Pressing

[tay666]

You have never run or moderated a board before have you.

 

I've never seen a board with specific criteria for making a post a sticky.

It is usually one of those "you know it when you see it" kind of calls.

At least in my 3 or 4 years of moderating and administrating various boards on the net.

[esquirecomics]

You have never run or moderated a board before have you.

 

I've never seen a board with specific criteria for making a post a sticky.

It is usually one of those "you know it when you see it" kind of calls.

At least in my 3 or 4 years of moderating and administrating various boards on the net.

 

No, admitedly, I never have. And perhaps, as you suggest, the CGC board does not have specific criteria either in reaching these types of decisions.

 

But then again, that would be a legitimate answer to the numerous questions I posed to both the several moderators and Steve B. I don't expect every answer I ever receive to be the one I like, I just reasonably expect an answer.

[esquirecomics]

I agree. Esquire, you have made many great insightful posts. But you seem to be veering too far into the conspiracy CGC is wrong and evil camp lately. Youre getting very strident in your views and seem to be at risk of alienating much of your core audience.. Hope this doesnt come across as a strong criticism... just an observation. Okay?

 

I appreciate the compliment. I am always open to and welcome constructive criticism, as I hope CGC would be. If someone believes a comment I made is out of line, by all means either call me on it through the boards or PM me. But with all due respect I don't see why my offering comments on the deficiencies I perceive to exist in CGC's business practice or the statements of its management should be interpreted as bordering on entering a conspiracy or evil camp. I've probably offered as many compliments about CGC and Steve B. as I have critical comments.

 

Believe me, I know conspiracies well. I work one block from the White House. My legal career started on pursuing conspiracies. I am probably the only attorney to have litigated in court both the assassinations of Presidents Lincoln and Kennedy! I also deal with the CIA on a daily basis. You can't get more conspiratorial than that!

 

Still, with all the work I do representing people suing the USGOV, I am not un-American. I am not anti-American. I am not, contrary to what the CIA General Counsel's Office believes, anti-CIA. In fact, I am anything but. I love our country and I even respect the CIA (on some levels at least!). So no one should presume that simply because I make comments that appear in a vacuum to be negative against CGC that it is because I don't like CGC or feel they are trying to manipulate us. I am merely trying to improve upon problems I perceive within CGC. Frankly, the stronger CGC is, the better it is for me. I want to rely on CGC for their grading and restoration detection skills. I will primarily be selling CGC books. If CGC falls out of favor, my business will potentially suffer.

 

I can assure everyone that, with very limited exceptions, the intent of any post I make will be to further the integrity of our hobby that we love so much.

[PovertyRow]

Well Esquire, I am going to be uncharacteristically harsh here for old Pov.

 

Publishing emails between you and Borock is just wrong - and just because you want yet another Pressing thread made sticky?

 

Second, I have read your "disclosure" ideas and they are fine but incredibly naive. For how long will that disclosure stick with the book? I posted this a year ago.

 

Maker's Mark

 

(If the URL is too long just copy/paste the entire link below into your browser):

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/sho...true#Post366057

 

To me this is the only way for "disclosure" to have any real meaning. We cannot do a lot with the books that have already been treated. But something CAN be done about future treatment. But assuming the disclosure is going to follow thw book for its life??? No way, unless the Maker's Mark is used.

 

There have been a lot more much more informative Pressing posts that would deserve being Sticky over this one. Don't know if you have read them but my feeling is you have a personal stake, based in your posts about Disclosure that makes you want to make this post sticky.

 

Pov

[awe4one]

Well Esquire, I am going to be uncharacteristically harsh here for old Pov.

 

Down boy...here's a treat...

 

Jim

[PovertyRow]

Well Esquire, I am going to be uncharacteristically harsh here for old Pov.

 

Down boy...here's a treat...

 

Jim

 

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..........GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.......

 

THROW THE FREAKIN' STICK won't you?

[esquirecomics]

Well Esquire, I am going to be uncharacteristically harsh here for old Pov.

 

Publishing emails between you and Borock is just wrong - and just because you want yet another Pressing thread made sticky?

 

Second, I have read your "disclosure" ideas and they are fine but incredibly naive. For how long will that disclosure stick with the book? I posted this a year ago.

 

Maker's Mark

 

(If the URL is too long just copy/paste the entire link below into your browser):

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/sho...true#Post366057

 

To me this is the only way for "disclosure" to have any real meaning. We cannot do a lot with the books that have already been treated. But something CAN be done about future treatment. But assuming the disclosure is going to follow thw book for its life??? No way, unless the Maker's Mark is used.

 

There have been a lot more much more informative Pressing posts that would deserve being Sticky over this one. Don't know if you have read them but my feeling is you have a personal stake, based in your posts about Disclosure that makes you want to make this post sticky.

 

Pov

 

Interesting indeed. And to think it was I who was being called conspiratorial. Where do I begin?

 

First, you presume I did something wrong by publishing "private" e-mails between Steve and I without considering other possibilities. Do you really think that as an attorney I would simply publish private conversations between myself and Steve? But with my occupation aside, do you think that as a comic dealer, particularly a new one, that I would undercut my credibility with Steve by posting our private conversations? I've had some very sensitive conversations with Steve and told him on more than one occassions that anything we talk about can and will remain private. His response to me was that nothing he sends to me is considered private. Whatever he says to me in response to a question is something he would say publicly and I can use it as I see fit. If Steve feels differently now, then all he needs to do is tell me so.

 

In any event, there is absolutely nothing within those e-mails that would cause Steve to be embarrased or concerned. The contents directly answered the questions posed to me about when I contacted CGC personnel and why I felt they were being unprofessional by not responding.

 

Second, "incredibly naive"? Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. I can't solve all the comic world's problems. All I can do is use my experiences in the comic community, the law and life in general and offer some possible solutions. If attempting to persuade people to have some integrity and honesty in how they conduct themselves is incredibly naive, then I am GUILTY!

 

Third, using some kind of invisible mark, or "Marker's Mark" as you deemed it, sounds like a great idea to pursue. Its too bad your thread only had 9 postings on it. It is worthy of further investigation, which is something perhaps you might be willing to undertake. I, for one, would be more than happy to work with you on that project. Of course, placing the mark inside the back cover as you initially suggested would not seem to be worth much if the book becomes slabbed as is the intent of most of us on these boards. The mark would have to be either on the front or back cover to be worthwhile.

 

Finally, I suggested this pressing thread be a sticky point because as far as I could tell it had the most views and postings of any of them. It is also the most recent. Have I gone back and read all prior threads on pressing, probably not. Of those I did read, the repetition among them is overwhelming, which leads me to agree with the majority of posters that we have run the course of this discussion unless we come up with something new. I likely never would have found your "Marker's Mark" thread from more than a year ago (and I've only been on these boards since this January) because I wouldn't have recognized the relationship between your title and the topic at hand.

 

And if you want to accuse me of something, please be kind enough to state your basis for your allegation rather than simply insinuate that somehow I have a hidden agenda. Exactly what kind of "personal stake" do you believe I have with this thread? Show me any posting that would lead you to believe in the slightest I have or will benefit in some way by either pressing being classified as restoration, CGC agreeing to note pressing on its label or the theme of disclosure becoming an accepted practice among sellers.

 

C'mon Pov, don't you I think I deserve a little bit better than being victimized by your "feeling" that I am up to something.

[PovertyRow]

First, you presume I did something wrong by publishing "private" e-mails between Steve and I without considering other possibilities.

 

Well, I accept without question Steve said no need for privacy. But having been using the internet for some years before the "World Wide Web" made its appearance, I do know that simple protocol suggests that such agreement be simply mentioned before posting such ordinarily private messages. So my apologies for making an assumption.

 

Second, "incredibly naive"? Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. I can't solve all the comic world's problems. All I can do is use my experiences in the comic community, the law and life in general and offer some possible solutions. If attempting to persuade people to have some integrity and honesty in how they conduct themselves is incredibly naive, then I am GUILTY!

 

Just to clarify, the "naive" was not in trying to do what is the right thing. It is believing there is any chance of the information being passed word of mouth from buyer to seller to buyer to seller. It is a GOOD idea but not practical, in my opinion. I have had a few books retored back in the 80's. I sold them with the restorer's certificate. I have to wonder, twenty years later, if those books are still with the certs. I tend to doubt it.

 

Third, using some kind of invisible mark, or "Marker's Mark" as you deemed it, sounds like a great idea to pursue. Its too bad your thread only had 9 postings on it. It is worthy of further investigation, which is something perhaps you might be willing to undertake. I, for one, would be more than happy to work with you on that project. Of course, placing the mark inside the back cover as you initially suggested would not seem to be worth much if the book becomes slabbed as is the intent of most of us on these boards. The mark would have to be either on the front or back cover to be worthwhile.

 

I agree with this and the back cover is the natural place, as it would also be visible through a slab. An excellent idea.

 

Finally, I suggested this pressing thread be a sticky point because as far as I could tell it had the most views and postings of any of them. It is also the most recent. Have I gone back and read all prior threads on pressing, probably not.

 

Believe me, there have been much more informative pressing threads. Some have been amazingly detailed as to the process, experiemnts on the parts of forumites, detecting it, potential impacts etc. Honestly this just reads like another pressing thread with nothing outstanding to make it sticky.

 

And if you want to accuse me of something, please be kind enough to state your basis for your allegation rather than simply insinuate that somehow I have a hidden agenda. Exactly what kind of "personal stake" do you believe I have with this thread?

 

Whoah dude! Sometimes the obvious is too obvious. As in THE PRISONER where at the beginning of every episode you hear "Who is Number One" and the reply "You are Number Six". Let me repeat - Don't know if you have read them but my feeling is you have a personal stake, based in your posts about Disclosure that makes you want to make this post sticky. Meaning - because you have chosen this particular thread to make your Pressing stance that you have a personal stake in this thread and want to see it made sticky, but without really pursuing if other Pressing threads would be more deserving of stickiness.

 

C'mon Pov, don't you I think I deserve a little bit better than being victimized by your "feeling" that I am up to something.

See above and to reiterate: because you have chosen this thread to make your Disclosure argument you have a personal stake in this thread - not for gain or for some hidden agenda. You just have a personal stake in it because of the posting effort.

[Aman619]

I like the makers mark idea tooo. But lets face facts. How long will it take for fake stamps to be made along with the exact same ink? I think CGC should just start scanning all books worth more than some fairly large figure in an effort to catch resubmits wherein large profits can be pressed out of previously lower graded books. I dont like pressing and its clearly restoration (there Ive said it again) But, even worse than pressing a raw book for slabbing into a the highest grade possible is cracking out a graded book to press it into a higher grade than CGC already assessed it, as we see here with this dubious BB28.

 

We have no way of knowing when a raw book gets improved. Just as we never knew before CGC and as now as CGC states they cant tell either.

 

But CGC should expand their anti-restoration duties to catch crack and pressed books. Even though they (we) cant doscern the pressing, most all of us CAN recognize individual books by their distinctive narkings and defects that pressing CANT eradicate.

 

C'mon Steve and CGC - - - investigate steps to catch this craap!! I think I speak for all of us that we think this is part of your mission. I mean, you cant really think its kosher for an already slabbed book to be cracked out and improved, can you??? Since we accept (for the most part) that you cant catch the pressing on a book youve never seen, we DO know you can catch it the second time through, right? It didnt take long for us to see that this is the same B&B28 by looking at its scratches and spine nicks.

 

Its especially worth the effort on the expensive books. Start scanning them. Worst case for you you end up with a database of scans of the best books to comne through CGC. Add a few $$s if you have to. Its worth it to us if it helps you catch this stuff.

[Timely]

Third, using some kind of invisible mark, or "Marker's Mark" as you deemed it, sounds like a great idea to pursue. Its too bad your thread only had 9 postings on it. It is worthy of further investigation, which is something perhaps you might be willing to undertake. I, for one, would be more than happy to work with you on that project. Of course, placing the mark inside the back cover as you initially suggested would not seem to be worth much if the book becomes slabbed as is the intent of most of us on these boards. The mark would have to be either on the front or back cover to be worthwhile.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Are you guys really saying you want CGC to use invisible INK or some other invisible marker so at a later date we will know if invisible pressing was done to the book?!?

 

West

[Red Hook]

And I'll ask the same question I asked in the other thread.

 

What's to stop someone from creating (quite easily) conterfeit marks?

[Red Hook]

Are you guys really saying you want CGC to use invisible INK or some other invisible marker so at a later date we will know if invisible pressing was done to the book?!?

 

West

 

I sure don't. Wouldn't mean anything anyway. As I said, I could home-press a book, counterfeit Matt Nelson's "watermark" and sell it as professionally pressed.

[DiceX]

Are you guys really saying you want CGC to use invisible INK or some other invisible marker so at a later date we will know if invisible pressing was done to the book?!?

 

West

 

Sounds worse than pressing to me.

Hows about you guys get an embosser like a Notary uses and emboss the grade and serial number right onto the front cover.

[lou_fine]

To me this is the only way for "disclosure" to have any real meaning. We cannot do a lot with the books that have already been treated. But something CAN be done about future treatment. But assuming the disclosure is going to follow thw book for its life??? No way, unless the Maker's Mark is used.

 

Third, using some kind of invisible mark, or "Marker's Mark" as you deemed it, sounds like a great idea to pursue. Its too bad your thread only had 9 postings on it. It is worthy of further investigation, which is something perhaps you might be willing to undertake. I, for one, would be more than happy to work with you on that project. Of course, placing the mark inside the back cover as you initially suggested would not seem to be worth much if the book becomes slabbed as is the intent of most of us on these boards. The mark would have to be either on the front or back cover to be worthwhile.

 

Hi Mark;

 

I've been reading this thread during the past week without posting any comments. By now, everybody is tired of hearing my point of view with respect to this topic since it is well known. Unfortunately, it sounds like a lot of people are starting to harp on you also. Well, don't give up since this is an important topic.

 

Since you just joined us recently in January of 2005, I guess you missed all of the multiple pressing and resto threads that were overwhelming the boards during the last week of November and the first two weeks of December. I think one of them even had over 60 pages and counting by the end.

 

Anyways, POV's mention of a Maker's Mark brought up an idea that I had earlier proposed during the controversy that I thought would help to resolve this ongoing problem with pressing and restoration in general. The basic idea was to get the restorers working WITH us for the long term benefit of the hobby instead of the current situation whereby they are working AGAINST us with respect to the long term benefit of the hobby. The bottom line was to turn the current win-lose situation into a win-win situation for everybody involved in the comic book hobby and take us to the next level.

 

God, it would take a lot of work and somebody with enough foresight and influence to implement it, but it would definitely convinced people like me to start putting some real money back into this marketplace. So, all the newbies can go ahead and read my earlier post and then slag it like most of the CGC-centric posters did last year:

 

 

*******************************************************************************************

 

lou_fine

Talkative?

 

 

Reged: 04/29/03

Posts: 735

Re: Is this where the hobby is going? [Re: fantastic_four]

#653888 - 11/28/04 06:06 PM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply

 

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I believe that all professional restorers, including CGC, if they do decide to move into this business, should all be certified. In order to be certified and maintain their certification, they must all adher to a professional rules of conduct. One of these rules would state that any work performed by them would have to be disclosed through the form of a miniscule infra-red digitized code on both the last page and inside back cover of the book. As a result, all books undergoing any type of work (including restoration removal) would carry an invisible audit trail along with them.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Lou;

 

An invisible audit trail to track invisible work? I really don't have a problem with an internal mark myself, but since it will be detectable whereas pro NDP and restoration removal isn't, the cure is more of a defacement than the disease...

 

I do like the idea, but the problem is that this isn't Wall Street. Comics aren't a regulated market, so Cicconi, Nelson, Heft, and CCS are going to do whatever is most viable to keep them earning a living. Since they know an infrared mark would shrink their market, why would they do it? I know, I know...it's the ethical thing to do...but the ethics of the issue are controversial and debatable, so I'd be surprised if it ever happened. They'd have to be motivated to do it for their own good, which means that there would have to be some great market recession or depression directly attributable to undisclosed NDP for them to have the incentive to do it.

 

It is definitely a lot more viable to do this with comics than with cards and coins, however, since there is no interior of secondary display importance to put an infrared mark at in those other hobbies.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Hi FF;

 

Nice to get your input on this idea.

 

With respect to your first point, I would much rather purchase a book that has been certified with an invisible infra-red code than a raw book with possible undisclosed restoration activities. To fully understand my point here, refer to my scenario below. Either way, if the book gets slabbed, nobody ever sees the interior pages anyways.

 

With respect to your point about shrinking the market: the only market shrinkage I see would be to the overall back issue market if the current controversial proposal is undertaken resulting in an uncontrolled market absent of confidence and integrity.

 

With respect to the issue of the restorers: where you see a roadblock, I see nothing but a huge opportunity and a win, win situation for all sides. If you look at today's marketplace, CGC graded books generally goes for a lot more money than raw books. Similarly, in the future, certified books could also go for a lot more money than uncertified raw books. By certification, I am referring to books that have undergone a restoration detection process by certified professionals and digitized with an invisible infra-red code denoting either NO RESTORATION or varying degrees and type of restoration. One guess as to who would be getting the business here. So what you see as an disincentive for the restorers would actually be a strong incentive for them to actively participate in.

 

Just imagine a marketplace with not only third party independent grading, but also their third party independent restoration certification. This would add even more confidence and integrity into the market and encourage more collectors or BSD investors to come in. Oh, don't bother with the argument that we already have CGC restoration detection because I just don't buy it. We certainly have PARTIAL restoration detection in place, but certainly not an end-to-end detection process. By having restorers digitally code all work done on a book would provide end-to-end tracking and eliminate the need for best guesses and needless declarations such as "cleaning and pressing is not consider to be restoration because we cannot detect it beyond a reasonable doubt".

 

You never know, in an open environment with both a 10-point condition grading AND a 10-point restoration rating certification system, GA books with R-3 could become just as acceptable as a current CGC 9.0 graded book. Similarly, an early SA book might also just be as acceptable with a R-1 restoration rating as a CGC 9.2 graded book. Modern books, no doubt, would have to be at R-0 similar to how they would have to be at 9.8 and above in order to carry a premium.

 

Bottom-line: Raw books selling for XX dollars. CGC graded books selling for 2 or 3 XX dollars. CGC graded AND restoration certified books selling for 4 or 5 XX dollars.

[BassGMan]

 

Are you guys really saying you want CGC to use invisible INK or some other invisible marker so at a later date we will know if invisible pressing was done to the book?!?

 

West

 

Good point. I can see numerous problems created from this idea. Some people may even shun these "marked" books seeing them as altered the same way as pressing and resto alters books. It is an idea, but probably not a practical or realistic idea. May sound like a temporary fix, but in twenty years from now, how are some of us going to look at these marked books, invisible or not? THEN people may very well seek out not only unpressed books, but unmarked books as well.

[PovertyRow]

Third, using some kind of invisible mark, or "Marker's Mark" as you deemed it, sounds like a great idea to pursue. Its too bad your thread only had 9 postings on it. It is worthy of further investigation, which is something perhaps you might be willing to undertake. I, for one, would be more than happy to work with you on that project. Of course, placing the mark inside the back cover as you initially suggested would not seem to be worth much if the book becomes slabbed as is the intent of most of us on these boards. The mark would have to be either on the front or back cover to be worthwhile.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Are you guys really saying you want CGC to use invisible INK or some other invisible marker so at a later date we will know if invisible pressing was done to the book?!?

 

West

 

Not sure where you got that from, West. I was referrng to restorers putting a mark on the book, not CGC.

[BassGMan]

 

Not sure where you got that from, West. I was referrng to restorers putting a mark on the book, not CGC.

 

Well, this is never ever gonna happen. I assume you mean that a pro presser should put this mark on a book he presses. For this to happen, the submitter of the book would have to agree to this alteration. How many people that press a book do you think are going to want this invisible mark on the book? The whole idea (I am assuming) is to make sure that no alterations can be seen or proven.

 

But if anyone suggests that CGC should put this invisible ink on a book, how many people are going to want this? If CGC were to require this mark placed on every book that they graded (or every book valued above a certain $ amount) how fast do you think submissions of those books would stop? Very. The whole idea of anyone placing any kind of mark on a book is never going to happen as only a very small minority of submitters would ever even want it.

[PovertyRow]

How many people that press a book do you think are going to want this invisible mark on the book?

 

In that case the presser puts a different invlisble mark indicating the customer refused the invisible mark. This is tied to a different database giving the customer's name, address, phone number, email and ebay ID. That way we can avoid buying from the sleazebag.

[DiceX]

POV, send me some of your porn mags, and I'll put an *invisible mark* on them for you.

You can check them with a blacklight when I send them back.

[BassGMan]

How many people that press a book do you think are going to want this invisible mark on the book?

 

In that case the presser puts a different invlisble mark indicating the customer refused the invisible mark. This is tied to a different database giving the customer's name, address, phone number, email and ebay ID. That way we can avoid buying from the sleazebag.

 

POV, I'm not sure if this was a joke or you were being serious. Obviously ANY alteration or mark that a professional presser was to put on a book would need to be approved in advance by the submitter. If a professional was to put some kind of mark on the books he works on without prior approval, he'd be out of business within no time.