• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Insane press and flip Avengers 1.

491 posts in this topic

I don't get all the outrage. The only thing I have a problem with is that the work was not disclosed. This process has happened before and has been pointed out. As long as there is no disassembly involved, its just another form of pressing. My opinion mirrors most here that it does look like but we all know there are label chasers that will pick these up. As far as the grade bump, there is nothing uncommon about it. As far as what CGC graded it, I believe they dropped the ball on it. That chip and all the spine ticks still exist on the book. If I had the knowledge and equipment I would do the same thing along with full disclosure of the work. Providing for the family is more important than funny books.

 

I think the outrage is more about the dollar value difference than the fact that the pages are fanned. If this was a Shlock Detective #2 CGC 8.5 that went to a 9.2 nobody would care a hoot.

 

People see the large dollar value difference and it carries a much larger shock value than if the book was worthless and sometimes that's hard to separate from the discussion.

 

I'm really surprised to see this too but then as Grails said, the seller really didn't do anything wrong except have the book pressed. Anyone else had the opportunity to do the same.

 

As far as I can see, he probably got lucky on the grade. The book should really still be an 8.5 if the colour breaking defects are the same, but hey, CGC can be inconsistent. It happens, apparently.

 

 

I basically agree, as I noted a few pages back. But I don't think it's quite accurate to say that all the seller did was get the book pressed. Relocating the spine on a book goes beyond conventional pressing. It's this point, rather than (or, maybe, in addition to) the dough involved that has some people in this thread up in arms.

 

As a practical matter, once pressing is deemed ok, then there isn't much that is likely to be done about this sort of manipulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CGC has stated since Steve B's time that poor pressing jobs that damage books will be punished by lower numerical grades. They should step up, be consistent with this philosophy, and also downgrade pressed books that have interior pages extruded to the ridiculous degree of the Avengers #1 , or have impacted staples made worse during the pressing process.

 

I would agree with this 100%.

 

+1

 

But Steve B isn't the honcho at CGC anymore. How about Haspel ... Nope gone too. Maybe Matt Nelson will take an aggressive stance against this technique until he adds it to his repertoire. meh

 

You're assuming Matt Nelson doesn't know this technique.

 

Makes me wonder how long this technique has been used and how many people know about it and use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't think it's quite accurate to say that all the seller did was get the book pressed. Relocating the spine on a book goes beyond conventional pressing.

 

Not getting into the argument of whether it's ethical or not, there is little difference mechanically between removing a spine roll and creating one.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes me wonder how long this technique has been used and how many people know about it and use it.

 

First I've ever heard of it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bunky said he's tied with the Wilson brothers. They have the knowledge of how to maximize a book and I guess they're pros.

Wasn't one of them, a well known restorer? I know I bought a Wonder Woman 1 on eBay that was "restored" by him, and the pages were put back in the wrong order.

 

I know I'm in the minority, but I agree with Oakman, that pressing is restoration. It should be noted.

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't think it's quite accurate to say that all the seller did was get the book pressed. Relocating the spine on a book goes beyond conventional pressing.

 

Not getting into the argument of whether it's ethical or not, there is little difference mechanically between removing a spine roll and creating one.

 

 

Roy, your previous comment states ...

'I'm really surprised to see this too but then as Grails said, the seller really didn't do anything wrong except have the book pressed. Anyone else had the opportunity to do the same.'

 

You said the Seller didn't do anything wrong, that is introducing the ethical aspects of this. Now you are saying you don't want to get in to the argument of ethics. Okay, than why bring it up ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't think it's quite accurate to say that all the seller did was get the book pressed. Relocating the spine on a book goes beyond conventional pressing.

 

Not getting into the argument of whether it's ethical or not, there is little difference mechanically between removing a spine roll and creating one.

 

 

Roy, your previous comment states ...

'I'm really surprised to see this too but then as Grails said, the seller really didn't do anything wrong except have the book pressed. Anyone else had the opportunity to do the same.'

 

You said the Seller didn't do anything wrong, that is introducing the ethical aspects of this. Now you are saying you don't want to get in to the argument of ethics. Okay, than why bring it up ?

So he can get into another argument about ethics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I don't think it's quite accurate to say that all the seller did was get the book pressed. Relocating the spine on a book goes beyond conventional pressing.

 

Not getting into the argument of whether it's ethical or not, there is little difference mechanically between removing a spine roll and creating one.

 

 

Roy, your previous comment states ...

'I'm really surprised to see this too but then as Grails said, the seller really didn't do anything wrong except have the book pressed. Anyone else had the opportunity to do the same.'

 

You said the Seller didn't do anything wrong, that is introducing the ethical aspects of this. Now you are saying you don't want to get in to the argument of ethics. Okay, than why bring it up ?

 

Wrong was probably the wrong choice of words. What I meant was that he had the book pressed. He didn't do anything that CGC would not allow.

 

Better?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So he can get into another argument about ethics.

 

Eh, no...but then I should realize that there is always someone who is going to pick apart what someone says and want more detail.

 

:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.