CGC et al To Aggressively Defend Against Lawsuit Filed In Pennsylvania 11 11

[comicwiz]

On 12/5/2023 at 3:38 PM, Dr. Balls said:

I am a fan of CGC, but for me - it puts them in a bad light. I’d expect a lesser company to take the stance they have. If you’re claiming to be the best in the game, you’re occasionally going to have to step up. This was one of those times and they floundered.

From my understanding, the Myers’ work was done with so much finesse, it was hard to detect. But that doesn’t mean it’s not detectable - we (the collectors) look to the Big Boys to lead the way in how restoration evolves and how to recognize it.

CGC and HA should have spent some of that money they earned from slabbing acetate covers and selling Garfield strips to find new tech to identify the Myers’ work instead of whining about it.

I'm sure this was brought up in this thread at some point, but at the time they seemed to harp on it being less "original" and the work not being reversible. I used the example of leafcasting because it's been done for years by reputable conservators and no one had a problem with it then, both for not being reversible, and for not being original when you start out with one small triangle of the original cover and the rest is reproduced. I concluded it was more about the Meyers doing it that was seen as a problem.

[Buzzetta]

On 12/5/2023 at 4:04 PM, comicwiz said:

I'm sure this was brought up in this thread at some point, but at the time they seemed to harp on it being less "original" and the work not being reversible. I used the example of leafcasting because it's been done for years by reputable conservators and no one had a problem with it then, both for not being reversible, and for not being original when you start out with one small triangle of the original cover and the rest is reproduced. I concluded it was more about the Meyers doing it that was seen as a problem.

Were the Myers the ones that were creating the Frankenstein books?  The Frankenstein books were those featuring restoration that were so extensive that they were basically reprints.  Cbcs graded them so long as even a single page was original while CGC considered books like that as NG. 

[comicwiz]

On 12/5/2023 at 4:52 PM, Buzzetta said:

Were the Myers the ones that were creating the Frankenstein books?  The Frankenstein books were those featuring restoration that were so extensive that they were basically reprints.  Cbcs graded them so long as even a single page was original while CGC considered books like that as NG. 

I showed an example in this very thread of one CGC graded that was no different, completely reproduced cover/redrawn and got a 9.4. Big book too. Go back and read some of the earlier post in this thread. From the beginning, this was about the people involved, and the opportunity it presented.

[VintageComics]

On 12/5/2023 at 4:52 PM, Buzzetta said:

The Frankenstein books were those featuring restoration that were so extensive that they were basically reprints.

This is an unfair characterization of the books. 

The books are restored, not reprinted. 

Who determines how much resto is too much resto? The audience? 

[comicwiz]

On 12/5/2023 at 5:25 PM, VintageComics said:

This is an unfair characterization of the books. 

The books are restored, not reprinted. 

Who determines how much resto is too much resto? The audience? 

They know the difference too. I even show them an example of the same book someone else created. That weren't supposed to get high grades. And it was a Tec 27, that got a 9.4. They don't want to see it.

[Buzzetta]

On 12/5/2023 at 5:24 PM, comicwiz said:

I showed an example in this very thread of one CGC graded that was no different, completely reproduced cover/redrawn and got a 9.4. Big book too. Go back and read some of the earlier post in this thread. From the beginning, this was about the people involved, and the opportunity it presented.

K - will definitely check it out. 

[Buzzetta]

On 12/5/2023 at 5:25 PM, VintageComics said:

This is an unfair characterization of the books. 

The books are restored, not reprinted. 

Who determines how much resto is too much resto? The audience? 

Who?

[VintageComics]

On 12/5/2023 at 5:33 PM, comicwiz said:

They know the difference too. I even show them an example of the same book someone else created. That weren't supposed to get high grades. And it was a Tec 27, that got a 9.4. They don't want to see it.

Who is 'they'?

[mattn792]

[fishbone]

……soooooo, no one knows anything beyond the 2019/20 ruling of it “going to trial “ ? Did it ? Is it still on hold from the Covid days ?

[AJD]

On 12/6/2023 at 12:40 PM, fishbone said:

……soooooo, no one knows anything beyond the 2019/20 ruling of it “going to trial “ ? Did it ? Is it still on hold from the Covid days ?

Well, there are a few possibilities.

1. The Meyers dropped their suit. (Unlikely after fighting through an appeal)

2. CGC made a payment to make it go away

3. The wheels of justice are turning very slowly

[comicwiz]

On 12/5/2023 at 7:42 PM, VintageComics said:

Who is 'they'?

Those who see them as Frankenbooks.

[MatterEaterLad]

On 12/5/2023 at 9:28 AM, Dr. Balls said:

Yikes. Companies as big as CGC and Heritage not able to determine if a cover was a "fake" or being stumped so badly on restoration that they have to classify it as "non-standard restoration techniques"? I don't know what to think about that.

@MatterEaterLad

I've refrained from posting too much about this because I've seen their work up close and I've seen video of some of their techniques (including some of the things that have stumped CGC). I don't want anything that I say here to get in the middle of this lawsuit, which I know is ongoing. 

I'm hoping the Myers do not settle, because then these techniques will probably be disclosed to the collecting community during a jury trial. 

I agree with @Dr. Balls. CGC has the resources and capacity to figure this out, but they didn't and that's on them.

They're not frankenbooks.

 

[Buzzetta]

On 12/5/2023 at 9:11 PM, comicwiz said:

Those who see them as Frankenbooks.

 

On 12/5/2023 at 9:35 PM, MatterEaterLad said:

I've refrained from posting too much about this because I've seen their work up close and I've seen video of some of their techniques (including some of the things that have stumped CGC). I don't want anything that I say here to get in the middle of this lawsuit, which I know is ongoing. 

I'm hoping the Myers do not settle, because then these techniques will probably be disclosed to the collecting community during a jury trial. 

I agree with @Dr. Balls. CGC has the resources and capacity to figure this out, but they didn't and that's on them.

They're not frankenbooks.

 

Were these the ones some referred to as Frankenbooks or were those something else all together ?  That's how I should have phrased it. 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Buzzetta

[MatterEaterLad]

On 12/5/2023 at 7:37 PM, Buzzetta said:

Were these the ones some referred to as Frankenbooks or were those something else all together ?  That's how I should have phrased it. 

I haven't read the legal doc in a while, which I think mentions their early work, like the Bat 1. I've seen books that came after that--books that stumped CGC and at least one of those books was called a Frankenbook here on the boards. 

 

[joeypost]

On 12/5/2023 at 9:51 PM, MatterEaterLad said:

I haven't read the legal doc in a while, which I think mentions their early work, like the Bat 1. I've seen books that came after that--books that stumped CGC and at least one of those books was called a Frankenbook here on the boards. 

 

I had the opportunity to hold and inspect 2-3 of these books at the Chicago dinner when all of this was coming to light. 
 

My opinion on two of the three books was the feel of the books was off. The one book, however had a very natural feel for a 60 year old book. In regard to the “look” of the books, it was hard to determine as they looked like a high grade book. I didn’t have any high intensity light or magnification to really look them ever, but I think the term frankenbook is a little harsh. 

[MatterEaterLad]

I know some people were critical of their business model, which was to restore a book that would head to auction and instead of being paid hourly for the resto they would take a % of the hammer price.

The difference is that this allowed them to put a ridiculous amount of time into a single book. They'd spend 200 hours on a book, and if they were charging by the hour, most wouldn't pay that.

 

[comicwiz]

On 12/6/2023 at 9:47 AM, MatterEaterLad said:

I know some people were critical of their business model, which was to restore a book that would head to auction and instead of being paid hourly for the resto they would take a % of the hammer price.

It's funny reading this. Especially since every auction house now takes fees from both sides. No one says a peep about paying a BP, for what reason, I still have never seen or heard an explanation what an auction/consignment company is providing to the buyer to merit it. On the recent blue screen X-Wing that sold at HA, the BP was half a million.

So to hear something being reconditioned to help the piece achieve a value enhancement is merited. Not so much when it's just another way for hands to reach into my pockets.

Edited December 6, 2023 by comicwiz

[VintageComics]

On 12/6/2023 at 9:00 AM, joeypost said:

I had the opportunity to hold and inspect 2-3 of these books at the Chicago dinner when all of this was coming to light. 
 

My opinion on two of the three books was the feel of the books was off. The one book, however had a very natural feel for a 60 year old book. In regard to the “look” of the books, it was hard to determine as they looked like a high grade book. I didn’t have any high intensity light or magnification to really look them ever, but I think the term frankenbook is a little harsh. 

Many books with a lot of resto feel 'off' so that's not a judge of anything really, and I say this because most people won't realize this as they don't handle many heavily restored books. 

[VintageComics]

On 12/6/2023 at 9:47 AM, MatterEaterLad said:

I know some people were critical of their business model, which was to restore a book that would head to auction and instead of being paid hourly for the resto they would take a % of the hammer price.

The difference is that this allowed them to put a ridiculous amount of time into a single book. They'd spend 200 hours on a book, and if they were charging by the hour, most wouldn't pay that.

 

A lot of people get hyped with the hate and run with it but in truth, it's a brilliant business model strictly from an economics point of view.

That model is used in many industries, the movie industry for example. 

Rather than pay an actor a wage, they're given a percentage of the profits of the film so they bet all of their financial reward on the success of the product. Jack Nicholson did it famously in Batman in 1989, but now movie houses like Blumhouse produce all of their movies using this formula. It's brilliant because it keeps costs down.