Promoting A New Trend Of Full Disclosure By Sellers

[esquirecomics]

I posted the message below in the General Comics section in the pressing thread, but because my primary interest in the pressing debate revolves around GA books, and especially pedigrees, I thought it worthwhile to post it here as well.

 

I've said in prior posts that my participation as a dealer/collector will be based on integrity, values and principles, and that no doubt my actions will need to speak as loud as my words. Thus far, such as with the Blue Ribbon #1 Larson matter, I hope I have demonstrated this to be true. I continue the trend with respect to the known pressing of GA books.

 

There is no doubt that for certain books, such as GA pedigrees, the existence of pressing would be quite evident, i.e., we know what the book previously graded at either as slabbed or unslabbed and if it were resubmitted as the pedigree after pressing, there is no question about it (presuming the pedigree label is retained or the book has the customary tell-tale signs of certain pedigrees). If people want to go out and have their 9.2 copy of X-Factor #1 pressed to get a CGC 9.8, more power to you. Go right ahead.

 

But the beauty to me of a Mile High book (or Larson, Reilly, etc) from 1939 is that a collector cherished these books in his house, stored them in a natural environment and setting (which, yes, amounted to legitimate "pressing") and now nearly 70 years later the book is still gorgeous. To then take such a beautiful, historic book, and artificially modify it, whether this is restoration or not, to me, denigrates the history and beauty. It is not the same thing, in my opinion. Perhaps others differ. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and with comics it is no different.

 

 

******** MESSAGE FROM GENERAL COMICS SECTION**********

 

I am running both a test and hoping to start a trend. The test is determining whether openly revealing that a book has been pressed will impact its sale. The trend is to promote full disclosure by all sellers, especially dealers who should have the integrity to be completely honest to their customers about all factors that may impact a book's value.

 

On www.ComicCollectors.net, I have for sale the Mile High copy of Military Comics #38 (pictured below). A very nice book indeed. Apparently, according to the MH census compiled by Arty, this book was originally graded an 8.5. Since it is now a 9.4, I presume logic dictates it was pressed (unless someone can come up with another reasonable possibility). I bought it already CGC'd so I have no idea of who owned it previously.

 

As of tonight I have added the following text to the description of the book:

 

** FULL DISCLOSURE: This book is on consignment from Mark S. Zaid of EsquireComics.com. Available evidence indicates that this Mile High copy had originally been graded an 8.5, but has apparently been pressed by a former owner to achieve the current CGC 9.4 grade. **

 

No doubt bids will be rushing in, or will they? There is no doubt in my mind that acknowledging the existence of pressing will have a negative impact on marketability (perhaps not price b/c some people may just not care). The primary reason, in my opinion, that pressing is not yet considered restoration by the leaders in the community who set the trends and policies, and most especially why even if it is never considered restoration it nevertheless will not be denoted on the CGC slab, is $$$$$$$$$.

 

[Forbush-Man]

I posted the message below in the General Comics section in the pressing thread, but because my primary interest in the pressing debate revolves around GA books, and especially pedigrees, I thought it worthwhile to post it here as well.

 

I've said in prior posts that my participation as a dealer/collector will be based on integrity, values and principles, and that no doubt my actions will need to speak as loud as my words. Thus far, such as with the Blue Ribbon #1 Larson matter, I hope I have demonstrated this to be true. I continue the trend with respect to the known pressing of GA books.

 

There is no doubt that for certain books, such as GA pedigrees, the existence of pressing would be quite evident, i.e., we know what the book previously graded at either as slabbed or unslabbed and if it were resubmitted as the pedigree after pressing, there is no question about it (presuming the pedigree label is retained or the book has the customary tell-tale signs of certain pedigrees). If people want to go out and have their 9.2 copy of X-Factor #1 pressed to get a CGC 9.8, more power to you. Go right ahead.

 

But the beauty to me of a Mile High book (or Larson, Reilly, etc) from 1939 is that a collector cherished these books in his house, stored them in a natural environment and setting (which, yes, amounted to legitimate "pressing") and now nearly 70 years later the book is still gorgeous. To then take such a beautiful, historic book, and artificially modify it, whether this is restoration or not, to me, denigrates the history and beauty. It is not the same thing, in my opinion. Perhaps others differ. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and with comics it is no different.

 

 

******** MESSAGE FROM GENERAL COMICS SECTION**********

 

I am running both a test and hoping to start a trend. The test is determining whether openly revealing that a book has been pressed will impact its sale. The trend is to promote full disclosure by all sellers, especially dealers who should have the integrity to be completely honest to their customers about all factors that may impact a book's value.

 

On www.ComicCollectors.net, I have for sale the Mile High copy of Military Comics #38 (pictured below). A very nice book indeed. Apparently, according to the MH census compiled by Arty, this book was originally graded an 8.5. Since it is now a 9.4, I presume logic dictates it was pressed (unless someone can come up with another reasonable possibility). I bought it already CGC'd so I have no idea of who owned it previously.

 

As of tonight I have added the following text to the description of the book:

 

** FULL DISCLOSURE: This book is on consignment from Mark S. Zaid of EsquireComics.com. Available evidence indicates that this Mile High copy had originally been graded an 8.5, but has apparently been pressed by a former owner to achieve the current CGC 9.4 grade. **

 

No doubt bids will be rushing in, or will they? There is no doubt in my mind that acknowledging the existence of pressing will have a negative impact on marketability (perhaps not price b/c some people may just not care). The primary reason, in my opinion, that pressing is not yet considered restoration by the leaders in the community who set the trends and policies, and most especially why even if it is never considered restoration it nevertheless will not be denoted on the CGC slab, is $$$$$$$$$.

 

 

The jury is still "out" on pressing but, to me, it is a form of restoration,...minor but none the less. Will the collecting comunity view it as such?

 

If it's graded as a "Blue Label",....I think it will fly below the radar. Just MHO.

 

The real problem is "Disclosure" and the ability to detect pressing,....which I fear is not there,......

[adamstrange]

The original description didn't note any defect that would require pressing. The descriptions aren't always accurate, but I tend to think the stain on the back cover (which Heritage did nto) was probably the major reason for the down-grade to 8.5. And it would be appropriate to note that in the sale. (If you read Halperin's response to the Forbes article on re-slabbing of coins, he mentioned that he provides a full archive of past auctions to allow anyone to research the past history of coin.)

 

I think it's very sad that anyone felt any reason to do anything to the book. It's a friggin' MH that will look fabulous out of the holder. But with more attention paid to a grade that primarily represents the more easily defined structural qualities of a book, there will always be a temptation to "fix" small problems.

 

I do commend the approach you're taking, as it is never fun taking the hits you've taken on this and the "Larson".

[esquirecomics]

Thanks AdamStrange. I may be in error on the pressing supposition, and I am investigating it further. I will, however, modify the descriptive language to note that it was previously a 8.5 with a slight amount of glue which was removed. I suppose for now I will still allude to the possibility of pressing until I ascertain whether the grade could jump 3 levels simply by removing the glue.

 

I also apologize to the boards for starting a repeat of a thread that QualityComix posted in December, when I was not yet on the boards. I commend QualityComix for their position, and acknowledge I am following in his footsteps (or standing next to him), rather than leading the charge on my own.

[Harvey Dude]

Thanks AdamStrange. I may be in error on the pressing supposition, and I am investigating it further. I will, however, modify the descriptive language to note that it was previously a 8.5 with a slight amount of glue which was removed. I suppose for now I will still allude to the possibility of pressing until I ascertain whether the grade could jump 3 levels simply by removing the glue.

 

I also apologize to the boards for starting a repeat of a thread that QualityComix posted in December, when I was not yet on the boards. I commend QualityComix for their position, and acknowledge I am following in his footsteps (or standing next to him), rather than leading the charge on my own.

 

I commended QualityComix back then and I commend you now. As a collector, I find it refreshing that there are still people of ethics out there.

[esquirecomics]

 

This announcement relates to the promotion of the new trend of disclosure. It also impacts GA collectors b/c it is GA books where pressing is most likely to be detectable, as noted below.

 

To some, this announcement may not come as a surprise. Some recent posts have led me to believe that the topic of my announcement has been discussed among smaller groups, or at least anticipated (most likely in the aftermath of Susan Cicconi's appearance on Vincent Zurzolo's radio program "Comic Zone" on November 8, 2004). Nevertheless, as far as I know, this is the first formal, and most detailed, pronouncement of the following information.

 

Noted comic book restorer, Susan Cicconi of The Restoration Lab, has authorized me to inform you all that she:

 

***** will no longer be pressing comic books;

 

***** considers pressing to be restoration; and

 

***** considers undisclosed pressing to be an unethical and deceptive practice.

 

I do not believe there is any doubt that Susan is one of, if not, the foremost and respected restoration expert of comic books. She now has almost 25 years of professional restoration experience under her belt. For those who do not know her background, let me fill you in on some of the highlights.

 

***** Susan started her apprenticeship in Paris, France under the tutelage of the chief paper conservator at the Museum of Modern Art in the late 1970s, where she first worked on fine art prints (including 36 original drawings by Picasso);

 

***** She then continued her apprenticeship in NYC and her work included restoring an 18th century watercolor scroll for the French government. She eventually settled back in Boston in 1981-82 where she became the assistant to William Sarill, an early pioneer in comic book restoration. After another short stint in Paris she returned to Boston for good in 1986, at which time she bought Sarill's business The Restoration Lab;

 

***** Since then Susan has developed an impressive résumé in comic book restoration and conservation. From 1991-1998, in fact, she served as the chief restoration consultant for the historic collectible auctions held by Sothebys. Her restoration work has included such notable comics as Marvel #1, Action #1, Superman #1, Flash #1, More Fun #52, Showcase #4, Amazing Fantasy #15, Spiderman #1, Fantastic Four #1 and many more. Something not likely known within the comic community is that Susan also has extensive experience in cleaning, pressing and restoring valuable baseball cards. She no longer practices this form of restoration/conservation due to the very same "lack" of disclosure in the field.

 

To be sure, Susan does not hide the fact that pressing was a service she previously provided. Although she did so, it was always her hope that her customer would reveal the information to any prospective buyer. From what she could tell, however, this was not being done. This is one of the primary reasons why she no longer wishes to engage in the pressing of comic books. It is her hope that by taking a public stand others will also realize the negative ramifications of what is being done to the comic book community.

 

When asked about how pressing has become such a controversial topic, Susan noted that back in the 1980s pressing was typically part of a more involved service that encompassed many facets of the treatment process. Pressing today has an entirely different spin, and in her opinion, should still be disclosed.

 

What led her to change her views? For one thing, the advent of CGC changed everything, particularly due to the sophisticated change in the grading system, i.e., the creation of the numerical designations. Susan feels strongly that the entire pressing controversy is about nothing more than simply getting the better grade (typically on an already high grade book!) in order to increase the monetary value of the book. It has nothing to do with the fundamentals of what restoration is all about.

 

Around 2000, both dealers and sellers started asking her to just press the book. While I did not ask her to name names, she informed me that she had been approached by dealers whose names are well known by those on these boards. And, of course, the so-called "non-professional" restorers came on the scene; the ones who were buying dry presses or using other devices to simply enhance the grade of the book in order to generate greater profit.

 

Also, for those of you who have been pressing your comic books, or buying from those dealers who are intentionally pressing books (without disclosure) with no regard of knowledge or structure of the comic, significant harm can be done to the book. For one thing, the spines are crushed under the pressure, cover gloss can be diminished or smudged if proper protection is not employed and in some cases, the very crease, dent or wave can revert back to its pre-pressed form. The bottom line is that they could be ruining the books (or simply deceiving you in the short run) simply to make extra money for their pockets, at your expense.

 

It is clear from talking to Susan that she takes her work very, very seriously. Throughout her career she has maintained a conservative approach to restoration/conservation by employing traditional methods that were learned on very valuable fine art prints. She wants to steer her well-known reputation of science and artistry back to the fundamentals of restoration/conservation. It's a "healing process" or "the bringing a piece of history back to life" that gives her and the recipient the greatest pleasure.

 

On the question of detection, Susan told me that one may not be able to tell that the book had been pressed if it had only been dry-pressed. She would maintain that if she were to "get back" some of the books that she previously just pressed, it would be very hard to detect that service, so skilled is her work. If a solvent was used to clean the book, however, it could be detected by the "whiteness" in the cover and sometimes by the residual smell if not sufficiently aired out. In today's world, most professional pressing jobs unfortunately won't be detected and in her opinion it's really just the well-trained EYE and the FEEL of a seasoned comic book aficionado that can make the assessment.

 

Nevertheless, she does believe that there are some types of books where the pressing could be detected, at least by a professional such as herself who has spent 25 years of looking at just the defects of a comic book. A lot depends on the age of the book and the specific defects involved but she is fairly confident that under the right circumstances she can tell if a book has been pressed.

 

In fact, as part of her service to declare books unrestored (i.e., in their original state), Susan has 12 reference points as to what original state/no restoration means. She will be offering Certificates of Evaluation with her signature declaring that a book is in its original state (the fee is yet to be decided). She cannot absolutely guarantee that a book has not been just pressed at this time, but she is willing to at least provide her professional opinion.

 

In the case of restoration detection, a similar certificate is offered and all of the areas of restoration are noted (location and method) and she will offer her opinion if it is amateur or professional work.

 

Copies of the two different Certificates are reproduced below.

 

With respect to whether pressing is restoration, there was no pause to formulate her response. Susan said quite emphatically that pressing is definitely a form of restoration, perhaps the minimalist of forms, but restoration nonetheless. The book is being handled, inserted under the pressure of a very hot dry mounting press and perhaps locally treated on specific areas using tacking irons (like dents and corners) with solutions or solvents. Waves, dents, corners, creases etc...are being removed to "recreate" the appearance of the book back to an original "perfect" state.

 

Perhaps even more important, Susan is of the opinion that the practice of nondisclosure of pressing is unethical and constitutes nothing less than deception. Pressing goes against the grain of everything she and true conservators in all domains stand for.

 

In closing, I want to make several important points sufficiently clear. There are no ulterior motives, actual conflicts of interest or an appearance of impropriety present here. For one thing, Susan has nothing to gain. In fact, taking this public stand is costing her money. It is obvious that Susan could be reaping a significant amount of money were she to continue a pressing service. Imagine if SHE were out there looking for those perfect candidates and pressing them and putting those said books on her website or E-bay without disclosure. A small fortune would be in the wings. "It's just not right" she says.

 

As for me, I have no relationship, personal or professional, with Susan. Before I spoke with her on this issue, I had only spoken to her once back in 1997 to inquire about her restoration services on behalf of a colleague. All that she asked of me was to let everyone know that additional information on this topic will be posted on her revamped website, http://www.therestorationlab.com/, which should live within days.

 

Also, Susan was provided a copy of this text before I posted it so she could review it for accuracy. I have an e-mail from her confirming that she read it and approved its release.

 

I hope that everyone finds this "interview" of value. Susan is the first professional, expert restorer who has now publicly come forward and supported what many of us believe. This is likely just the beginning of a trend to come. It is simply a matter of time before a greater stigma attaches to pressed books. Moreover, the fact is that I believe this stigma will primarily be the result of, to use Susan's terms, the unethical and deceptive practice of undisclosed pressing.

 

It is, in my opinion, even less time before those dealers who are pressing books without disclosure are exposed and the courts become involved. It will only take one collector purchasing a high-end expensive book that had undergone undisclosed pressing to then discover he/she has, in their opinion, been "had" and there will be a radical change of the landscape in this debate.

 

I have set forth my opinions on this topic in detail elsewhere so I will not go any further here. I will let Susan's comments speak for themselves.

 

 

 

[Aman619]

good stuff. But will Susan be able to check a book in its slab? If not we have to break it out, send in in hoping for a clean bill of health only to send it back to CGC for a reslab, HOPING it gets the same grade again. So we pay Susan a fee, pay shipping 4 segments, pay for a reslab, and wait 4 months.

 

what a bargain. Somehow I dont see her getting too many books to check out.

[esquirecomics]

good stuff. But will Susan be able to check a book in its slab? If not we have to break it out, send in in hoping for a clean bill of health only to send it back to CGC for a reslab, HOPING it gets the same grade again. So we pay Susan a fee, pay shipping 4 segments, pay for a reslab, and wait 4 months.

 

what a bargain. Somehow I dont see her getting too many books to check out.

 

I'm sure it has to be a raw book.

[Aman619]

if so, Mark, where does this leave us? I mean, the pressing we are all up in arms about are books pressed solely to pump up a CGC grade. And as you know, once a book gets a lofty grade, it needs to STAY slabbed to ENSURE the grade. So there just arennt going to be a lot of raw books to check for pressing are there?

 

but its great that she wont press anymore...

[esquirecomics]

if so, Mark, where does this leave us? I mean, the pressing we are all up in arms about are books pressed solely to pump up a CGC grade. And as you know, once a book gets a lofty grade, it needs to STAY slabbed to ENSURE the grade. So there just arennt going to be a lot of raw books to check for pressing are there?

 

but its great that she wont press anymore...

 

I certainly recognize and echo the frustration. For many reasons, including the one you note above, first we probably need to try and stop pressing from occurring in the present and future, and then we can turn to how to deal with the past. This is a start.

[Forbush-Man]

I certainly recognize and echo the frustration. For many reasons, including the one you note above, first we probably need to try and stop pressing from occurring in the present and future, and then we can turn to how to deal with the past. This is a start.

 

 

Yep, you have to start somewhere. Susan's comments are a welcome wake-up call for the hobby, and from the premiere restoration expert in the field no less!

[esquirecomics]

Given the title of this thread, it was as good as any to post this image.

 

 

As I promised, I had CGC restore to the label the fact that this copy of More Fun #52 CGC 5.5 is the Rockford pedigree copy previously owned by Nicholas Cage.

 

This copy had previously been a CGC 6.5 slightly restored (P) and the label reflected both designations. However, when the glue was removed thereby unrestoring the restoration, though dropping the grade, whoever did that purposefully had CGC omit the designations.

 

I cannot but presume that the purpose was to hide from the public that the book had previously been restored for I cannot fathom why anyone would not want a Rockford pedigree designation on their CGC label, especially for such a high-priced key book such as this one.

 

Shame, shame on that person.

[nearmint]

If the glue was removed, why are they still noting it on the label?

[esquirecomics]

If the glue was removed, why are they still noting it on the label?

 

Its that CGC "discretionary" rule that goes something like:

 

"We are permitted in our discretion to note a minor amount of color touch or glue and still give a book a blue label."

 

Where the line is drawn I have no idea. I bet they don't either.

 

Mind you, I'm not complaining with respect to this book!

[nearmint]

I understand the "discretionary rule". It just seems odd that someone would remove most of the glue, but not all of it. I guess removing it all may have further damaged the book?

[esquirecomics]

I understand the "discretionary rule". It just seems odd that someone would remove most of the glue, but not all of it. I guess removing it all may have further damaged the book?

 

That would be my guess. Removal had already brought the grade down 1.0. So long as CGC was going to slab it blue (and that raises the question of whether they were advising all along ,), why go further and bring it down to a 5.0 or perhaps lower with no glue. For this book, I was more than happy to have a 5.5 with a little glue, which is a joke anyway IMO.

 

Heritage has the old and current version in its archives, but I don't think it is possible to view the glue area on either scans.

[nearmint]

That's a very cool book, Mark. I know I couldn't care less about a tiny dot of glue.

[jkrk]

Given the title of this thread, it was as good as any to post this image.

 

 

 

As I promised, I had CGC restore to the label the fact that this copy of More Fun #52 CGC 5.5 is the Rockford pedigree copy previously owned by Nicholas Cage.

 

This copy had previously been a CGC 6.5 slightly restored (P) and the label reflected both designations. However, when the glue was removed thereby unrestoring the restoration, though dropping the grade, whoever did that purposefully had CGC omit the designations.

 

I cannot but presume that the purpose was to hide from the public that the book had previously been restored for I cannot fathom why anyone would not want a Rockford pedigree designation on their CGC label, especially for such a high-priced key book such as this one.

 

Shame, shame on that person.

 

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

 

Mark, First off, let me say that your book is a great looking F- copy of a key book.

Congrats.

 

I can understand why some individuals become lawyers. You found a cause and you are willing to fight the battle to change what you see as an inustice.

 

I view the batlle as a difficult fight as my motto is, "Just explain the rules to me and I'll figure out how to play the game". I would rather go along and play the game under existing rules than fight the batlle. Persistance is novel to me but I admire the trait in others.

 

I assume that any alteration disclosed will lower the demand for any book.

Will the ultimate sellling price be any different? I don't know since you only need two aggressive buyers bidding against each other to set the price. I only know that some will refuse to bid full value based on an uncertain future in the pricing of pressed books. AS i've said before, if a book's history can't be traced few will be as upfront as you are in revealing all that they know about a certain book. Few will risk potential profits when no teltale sign is out there.

 

I wish you luck with your quest and I am watching your battle with interest. My cynical nature tells me that the best will accomplish is to persuade CGC into putting all the grades a certain book has earned (on the label) without noting why the book's grade changed. For your sake I hope I'm wrong.

[esquirecomics]

I posted the following message in a new thread in the Comic Events section, but not everyone goes there to review what is new. No doubt there are readers in this section who can make a valuable contribution to the discussion so I am posting it here as well.

 

HOWEVER, please do not respond in this thread. Go to the Comic Events section and respond in that specific thread. Thanks!

 

 

Unless plans change, I will be hosting/moderating a panel discussion at the San Diego Comic-Con on Friday, July 15, 2005, from 4:00 pm - 5:30 pm. I still haven't decided on final format or named the participants, but it will be designed for discussion purposes of all the controversial and non-controversial topics that dominate our collecting/investment hobby today.

 

For example, we will cover such topics as third-party grading, restoration, pressing, pricing, marketability, future of the hobby, etc. I envision 5-8 participants in a professional round-table forum discussion debating these and other topics for one hour. Then the audience will have an opportunity to join in for an additional 30 minutes.

 

Steve Borock has already graciously accepted my invitation to participate.

 

I turn to you, the comic community, for input. I welcome your thoughts and suggestions for my consideration.

 

(1) What topics/questions would you like to see discussed?

 

(2) What individuals or representatives of a particular population segment (i.e., publisher, dealer, collector, restorer, etc) would you like to see sit on the panel?

 

I hope to see you at the discussion, and to meet you all. If you wish to raise a suggestion with me confidentiality, please do not hesitate to PM or e-mail me.