General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[Jimmy Linguini]

I think CC has a point about cliques and PM circle kissers, but I'm not sure about the trolling so much.

 

just because someone says something negative doesn't mean they're trolling. If they're trying to get you to react negatively to something they're trolling.

[Logan510]

Most concerning to me is that apparently Chip is ignoring this discussion.

 

I don't know how to say this any clearer:

 

He's not going to come in and comment. B/c it doesn't matter what he says, the TROLLS will turn his words against him; they always do.

 

Why would anyone voluntarily step into the firing squad??

 

who are the TROLLS?

 

 

It truly doesn't take much to figure that out...look for the pack of individuals who all roll in around the same time when an "issue" has been been brought to light. True or not, they all pile on and make it their sole purpose to spew hate. They never say a positive word about anyone except themselves....

It's too late in the day for me to try to decipher a list. Could you post one for me?

If you don't know The List, you're probably on it.

 

I'm sure I'm on it.

I like to be on lists.

Yeah, I could be on it too. Funny thing is, I think I'd find myself on Logan's "hoop jumpers and Defenders of Everything" list as well. It takes work to make everyone think you're a *spoon*.

 

 

You defended people so much I thought you were Canadian for a long time

[Logan510]

Most concerning to me is that apparently Chip is ignoring this discussion.

 

I don't know how to say this any clearer:

 

He's not going to come in and comment. B/c it doesn't matter what he says, the TROLLS will turn his words against him; they always do.

 

Why would anyone voluntarily step into the firing squad??

 

who are the TROLLS?

 

 

It truly doesn't take much to figure that out...look for the pack of individuals who all roll in around the same time when an "issue" has been been brought to light. True or not, they all pile on and make it their sole purpose to spew hate. They never say a positive word about anyone except themselves....

It's too late in the day for me to try to decipher a list. Could you post one for me?

If you don't know The List, you're probably on it.

 

I'm sure I'm on it.

I like to be on lists.

Yeah, I could be on it too. Funny thing is, I think I'd find myself on Logan's "hoop jumpers and Defenders of Everything" list as well. It takes work to make everyone think you're a *spoon*.

Brother you are cool in my book,must make me a *spoon* too!

 

Not even close to being the reason

[Columbia Comics]

Its a bit like that..but there are absolutely some who do troll others. I know people troll me (and I suspect its the same who troll others, like Rupp), just looking for anything that they can use to "hump the button."

 

Its sad really....but yes, I'll agree with Mr. Pasta that there certainly are cliques here and they tend to move in packs.

 

What ultimately set me off is the whole "He's immediately guilty" mindset that many here have, including boobaset. He immediately casts a negative light on a question instead of posing it like a question.....and then all hell breaks loose.

 

It's happened many times to others and myself included....so yeah, I take a slight offense. If you have solid evidence, then post that when you post your "concerns."

 

Otherwise, its kinda like pressing...its not restoration b/c CGC cannot detect it. In other words, they have no hard evidence.

 

 

[HarveySwick]

Brock,

 

I'm still curious if you think there is nothing wrong if Chip BELIEVED that the grade was a 4.0, but still listed it as a 5.5 or higher on eBay?

 

We're not taking about him just disagreeing with opinions given by others in the PGM thread.

 

It's more concerning that he KNOWS he was providing false grades on eBay. So if someone isn't the greatest grader and took him, as a seller, at his word that they thought there were paying for and getting a 5.5 book when actually they were receiving something less and the seller knew it.

 

That just seems unethical and very deceitful. I don't see how it can be seen any other way.

 

And how is anyone defending Chip when he doesn't care to defend himself or explain away these accusations. Sometimes silence is deafening and an indication that a party knows that they are guilty and have no explanation.

[prez]

Everybody knows that ebay is filthy with overgrading. I believe that most of it is due to grading ignorance. I don't have a problem with that. They don't know what they're doing. I do have a problem with overgrading on purpose. As we are a more knowledgeable set of collectors it is our responsibility to represent this hobby and our wares honestly on ebay. No overgrading on purpose, no shilling, no undisclosed restoration, no shipping comics in an unprotected mailer, no shipping profiteering. None of it. We know better.

 

When eBay stops taking 12-14% from their customer's sales, then we may start seeing more upfront sellers. I find more quality sellers here on this forum than eBay. For some reason, people here are more accountable.

 

Edited September 3, 2014 by dead_clone

[Chaseman210]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

 

Coming into this thread and commenting will do nothing but toss fuel on the fire. It's just what the big trolls want, right Boboset??

 

No. What I want is honesty and transparency when it comes to selling the funny books that I love so much. I'm disappointed, but not at all surprised, that you don't see that.

 

You think dealing the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5 is ok? As Chips biggest defender, it's safe to assume you are ok with that. Correct?

 

I'm not so much defending Chip as I am attacking your malicious practices. You're the first person to jump all over someone based on unfounded allegations.

 

I hate to break it to you...but the people offering up grades in the PGM thread aren't very good...and its probably no fault of their own as I've said, and WILL SAY IT AGAIN, you cannot grade a comic based on a two dimensional image. You need the book in hand.

 

Honestly and transparency you say? So if he posts a book in the PGM thread...and let's say the avg is a 4.5...yet he feels it's a 5.0 to 5.5, should he post both opinions?

 

Something like: CGC boards grade it a 4.5 (but they're usually low (and sometimes REAL low). I give it a 5.5....so maybe it falls in the middle?

 

transparency would be saying an ad page has been removed or a MVS has been cut out. I don't believe he's flat out trying to deceive. How the hell can you deceive when you're offering up an opinion based on a flawed system?? And mind you, who's grading standards are we applying? B/c OSPG and CGC aren't N'Sync

 

If you have a problem, just don't buy. Or make your own judgments instead of relying on a seller's assessment. And if you're unhappy, return the book. Its pretty simple.

 

Yet you continue to cause a big stink....krap in the TGT thread and cause headache after headache...but I guess since its for the "funny books that you love" its all ok. Correct??

 

Brock,

 

I see what you're saying. But in this situation, I think the main issue is being overlooked. The issue doesn't lie with the grades estimated in the PGM (because, yes, they're flawed). The issue is that Chip listed the book on eBay as a 5.5, and IN HIS OWN POST, said the grade was a 4.0 in TGT. So it's not about what grades were in the PGM. It's that Chip listed his own opinion of the grades on two different places and two different numbers.

 

I understand your point of view here, but I don't think the is because of PGM.

[Jimmy Linguini]

Its a bit like that..but there are absolutely some who do troll others. I know people troll me (and I suspect its the same who troll others, like Rupp), just looking for anything that they can use to "hump the button."

 

Its sad really....but yes, I'll agree with Mr. Pasta that there certainly are cliques here and they tend to move in packs.

 

What ultimately set me off is the whole "He's immediately guilty" mindset that many here have, including boobaset. He immediately casts a negative light on a question instead of posing it like a question.....and then all hell breaks loose.

 

It's happened many times to others and myself included....so yeah, I take a slight offense. If you have solid evidence, then post that when you post your "concerns."

 

Otherwise, its kinda like pressing...its not restoration b/c CGC cannot detect it. In other words, they have no hard evidence.

 

 

I think you've done one or two things that have had people react to you and you think its trolling.

 

Its not, but I don't disagree with your other points. I do think when you realize the one or two things that upset people you'll have a better idea of board politics and the cliques. But, that again is just my opinion.

[Columbia Comics]

Brock,

 

I'm still curious if you think there is nothing wrong if Chip BELIEVED that the grade was a 4.0, but still listed it as a 5.5 or higher on eBay?

 

We're not taking about him just disagreeing with opinions given by others in the PGM thread.

 

It's more concerning that he KNOWS he was providing false grades on eBay. So if someone isn't the greatest grader and took him, as a seller, at his word that they thought there were paying for and getting a 5.5 book when actually they were receiving something less and the seller knew it.

 

That just seems unethical and very deceitful. I don't see how it can be seen any other way.

 

And how is anyone defending Chip when he doesn't care to defend himself or explain away these accusations. Sometimes silence is deafening and an indication that a party knows that they are guilty and have no explanation.

 

Justin,

 

I have no idea what Chip did or didn't believe. Nor have I seen the particular book in question. So to ask me what he did (or didn't do) is a question I cannot answer.

 

I can tell you from my personal experience that the PGM forum misses the boat the majority of the time. Case in point, I picked up a Tec 140 off eBay and posted it in the PGM thread. The average grade posted was 4.5/5.0. I think there was one person who said 5.5. If someone had sent me a PM saying your book is a 4.5, sell it to me as a 4.5, I would have laughed in their face. I knew the book was a dead ringer for a min 5.5 and it pressed up to a 6.0.

 

So in that case, I would have been in the EXACT same situation. Does that mean I'm trying to deceive people by saying "I know my book better than you?"

 

If you think its the same, we'll have to agree to disagree friend.

 

And apparently the prior messages of me stating that Chip isn't going to comment (nor would I) got lost in translation.

 

You can take this last comment however you want:

 

At the end of the day, I don't really care what other sellers do. I only care what we do and the image we display. Some thing I'm a real a-hole and that's fine, that's their opinion. Some think we're good....whatever. You're not going to please everyone.

 

And FYI, there's a reason I rarely sell raw books......

[HarveySwick]

Ok, read again what I wrote. That IS what he did!

 

He got opinions on a ST #115 of 3.5/4.0. He AGREED with that grade. Then he listed the book on eBay as a 5.5. He then offered it up in TGT. When asked what the grade was, he said it was a 4.0 without any hesitation - as it was STILL listed as a 5.5 on eBay!

[jsilverjanet]

 

I have no idea what Chip did or didn't believe. Nor have I seen the particular book in question. So to ask me what he did (or didn't do) is a question I cannot answer.

 

Brock, when I read this it makes me believe that the argument you are making is not about Chip at all but more your other argument "cliques, trolls, lions and bears".

 

I just think it's silly not to at least look into what is being said if you are going to have an issue with the person that's say it.

[Columbia Comics]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

 

Coming into this thread and commenting will do nothing but toss fuel on the fire. It's just what the big trolls want, right Boboset??

 

No. What I want is honesty and transparency when it comes to selling the funny books that I love so much. I'm disappointed, but not at all surprised, that you don't see that.

 

You think dealing the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5 is ok? As Chips biggest defender, it's safe to assume you are ok with that. Correct?

 

I'm not so much defending Chip as I am attacking your malicious practices. You're the first person to jump all over someone based on unfounded allegations.

 

I hate to break it to you...but the people offering up grades in the PGM thread aren't very good...and its probably no fault of their own as I've said, and WILL SAY IT AGAIN, you cannot grade a comic based on a two dimensional image. You need the book in hand.

 

Honestly and transparency you say? So if he posts a book in the PGM thread...and let's say the avg is a 4.5...yet he feels it's a 5.0 to 5.5, should he post both opinions?

 

Something like: CGC boards grade it a 4.5 (but they're usually low (and sometimes REAL low). I give it a 5.5....so maybe it falls in the middle?

 

transparency would be saying an ad page has been removed or a MVS has been cut out. I don't believe he's flat out trying to deceive. How the hell can you deceive when you're offering up an opinion based on a flawed system?? And mind you, who's grading standards are we applying? B/c OSPG and CGC aren't N'Sync

 

If you have a problem, just don't buy. Or make your own judgments instead of relying on a seller's assessment. And if you're unhappy, return the book. Its pretty simple.

 

Yet you continue to cause a big stink....krap in the TGT thread and cause headache after headache...but I guess since its for the "funny books that you love" its all ok. Correct??

 

Brock,

 

I see what you're saying. But in this situation, I think the main issue is being overlooked. The issue doesn't lie with the grades estimated in the PGM (because, yes, they're flawed). The issue is that Chip listed the book on eBay as a 5.5, and IN HIS OWN POST, said the grade was a 4.0 in TGT. So it's not about what grades were in the PGM. It's that Chip listed his own opinion of the grades on two different places and two different numbers.

 

I understand your point of view here, but I don't think the is because of PGM.

 

I haven't seen any of the posts/threads you're referencing. If that's the case, then maybe he made a mistake, maybe not. I haven't asked him that....

 

But I can also attest to grading very conservatively on here when selling raw books. I can specifically name two instances where I sold raw books:

 

An X-Men 141 - I graded it an 8.5; CGC disagreed, gave it a 9.6 :shrug:

An ST 37 - I said 9.2, maybe 9.4; CGC disagreed, gave it a 9.6 as well.

 

The second example isn't as extreme as the first, but there's a reason people ask me if we're having a raw sale....I tend to go a grade lower just to be "safe."

 

Why? B/c buyers here would crucify sellers if they sold a 9.0 book that came back an 8.5 or GOD forbid, an 8.0....

 

Its truly a cannot win scenario....so I just stopped selling raw books unless I'm pennies into them.

[Columbia Comics]

 

I have no idea what Chip did or didn't believe. Nor have I seen the particular book in question. So to ask me what he did (or didn't do) is a question I cannot answer.

 

Brock, when I read this it makes me believe that the argument you are making is not about Chip at all but more your other argument "cliques, trolls, lions and bears".

 

I just think it's silly not to at least look into what is being said if you are going to have an issue with the person that's say it.

 

Send me a link...I'm too lazy to look myself

[jsilverjanet]

 

I think you've done one or two things that have had people react to you and you think its trolling.

 

Its not, but I don't disagree with your other points. I do think when you realize the one or two things that upset people you'll have a better idea of board politics and the cliques. But, that again is just my opinion.

 

this is the most lucid post I've ever read from you

 

you have now achieved Level 5 Laser Lotus

[oakman29]

Most concerning to me is that apparently Chip is ignoring this discussion.

 

I don't know how to say this any clearer:

 

He's not going to come in and comment. B/c it doesn't matter what he says, the TROLLS will turn his words against him; they always do.

 

Why would anyone voluntarily step into the firing squad??

 

who are the TROLLS?

 

 

It truly doesn't take much to figure that out...look for the pack of individuals who all roll in around the same time when an "issue" has been been brought to light. True or not, they all pile on and make it their sole purpose to spew hate. They never say a positive word about anyone except themselves....

It's too late in the day for me to try to decipher a list. Could you post one for me?

If you don't know The List, you're probably on it.

 

I'm sure I'm on it.

I like to be on lists.

Yeah, I could be on it too. Funny thing is, I think I'd find myself on Logan's "hoop jumpers and Defenders of Everything" list as well. It takes work to make everyone think you're a *spoon*.

Brother you are cool in my book,must make me a *spoon* too!

 

Not even close to being the reason

Smart azz!

 

[Boboset]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

 

Coming into this thread and commenting will do nothing but toss fuel on the fire. It's just what the big trolls want, right Boboset??

 

No. What I want is honesty and transparency when it comes to selling the funny books that I love so much. I'm disappointed, but not at all surprised, that you don't see that.

 

You think dealing the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5 is ok? As Chips biggest defender, it's safe to assume you are ok with that. Correct?

 

I'm not so much defending Chip as I am attacking your malicious practices. You're the first person to jump all over someone based on unfounded allegations.

 

I hate to break it to you...but the people offering up grades in the PGM thread aren't very good...and its probably no fault of their own as I've said, and WILL SAY IT AGAIN, you cannot grade a comic based on a two dimensional image. You need the book in hand.

 

Honestly and transparency you say? So if he posts a book in the PGM thread...and let's say the avg is a 4.5...yet he feels it's a 5.0 to 5.5, should he post both opinions?

 

Something like: CGC boards grade it a 4.5 (but they're usually low (and sometimes REAL low). I give it a 5.5....so maybe it falls in the middle?

 

transparency would be saying an ad page has been removed or a MVS has been cut out. I don't believe he's flat out trying to deceive. How the hell can you deceive when you're offering up an opinion based on a flawed system?? And mind you, who's grading standards are we applying? B/c OSPG and CGC aren't N'Sync

 

If you have a problem, just don't buy. Or make your own judgments instead of relying on a seller's assessment. And if you're unhappy, return the book. Its pretty simple.

 

Yet you continue to cause a big stink....krap in the TGT thread and cause headache after headache...but I guess since its for the "funny books that you love" its all ok. Correct??

 

What are the other headaches that I'm causing?

 

I know that I was instrumental in exposing Hustrucks shilling. Was that a headache for you?

 

Yes, there is definitely some undergrading in the PGM threads. There's overgrading too but probably more undergrading. This is nothing new and I understand how to grade, you know that.

 

You still did not answer the question. Is it ok to list the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5?

[Columbia Comics]

 

I think you've done one or two things that have had people react to you and you think its trolling.

 

Its not, but I don't disagree with your other points. I do think when you realize the one or two things that upset people you'll have a better idea of board politics and the cliques. But, that again is just my opinion.

 

this is the most lucid post I've ever read from you

 

you have now achieved Level 5 Laser Lotus

 

I dedicate this song to Alex (Jimmy):

 

[Chaseman210]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

 

Coming into this thread and commenting will do nothing but toss fuel on the fire. It's just what the big trolls want, right Boboset??

 

No. What I want is honesty and transparency when it comes to selling the funny books that I love so much. I'm disappointed, but not at all surprised, that you don't see that.

 

You think dealing the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5 is ok? As Chips biggest defender, it's safe to assume you are ok with that. Correct?

 

I'm not so much defending Chip as I am attacking your malicious practices. You're the first person to jump all over someone based on unfounded allegations.

 

I hate to break it to you...but the people offering up grades in the PGM thread aren't very good...and its probably no fault of their own as I've said, and WILL SAY IT AGAIN, you cannot grade a comic based on a two dimensional image. You need the book in hand.

 

Honestly and transparency you say? So if he posts a book in the PGM thread...and let's say the avg is a 4.5...yet he feels it's a 5.0 to 5.5, should he post both opinions?

 

Something like: CGC boards grade it a 4.5 (but they're usually low (and sometimes REAL low). I give it a 5.5....so maybe it falls in the middle?

 

transparency would be saying an ad page has been removed or a MVS has been cut out. I don't believe he's flat out trying to deceive. How the hell can you deceive when you're offering up an opinion based on a flawed system?? And mind you, who's grading standards are we applying? B/c OSPG and CGC aren't N'Sync

 

If you have a problem, just don't buy. Or make your own judgments instead of relying on a seller's assessment. And if you're unhappy, return the book. Its pretty simple.

 

Yet you continue to cause a big stink....krap in the TGT thread and cause headache after headache...but I guess since its for the "funny books that you love" its all ok. Correct??

 

Brock,

 

I see what you're saying. But in this situation, I think the main issue is being overlooked. The issue doesn't lie with the grades estimated in the PGM (because, yes, they're flawed). The issue is that Chip listed the book on eBay as a 5.5, and IN HIS OWN POST, said the grade was a 4.0 in TGT. So it's not about what grades were in the PGM. It's that Chip listed his own opinion of the grades on two different places and two different numbers.

 

I understand your point of view here, but I don't think the is because of PGM.

 

I haven't seen any of the posts/threads you're referencing. If that's the case, then maybe he made a mistake, maybe not. I haven't asked him that....

 

But I can also attest to grading very conservatively on here when selling raw books.

 

Yeah, I see what you mean. I guess what people want to know is that if a seller grades conservatively here (where most people know more about grades than eBay buyers), why not have the same mentality while selling to someone who might not know as much? A seller might never get a negative. Heck, the buyer might even be happy with the purchase if they don't know better. But if a seller believes it to be one grade when dealing with more experienced collectors, maybe they should do that with novice collectors as well.

 

And the thing about trolls, etc. I am not qualified to delve into that

[N/A]

Most concerning to me is that apparently Chip is ignoring this discussion.

 

I don't know how to say this any clearer:

 

He's not going to come in and comment. B/c it doesn't matter what he says, the TROLLS will turn his words against him; they always do.

 

Why would anyone voluntarily step into the firing squad??

 

who are the TROLLS?

 

 

It truly doesn't take much to figure that out...look for the pack of individuals who all roll in around the same time when an "issue" has been been brought to light. True or not, they all pile on and make it their sole purpose to spew hate. They never say a positive word about anyone except themselves....

It's too late in the day for me to try to decipher a list. Could you post one for me?

If you don't know The List, you're probably on it.

 

I'm sure I'm on it.

I like to be on lists.

 

+1

 

Who's Chip?

[Columbia Comics]

You still did not answer the question. Is it ok to list the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5?

 

What was the book? Wasn't it a ST 115?