Batman #1 CGC 9.2 slight(p) on eBay...

[rob_react]

I believe he called it "mea culpa"

 

Him and his fancy book learnin' lawyer talk.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait a second! I took six years of latin! I got book learnin' too!

 

[buttock]

"Larnin", there's no 'e'.

[rob_react]

"Larnin", there's no 'e'.

 

[Harvey Dude]

Nothing could have improved this book, certainly not pressing (as a matter of fact that probably would have weakened the pages). I felt like I had an arbitrage opportunity, to me it looked like a CGC 9.4. I decided to play Russian roulette with CGC

 

You removed your Batman #1 photo so I no longer can compare but one other board member noted an apparent improvement in the spine area. Are you saying that you did not peform any additional work prior to resubmission?

 

 

I resubmitted it and hit the jackpot. ... I really believe I would have made more money and would have avoided having to set the record straight with this embarrassing statement. But, I want to make sure there is trust in the community.

 

You don't need to set the record straight with us. You should set the record straight with the buyer.

 

One last comment. You mention, “I really believe it cost me some serious money.” I actually believe you made a healthy profit based on your embellished story. I am not a lawyer but I would think your deceptive advertising on the Batman #1 would be illegal?

 

WELCOME TO THE BOARDS

[Harvey Dude]

One last question. Why did you pull the Batman #1 Ebay photo so fast while many of your other closed auctions still maintain the pictures?

 

Maybe, I am having problems with my computer uploading that particular picture but it shows up blank when I try to access it.

[themegoguy]

You are correct Harvey that there was great improvement to the lower staple area on the book!

[FFB]

Nothing could have improved this book, certainly not pressing (as a matter of fact that probably would have weakened the pages). I felt like I had an arbitrage opportunity, to me it looked like a CGC 9.4. I decided to play Russian roulette with CGC

 

You removed your Batman #1 photo so I no longer can compare but one other board member noted an apparent improvement in the spine area. Are you saying that you did not peform any additional work prior to resubmission?

 

 

I resubmitted it and hit the jackpot. ... I really believe I would have made more money and would have avoided having to set the record straight with this embarrassing statement. But, I want to make sure there is trust in the community.

 

You don't need to set the record straight with us. You should set the record straight with the buyer.

 

One last comment. You mention, “I really believe it cost me some serious money.” I actually believe you made a healthy profit based on your embellished story. I am not a lawyer but I would think your deceptive advertising on the Batman #1 would be illegal?

 

WELCOME TO THE BOARDS

 

I was the one who noted the apparent improvement at the lower staple (staple tear sealed). The position of the lower staple relative to the spine fold also seems to have shifted a tad, suggesting to me, at least, that the book was again disassembled, the tear sealed, and the book reassembled and perhaps pressed.

 

As for the illegality, there are questions about whether his sappy story was material to the buyer's decision to buy the book and whether the buyer actually relied on the sappy story in placing his winning bid. As long as the seller didn't lie about the specifics of the book itself (grade, kind and nature of restoration, etc.), it would be a hard case to make to say that his sappy story increased the value of the book in that sale. As several people have noted and as the seller seems to realize, his sappy story likely turned off a few bidders who otherwise would have been interested.

[Harvey Dude]

As for the illegality, there are questions about whether his sappy story was material to the buyer's decision to buy the book and whether the buyer actually relied on the sappy story in placing his winning bid. As long as the seller didn't lie about the specifics of the book itself (grade, kind and nature of restoration, etc.), it would be a hard case to make to say that his sappy story increased the value of the book in that sale. As several people have noted and as the seller seems to realize, his sappy story likely turned off a few bidders who otherwise would have been interested.

 

Thanks for the clarification FFB. As I have previously posted, I have very low tolerance for deception even if the deceit does not reach the level of illegality.

[Silver Surfer]

Should have positioned this book on the boards before you listed it. Probably would have went a lot higher than it did but still a nice return on this puppy.

[esquirecomics]

As we've discussed throughout the tenure of the auction, many of us had our doubts about the sanctity of the story. Of course that did not stop me from initially bidding on the book and breaking the reserve. The book was the book. After all, did it really matter whether one or five people had owned it? Ray and I talked and e-mailed quite a few times. I never did raise the controversy with him because I was, frankly, testing his responses. It became clear to me as time went by that something was up and I decided not to bid further. I've elaborated on my reasoning above. Suffice it to say that Ray's handling of the transaction cost him my further bidding. I had lost my trust in the auction. Had I decided to bid again I have little doubt I would not have won. So, let this be a lesson to Ray and everyone else not to play games.

 

In any event, as Ray noted, we had a heart to heart talk about the book after I asked him directly about its origins, particularly with respect to his taking ownership. I strongly recommended he come clean on these boards given our past discussions and in light of who trolls here, I was pleased to see that he agreed and did so. I applaud his integrity and willingness to take some lumps in the name of disclosure. As we know from these boards, there have been - unfortunately - few sellers, whether they be formal dealers or collectors using e-bay, who are willing to respond to concerns or criticisms.

 

I am happy to welcome Ray to the boards and look forward to seeing more of his books for sale, but this time without the song and dance. Let the books sell themselves!

 

I would be remiss, however, not to use this occasion to point out what is obvious. CGC once again allowed an obviously resubmitted book to receive a different, in this case higher, grade. Given the tell-tale signature signs of the books (i.e., the S for example), and my understanding that they scan the higher value books, I find it hard to believe that if we could figure out it was the same book, then CCG could not and should not have as well. I know there is some issue with whether it had underwent further restoration, but there still remains a restored 9.0 in the census (and an unbelievable 3 in 9.2, how long has that been??) so no steps were taken to adjust their knowledge. That bothers me.

[FFB]

I would be remiss, however, not to use this occasion to point out what is obvious. CGC once again allowed an obviously resubmitted book to receive a different, in this case higher, grade. Given the tell-tale signature signs of the books (i.e., the S for example), and my understanding that they scan the higher value books, I find it hard to believe that if we could figure out it was the same book, then CCG could not and should not have as well. I know there is some issue with whether it had underwent further restoration, but there still remains a restored 9.0 in the census (and an unbelievable 3 in 9.2, how long has that been??) so no steps were taken to adjust their knowledge. That bothers me.

 

I agree that if this is the same 9.0 in the census, the 9.0 should be removed. CGC knows the serial number that this book had before and should be able to check easily to see if it is still in the census. Someone should call them and give them the serial number from Heritage. Not me though. Too lazy.

[Aman619]

I agree wholeheartedly that CGC should know this and should stay on top of keeping the census accurate. However, as much as Ive bashed them over the pressing thing, lets face it, recognizing scans is something we on these boards apparently have the time and inclination to do and they running a business just dont. But at least they could pick up on stuff we discover and act on it. Make us sort of unofficial scouts or deputies. Maybe hand out vouchers for grading to those who ferret out this suff.... or is it not th ekind of thing they want so public?

[Stromm]

I also agree the census should be kept accurate, BUT, that's not going to happen. Least of all with Moderns or "pressed" bronze & silver age books. I can offer no answers, only cover your BUTT when buying or bidding. The "fourm police" do an execelent job of exposing questionable books. You guys should form a company and charge for the service! Anyway, someone mentioned pics to compare the Bats, I am sure others could have found these too. I'll host them for awhile so you can all save them yourself.

 

 

 

[Harvey Dude]

I agree wholeheartedly that CGC should know this and should stay on top of keeping the census accurate.

 

Given the significance of this book, I agree that CGC should correct the census. With that said, it is standard procedure to send in the old label to ensure the integrity of the claim, though in this instance, it is obvious. Heck, I wouldn’t want that errant label floating around. Ray should send it in to correct the census.

 

I have not heard anything more regarding the questions regarding Ray’s full disclosure of the matter. Was additional restoration performed after the book was received or did he just resubmit and play the roulette game as he states in his original posting.

[Harvey Dude]

Stromm, thanks for posting the side by side comparison.

[OldGuy]

That story about his Dad picking up that book off the newstand is such an old chestnut that the alarm bells were always going to be set off. Wonder why it's the only GA book listed....

 

I wouldn't put that info about my dad buying it off the rack in the description even if it were true.

 

[Silver Surfer]

Not getting on Ray or anything but I'm really surprised that someone who owned such a coveted book with a reserve price that you just don't see very often on EBay would then handle the situation like he was a first timer. You would have to think that your target audience would be serious collectors with serious money behind them and even more knowledge about the market than your average Joe who is surfing EBay for deals. Also, Ray must have been aware of CGC prior to listing it so why didn't he come here earlier, establish a rapore and then position this great book. I'm still scratching my head over that one.

 

Excuse me Ray if I aven't read all of this thread but I take it you have other key books like this in your collection?

[ronm3-migration]

Whatever happened with this book?

[ronm3-migration]

Anyone? Crickets???

[esquirecomics]

As we've discussed throughout the tenure of the auction, many of us had our doubts about the sanctity of the story. Of course that did not stop me from initially bidding on the book and breaking the reserve. The book was the book. After all, did it really matter whether one or five people had owned it? Ray and I talked and e-mailed quite a few times. I never did raise the controversy with him because I was, frankly, testing his responses. It became clear to me as time went by that something was up and I decided not to bid further. I've elaborated on my reasoning above. Suffice it to say that Ray's handling of the transaction cost him my further bidding. I had lost my trust in the auction. Had I decided to bid again I have little doubt I would not have won. So, let this be a lesson to Ray and everyone else not to play games.

 

In any event, as Ray noted, we had a heart to heart talk about the book after I asked him directly about its origins, particularly with respect to his taking ownership. I strongly recommended he come clean on these boards given our past discussions and in light of who trolls here, I was pleased to see that he agreed and did so. I applaud his integrity and willingness to take some lumps in the name of disclosure. As we know from these boards, there have been - unfortunately - few sellers, whether they be formal dealers or collectors using e-bay, who are willing to respond to concerns or criticisms.

 

I am happy to welcome Ray to the boards and look forward to seeing more of his books for sale, but this time without the song and dance. Let the books sell themselves!

 

I would be remiss, however, not to use this occasion to point out what is obvious. CGC once again allowed an obviously resubmitted book to receive a different, in this case higher, grade. Given the tell-tale signature signs of the books (i.e., the S for example), and my understanding that they scan the higher value books, I find it hard to believe that if we could figure out it was the same book, then CCG could not and should not have as well. I know there is some issue with whether it had underwent further restoration, but there still remains a restored 9.0 in the census (and an unbelievable 3 in 9.2, how long has that been??) so no steps were taken to adjust their knowledge. That bothers me.

 

Geez, I had forgotten about this auction. I certainly did not buy it. I haven't heard from Ray since this episode.

 

BTW, I just checked the CGC census and the 9.0 restored has been removed and there are 4 restored 9.2s.