important they consider certain defects to be. In this case, not only is page fanning ugly but current grading criteria may well result in its proliferation.

 

I guess that depends on what you consider change for the better.

 

To me personally, dinging something (and dinging it heavily) that nobody had a problem with until last month (that's after 43 years of OSPG's and 80 years of comics) is a little over the top.

 

I don't terribly disagree with CGC's decision of not dinging obviously visual defects like printer's creases and white spines (and "peek through") because it's painfully obvious - the market decides whether they like it or not.

 

To do it as a prevention so that nobody every presses a book improperly again is to me akin to arresting people with glassy red eyes in an effort to reduce drug and alcohol abuse in the general public.

 

Well, I'm laughing but it's not funny. It's bordering on McCarthyism now.

 

 

 

Nobody had a problem with it because, in the wild, only a production defect or (presumably) wildly changing climatic conditions could have caused it. Leading to it being rare.

 

It looks now like the move du jour is to add so much moisture and so much heat that is actually causing the covers to shrink. Think about that. Books that have manged to survive the ravages of time are being shrunk in pursuit of a better number and more bread.

 

I am not Dav or MasterChief or F_T. I have never been a collector of high grade Silver and I have never worried about nor been against pressing. Once I understood the CPR game, I did get out of high grade Bronze because it is all a game now.

 

I say all that to say this - The fact that these covers are being shrunk is shocking, amazing and saddening. They are still just comics, so not the most important thing in the world. But still important enough that we all spend time together talking about them and collecting them.

Arguing that because some covers have shrunk in the past no one should get up in arms reminds me of Bob Knight's deplorable comments about rape.

 

Thank you. Its almost as if we are getting lost in semantics and side arguments again, trying to justify why we shouldn't be upset or shocked at what we are seeing.

[GACollectibles]

Thanks, Bob, for your input here.

 

As far as the name of the collector goes, I cannot help but read "Close Shave" instead of "Cole Schave" whenever I see this thread title. Seems appropriate.

 

Dan

 

I see "cool shave", myself.

 

I keep doing a double take, because I see "Coach Elves".

[THE_BEYONDER]

It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the hobby (and CGC) to change how important they consider certain defects to be.

(thumbs u

 

And as it is now with tape, so shall it now be with Costanza'd-Cover-Syndrome (CCS) books.

 

They were in the pool!!!!

[VintageComics]

I say all that to say this - The fact that these covers are being shrunk is shocking, amazing and saddening.

 

I am in full agreement with you. I'll type more out later. Got dinner with the kids.

 

 

[Moondog]

My opinion has been communicated to CGC via emails/phone calls.

 

Yes, there are guys on the boards who want to start trouble. Some are still carrying a torch for Matt from his Worldwide shill issue. Others are non-pressing and they bring an agenda to the table. I understand that takes a little more work on CCS/CGC's part when trying to respond to them but I prefer to confront the posts than ignore them. I've read all of CGC/CCS posts. Yes it is disheartening when people create paranoia but that generally happens when people don't know what is going on. And who is going to tell them the truth? CGC/CCS? Has CCS/CGC done a good job in the past at cutting something off before it runs out of control. The answer is No. To defend CCS a bit would any of the other "amateur" pressers have the balls to come on and defend their mistakes? I've seen plenty of pretty bad pressing, I haven't seen any threads throwing them under the bus and I could easily do that.

 

I have customers who are not happy with the responses CGC/CCS have given. These are very stable customers who I would not define as "paranoid". If one customer is emailing me then who isn't? There are a lot of big ticket lurkers who "disappear" from buying when stuff like this goes on. If people continue to see these "Facejobs as they call them" or "Costanza's as I do" they think CCS doesn't care what they are turning out. But rest assured CCS has now put a "This has been pressed" stamp on the book where one did not exist before. The problem is that if "Costanza's" still come out people will think CGC is doing nothing.

 

Here is my issue with the Spine Realignment press. If the Spine realignment is being downgraded is the "submitter" still being rewarded with a higher grade because he removed other defects or is the grade lower than it was before it was sent in? Clearly in the case of the Batman #23 the submitter still got a higher grade. Now I know that CGC doesn't know the grade of the book before it was sent in so how can they grade it lower than it was before to discourage this practice. In the case of the Batman #23 I probably would have stated that without the spine realignment this book would have gotten a 8.0. But without a "Before" picture there is no way to financially discourage the submitter. So it will still be possible to get an upgrade from a spine realignment process, just not as great an upgrade. A very drastic response to get it to stop is to cut the submitter off who is doing it which I would have threatened.

 

I continue to remind CCS/CGC that I am the one that sells your "Pressing and Grading". If CCS/CGC loses the integrity part of grading than CGC and I have nothing.

 

Without having to go through hundreds of pages, can someone easily c/p the CCS/CGC responses in one post?

[Bronty]

Question for Matt, apologies if its already been asked. I have a book I wanted to have pressed. Its a 62 marvel. If I send it to CCS for pressing, is this the type of book I can expect to receive back? I wanted to use your service but I don't want my books to look like that.

[DrWatson]

My opinion has been communicated to CGC via emails/phone calls.

 

Yes, there are guys on the boards who want to start trouble. Some are still carrying a torch for Matt from his Worldwide shill issue. Others are non-pressing and they bring an agenda to the table. I understand that takes a little more work on CCS/CGC's part when trying to respond to them but I prefer to confront the posts than ignore them. I've read all of CGC/CCS posts. Yes it is disheartening when people create paranoia but that generally happens when people don't know what is going on. And who is going to tell them the truth? CGC/CCS? Has CCS/CGC done a good job in the past at cutting something off before it runs out of control. The answer is No. To defend CCS a bit would any of the other "amateur" pressers have the balls to come on and defend their mistakes? I've seen plenty of pretty bad pressing, I haven't seen any threads throwing them under the bus and I could easily do that.

 

I have customers who are not happy with the responses CGC/CCS have given. These are very stable customers who I would not define as "paranoid". If one customer is emailing me then who isn't? There are a lot of big ticket lurkers who "disappear" from buying when stuff like this goes on. If people continue to see these "Facejobs as they call them" or "Costanza's as I do" they think CCS doesn't care what they are turning out. But rest assured CCS has now put a "This has been pressed" stamp on the book where one did not exist before. The problem is that if "Costanza's" still come out people will think CGC is doing nothing.

 

Here is my issue with the Spine Realignment press. If the Spine realignment is being downgraded is the "submitter" still being rewarded with a higher grade because he removed other defects or is the grade lower than it was before it was sent in? Clearly in the case of the Batman #23 the submitter still got a higher grade. Now I know that CGC doesn't know the grade of the book before it was sent in so how can they grade it lower than it was before to discourage this practice. In the case of the Batman #23 I probably would have stated that without the spine realignment this book would have gotten a 8.0. But without a "Before" picture there is no way to financially discourage the submitter. So it will still be possible to get an upgrade from a spine realignment process, just not as great an upgrade. A very drastic response to get it to stop is to cut the submitter off who is doing it which I would have threatened.

 

I continue to remind CCS/CGC that I am the one that sells your "Pressing and Grading". If CCS/CGC loses the integrity part of grading than CGC and I have nothing.

 

Without having to go through hundreds of pages, can someone easily c/p the CCS/CGC responses in one post?

The CGC and CCS are going to continue to do things their way and the reason there's a problem is because of the whiny asses on the CGC boards.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Question for Matt, apologies if its already been asked. I have a book I wanted to have pressed. Its a 62 marvel. If I send it to CCS for pressing, is this the type of book I can expect to receive back? I wanted to use your service but I don't want my books to look like that.

 

Not to worry. I'm sure a page trimming service will soon be available to fix all these costanzas. (thumbs u

[Moondog]

My opinion has been communicated to CGC via emails/phone calls.

 

Yes, there are guys on the boards who want to start trouble. Some are still carrying a torch for Matt from his Worldwide shill issue. Others are non-pressing and they bring an agenda to the table. I understand that takes a little more work on CCS/CGC's part when trying to respond to them but I prefer to confront the posts than ignore them. I've read all of CGC/CCS posts. Yes it is disheartening when people create paranoia but that generally happens when people don't know what is going on. And who is going to tell them the truth? CGC/CCS? Has CCS/CGC done a good job in the past at cutting something off before it runs out of control. The answer is No. To defend CCS a bit would any of the other "amateur" pressers have the balls to come on and defend their mistakes? I've seen plenty of pretty bad pressing, I haven't seen any threads throwing them under the bus and I could easily do that.

 

I have customers who are not happy with the responses CGC/CCS have given. These are very stable customers who I would not define as "paranoid". If one customer is emailing me then who isn't? There are a lot of big ticket lurkers who "disappear" from buying when stuff like this goes on. If people continue to see these "Facejobs as they call them" or "Costanza's as I do" they think CCS doesn't care what they are turning out. But rest assured CCS has now put a "This has been pressed" stamp on the book where one did not exist before. The problem is that if "Costanza's" still come out people will think CGC is doing nothing.

 

Here is my issue with the Spine Realignment press. If the Spine realignment is being downgraded is the "submitter" still being rewarded with a higher grade because he removed other defects or is the grade lower than it was before it was sent in? Clearly in the case of the Batman #23 the submitter still got a higher grade. Now I know that CGC doesn't know the grade of the book before it was sent in so how can they grade it lower than it was before to discourage this practice. In the case of the Batman #23 I probably would have stated that without the spine realignment this book would have gotten a 8.0. But without a "Before" picture there is no way to financially discourage the submitter. So it will still be possible to get an upgrade from a spine realignment process, just not as great an upgrade. A very drastic response to get it to stop is to cut the submitter off who is doing it which I would have threatened.

 

I continue to remind CCS/CGC that I am the one that sells your "Pressing and Grading". If CCS/CGC loses the integrity part of grading than CGC and I have nothing.

 

Without having to go through hundreds of pages, can someone easily c/p the CCS/CGC responses in one post?

The CGC and CCS are going to continue to do things their way and the reason there's a problem is because of the whiny asses on the CGC boards.

 

Thanks, Doc. I received two PMs with the same short and concise info.

[Bomber-Bob]

See if you can guess which quotes belong to Matt and/or Plitch......

 

The fact that these covers are being shrunk is shocking, amazing and saddening.

 

To the individual responsible for the damage done to the books, and specifically pedigree copies in general, please stop.

 

I would have been very disappointed if I had won and a Constanza book showed up at my doorstep

 

Hideous and ruined forever. Love this hobby!

 

I think the person who 'may' have done these press jobs has probably lost their compass so doesn't know the way back here

 

I never disclose who I press books for,

 

The point of all of this is that the issue at hand is not as big as some people on the boards try to make it out to be

 

We (the graders) have no way of knowing if a book was previously certified or who sent it in

 

Doug seems to get grades nobody else can

 

Sorry but that's just plain BAD grading on CGC's part.

 

RSR & Cover Shrinkage are NOT that prevalent in our hobby.

 

Where is Zaid in all this?

 

At the end of the day, anything anyone does that jeopardizes the goose continuing to lay the golden egg will be ridiculed to the point people get beat into submission.