Is this unacceptable or is it just me? 4 4

[Cocomonkey]

Nice looking book! Crazy story, but glad it managed to end up getting to you.

[badback83]

I thought for sure you’d open the package and there wouldn’t be a book.  I just had a bad feeling.  Glad it worked out!

[Squad008]

13 hours ago, kav said:

I would probably leave good feedback but message the seller explaining all the deficits and point out that many are not so kind with feedback.  Conversely, if you are going to leave a neg or neutral, do not mention feedback or he can have it removed.

That is what I am planning on doing.  Was fair with the price and who knows the situation.  User had 36 positive feedback but only 1 positive as a seller for an Amazing Fantasy #15 that was coverless, was still over a $3k sale.  So they are selling higher priced items.  Will comment on the shipping in private.  I ship $40 CGC slabs with much more protection and priority, buyers are usually happy to pay a reasonable shipping fee if it means the comic is packaged and shipped properly.  I know that I wouldn't even hesitate to pay a $50 shipping fee on a $5-6k book.

Sadly, this isn't even in my top 5 worst shipping stories from ebay/amazon.

[Squad008]

2 hours ago, DocHoppus182 said:

I thought for sure you’d open the package and there wouldn’t be a book.  I just had a bad feeling.  Glad it worked out!

Me too, especially after I saw the label that said 8 oz..  Some of the nicest books I have bought have been shipped in the worst way possible.  Some of the lessor known online estate websites have shocked me with the way they ship things.  

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 5/9/2018 at 12:03 PM, newshane said:

Absolutely not. 

Completely unacceptable for a book of that value. 

In fact, comics don't qualify for media mail. If the post office catches it, then the person slated to receive the item is on the hook for the extra shipping charges that the seller should have paid in the first place. I've personally seen people get shafted at the post office when they came in to pick up a package. 

The Domestic Mail Manual...the only thing that matters as far as the USPS is concerned...is ambiguous on the subject. It doesn't matter what anyone who works for the USPS...even the postmaster general...says. If it's not in the DMM, then it has no regulatory weight (as those who work for/have worked for the USPS can confirm.)

The DMM says nothing about comics...it only addresses advertising. Comic books from any point older than 6 months do not contain ads. They contain historical reference material. It doesn't matter if the product being advertised still exists: once an ad is replaced by a subsequent ad, the former ad is no longer "in effect", and thus, no longer an ad. It is historical reference material. That something was once an ad doesn't mean it remains an ad in perpetuity. 

You cannot buy anything being advertised in a 1973 comic book, as it was advertised in 1973. Same with 1958, 1981, 2016, 1936, or any other year after about 6 months have passed (it varies ad to ad.) 

Since they are no longer valid, they are no longer ads. Since they are no longer ads, but are now reference material, the books containing them qualify for Media mail, by the USPS' own regulations.

That said...only a buffoon would ship a $6,000 book via Media mail.

[newshane]

58 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

The Domestic Mail Manual...the only thing that matters as far as the USPS is concerned...is ambiguous on the subject. It doesn't matter what anyone who works for the USPS...even the postmaster general...says. If it's not in the DMM, then it has no regulatory weight (as those who work for/have worked for the USPS can confirm.)

The DMM says nothing about comics...it only addresses advertising. Comic books from any point older than 6 months do not contain ads. They contain historical reference material. It doesn't matter if the product being advertised still exists: once an ad is replaced by a subsequent ad, the former ad is no longer "in effect", and thus, no longer an ad. It is historical reference material. That something was once an ad doesn't mean it remains an ad in perpetuity. 

You cannot buy anything being advertised in a 1973 comic book, as it was advertised in 1973. Same with 1958, 1981, 2016, 1936, or any other year after about 6 months have passed (it varies ad to ad.) 

Since they are no longer valid, they are no longer ads. Since they are no longer ads, but are now reference material, the books containing them qualify for Media mail, by the USPS' own regulations.

That said...only a buffoon would ship a $6,000 book via Media mail.

Good to know. I was told differently.

I'm not exactly sure that they will be checking the date on the comics if they open up a package. Also, from experience, the post master can pretty much do whatever the  he or she wants, and the action is usually taken before the customer has a chance to pull out the DMM. The USPS does NOT operate like Burger King - it's not your way right way. The customer is never right! 

For example, if someone sends me comics via Media Mail and they get "caught," then I am probably going to have to pay up before I get my books, no matter what the manual may say. At best, I would have to stand there for 2 or 3 hours (yes, this is very likely) arguing my point...and I'll probably have to pay anyway. lol 

Best way to avoid this is to avoid media mail. 

I won't do comic business with anyone who uses media mail and I would never request it in a million years. 

Thanks for the information. 

 

[masterlogan2000]

2 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

The DMM says nothing about comics...it only addresses advertising. Comic books from any point older than 6 months do not contain ads. They contain historical reference material. It doesn't matter if the product being advertised still exists: once an ad is replaced by a subsequent ad, the former ad is no longer "in effect", and thus, no longer an ad. It is historical reference material. That something was once an ad doesn't mean it remains an ad in perpetuity.

Do you have any references confirming this standpoint, or is this just your interpretation of what YOU define as an "ad"?

(I hate to derail this thread, but...) I'm going to respectfully disagree with you here, as my interpretation is "once an ad, always an ad".

Ads aren't limited to selling goods.  Ads can simply be promotions of people, concepts, or intellectual property.  Take the following example...

This is an advertisement from 1991 coming right off the back of a comic book.  I can tell you right now that neither KayBee Toys nor ToyBiz are actual companies TODAY.  These toys are no longer being manufactured TODAY.  Does this completely invalidate the ad?

Now, ask yourself the following:

What about the promotion of the X-Men themselves?  Or Marvel comics?  Heck, what about action figures in general?  Could this image not invoke feelings of 90s nostalgia and entice me to make a purchase of action figures?  What if it makes me want to pick up an X-Men comic?  See an X-Men movie?  Buy DVDs of the old X-Men Animated Series?  Isn't this what advertisements are meant to do?  Wouldn't that mean that this is still valid?

Sure, I can't purchase the product that is being DIRECTLY marketed to me here, but this image is about much, much more than trying to get me to purchase a 6" Colossus figure in 1991.

[kav]

Yep i could  see an old twinkies ad and that makes me want a Twinkie.

[Squad008]

11 minutes ago, masterlogan2000 said:

Do you have any references confirming this standpoint, or is this just your interpretation of what YOU define as an "ad"?

(I hate to derail this thread, but...) I'm going to respectfully disagree with you here, as my interpretation is "once an ad, always an ad".

Ads aren't limited to selling goods.  Ads can simply be promotions of people, concepts, or intellectual property.  Take the following example...

This is an advertisement from 1991 coming right off the back of a comic book.  I can tell you right now that neither KayBee Toys nor ToyBiz are actual companies TODAY.  These toys are no longer being manufactured TODAY.  Does this completely invalidate the ad?

Now, ask yourself the following:

What about the promotion of the X-Men themselves?  Or Marvel comics?  Heck, what about action figures in general?  Could this image not invoke feelings of 90s nostalgia and entice me to make a purchase of action figures?  What if it makes me want to pick up an X-Men comic?  See an X-Men movie?  Buy DVDs of the old X-Men Animated Series?  Isn't this what advertisements are meant to do?  Wouldn't that mean that this is still valid?

Sure, I can't purchase the product that is being DIRECTLY marketed to me here, but this image is about much, much more than trying to get me to purchase a 6" Colossus figure in 1991.

I used to own every single one of those X-Men toys, even bought most of them from Kay Bee.  But like Kay Bee, they are long gone.  

Ad makes me kind of want to find some to buy.

[kav]

This ad always makes me want to get a Ka Bala:

 

[Squad008]

This is one of my favorites

[kav]

12 minutes ago, Squad008 said:

This is one of my favorites

Come on OJ you're wearing Bruno Magli stop lyin to them kids.

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 hours ago, masterlogan2000 said:

Do you have any references confirming this standpoint, or is this just your interpretation of what YOU define as an "ad"?

(I hate to derail this thread, but...) I'm going to respectfully disagree with you here, as my interpretation is "once an ad, always an ad".

 

 

I'm making a logical argument that I believe would stand up in court, even though it would never get to that level.

I have no intention of convincing those who disagree, because you're certainly free to choose not to use Media mail to ship comics. My argument, laid out above, is straightforward, and is in "bureaucrat think." 

You say "is this just your interpretation of YOU define as an "ad""...and the answer, obviously, is yes. It's yes because that's how human beings communicate ideas and concepts to each other: they agree, by consensus and usage, After all, what is the dictionary? Someone's interpretation of what they think those words mean. It may be excellent work. It may be agreed upon by everyone. But that doesn't still mean that those were someone's interpretations of the idea they believe is being conveyed.

As to references: I already said that the DMM is the only thing that matters with regard to USPS practices, and comic books aren't addressed in the DMM. Therefore, in the absence of clear regulations, one must use reasonable and rational inference as to how the regulations that DO exist apply to this situation. To wit:

Quote

DMM 173.4.1a: "Books, including books issued to supplement other books, of at least eight printed pages, consisting wholly of reading matter or scholarly bibliography, or reading matter with incidental blank spaces for notations and containing no advertising matter other than incidental announcements of books. Advertising includes paid advertising and the publishers‘ own advertising in display, classified, or editorial style."

What is an ad? An ad is a notice or announcement in a public medium promoting a product, service, or event. So what do we call an ad that has been replaced, or promotes something which is no longer available, or is past the date for which the ad was valid? It's no longer an ad...it's an expired ad. And an expired ad, by virtue of its expiration, is no longer an ad. Therefore, it no longer falls under the restriction in the DMM.

4 hours ago, masterlogan2000 said:

Ads aren't limited to selling goods.  Ads can simply be promotions of people, concepts, or intellectual property. 

Naturally.

4 hours ago, Squad008 said:

Take the following example...

This is an advertisement from 1991 coming right off the back of a comic book.  I can tell you right now that neither KayBee Toys nor ToyBiz are actual companies TODAY.  These toys are no longer being manufactured TODAY.  Does this completely invalidate the ad?

No. The ad is "invalid" by virtue of its long ago expiration. It's not merely that KayBee and ToyBiz no longer exist...the entire ad has expired.

That back cover is no longer an ad...it is historical reference material, an interesting look at what was available, and where, and from whom, 27 years ago.

4 hours ago, masterlogan2000 said:

What about the promotion of the X-Men themselves?  Or Marvel comics?  Heck, what about action figures in general?  Could this image not invoke feelings of 90s nostalgia and entice me to make a purchase of action figures?  What if it makes me want to pick up an X-Men comic?  See an X-Men movie?  Buy DVDs of the old X-Men Animated Series?  Isn't this what advertisements are meant to do?  Wouldn't that mean that this is still valid?

Sure, I can't purchase the product that is being DIRECTLY marketed to me here, but this image is about much, much more than trying to get me to purchase a 6" Colossus figure in 1991.

That ad is not promoting "action figures in general." That is not its intention, nor what it was produced for...and that goes for X-Men comics, X-Men movies, DVDs of the old AS, etc.

No, that is not what ads are meant to do. Ads are meant to promote specific items, products, or events. No one would seriously suggest that a poster promoting a Phish appearance could therefore be said to also promote Phish CDs, Phish t-shirts, instruments that Phish happens to be using, concerts in general, music in general, and pot smoking.

The concept of "scope" applies here.

And I disagree completely with that image being "much, much more than trying to get you to purchase a 6" Colossus figure in 1991", unless that "much, much more" is trying to get you to buy ALL of them. Then you'd have a point.

[RockMyAmadeus]

6 hours ago, newshane said:

Good to know. I was told differently.

I'm not exactly sure that they will be checking the date on the comics if they open up a package. Also, from experience, the post master can pretty much do whatever the  he or she wants, and the action is usually taken before the customer has a chance to pull out the DMM. The USPS does NOT operate like Burger King - it's not your way right way. The customer is never right! 

For example, if someone sends me comics via Media Mail and they get "caught," then I am probably going to have to pay up before I get my books, no matter what the manual may say. At best, I would have to stand there for 2 or 3 hours (yes, this is very likely) arguing my point...and I'll probably have to pay anyway. lol 

Best way to avoid this is to avoid media mail. 

I won't do comic business with anyone who uses media mail and I would never request it in a million years. 

Thanks for the information. 

 

On the contrary. The USPS, being a quasi-governmental corporation, is much more apt to follow its manual than a private corporation. 

And, if you can demonstrate that what an agent of the USPS has done contradicts the DMM...you win. Do you think a quasi-governmental employee is going to risk their cushy retirement over a DMM dispute...? Especially if the Postal Inspectors get wind of it...? You have to think like a bureaucrat.

I've never argued with anyone at the USPS for 2 or 3 hours, ever. If I can't get satisfaction in 5-10 minutes, I take it up the chain. I'm not sure who you deal with that you say it is "very likely", but I would suggest you're doing it wrong.

By all means, if you're not comfortable using it, the answer's clear: don't use it. I rarely use it myself, because it's not a safe method of transportation. I think I've had 2-3 packages shipped to me Media Mail in the last 5 years. 

But "comfort" is not "regulation." 

[RockMyAmadeus]

6 hours ago, newshane said:

Good to know. I was told differently.

 

By the way....many people are told differently. In fact, someone "in authority" at the USPS issued some sort of bulletin several years ago on the USPS website that said comic books are explicitly restricted from being sent via Media mail.

Didn't matter one bit. That woman didn't know what she was talking about, and didn't know her job.

The only thing that matters to the USPS is the DMM. If it's not in there, it has no meaning.

[newshane]

2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

On the contrary. The USPS, being a quasi-governmental corporation, is much more apt to follow its manual than a private corporation. 

And, if you can demonstrate that what an agent of the USPS has done contradicts the DMM...you win. Do you think a quasi-governmental employee is going to risk their cushy retirement over a DMM dispute...? Especially if the Postal Inspectors get wind of it...? You have to think like a bureaucrat.

I've never argued with anyone at the USPS for 2 or 3 hours, ever. If I can't get satisfaction in 5-10 minutes, I take it up the chain. I'm not sure who you deal with that you say it is "very likely", but I would suggest you're doing it wrong.

By all means, if you're not comfortable using it, the answer's clear: don't use it. I rarely use it myself, because it's not a safe method of transportation. I think I've had 2-3 packages shipped to me Media Mail in the last 5 years. 

But "comfort" is not "regulation." 

You're correct on all accounts, but my point is...pick your battles; it's not worth the 'n headache.

And yes, if I go to the city post office, I'll be waiting in line for at least an hour. If I go to the country, it will be a 25 minute trip.

Maybe you're lucky, but it seems like the postal employees around here are trained to take as much time as humanly possible. I've seen one employee work a line of 15 customers with the other 4 windows empty. The maddening thing is that he took extra time to talk in detail about services that weren't being requested by the customer. I think he was taking pleasure in making everyone angry. It was ridiculous.

I'd rather go to the dentist.

...and when is the last time you've tried getting someone on the phone? lol

If you want to play lawyer with the postmaster, go for it. I'd rather avoid the deal by avoiding media mail. We can agree that it's not the best option for any comic. They are, indeed, abused more than average.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 minute ago, newshane said:

You're correct on all accounts, but my point is...pick your battles; it's not worth the 'n headache.

And yes, if I go to the city post office, I'll be waiting in line for at least an hour. If I go to the country, it will be a 25 minute trip.

Maybe you're lucky, but it seems like the postal employees around here are trained to take as much time as humanly possible. I've seen one employee work a line of 15 customers with the other 4 windows empty. The maddening thing is that he took extra time to talk in detail about services that weren't being requested by the customer. I think he was taking pleasure in making everyone angry. It was ridiculous.

I'd rather go to the dentist.

...and when is the last time you've tried getting someone on the phone? lol

If you want to play lawyer with the postmaster, go for it. I'd rather avoid the deal by avoiding media mail. We can agree that it's not the best option for any comic. They are, indeed, abused more than average.

 

I don't like misinformation, really. If someone agrees with me, great. If someone disagrees with me, no problem. I'm not here to convince anyone. 

But if someone says "comic books cannot be shipped Media mail", I'm going to say "...according to...?"

There's nothing that explicitly says they can't, and the advertising issue can be argued as I have above. 

Doesn't mean they should be...but it also doesn't mean they can't be, either.

[newshane]

5 hours ago, masterlogan2000 said:

Do you have any references confirming this standpoint, or is this just your interpretation of what YOU define as an "ad"?

(I hate to derail this thread, but...) I'm going to respectfully disagree with you here, as my interpretation is "once an ad, always an ad".

Ads aren't limited to selling goods.  Ads can simply be promotions of people, concepts, or intellectual property.  Take the following example...

This is an advertisement from 1991 coming right off the back of a comic book.  I can tell you right now that neither KayBee Toys nor ToyBiz are actual companies TODAY.  These toys are no longer being manufactured TODAY.  Does this completely invalidate the ad?

Now, ask yourself the following:

What about the promotion of the X-Men themselves?  Or Marvel comics?  Heck, what about action figures in general?  Could this image not invoke feelings of 90s nostalgia and entice me to make a purchase of action figures?  What if it makes me want to pick up an X-Men comic?  See an X-Men movie?  Buy DVDs of the old X-Men Animated Series?  Isn't this what advertisements are meant to do?  Wouldn't that mean that this is still valid?

Sure, I can't purchase the product that is being DIRECTLY marketed to me here, but this image is about much, much more than trying to get me to purchase a 6" Colossus figure in 1991.

If you (people in general, not YOU) think the average postal employee is going to give enough of a flyin' baby-making maneuver to spend more than two neurons on the validity of advertisements based on age...then you're out of your gourd my friend.

The reality is that the post master would tell you to eff yourself over the extra 7 or 8 dollar charge...then he would spend his lunch hour laughing and talking about you.

Sure, take him to court...how much are you really willing to pay for the principle of the matter?

Or...spend hours on the phone trying to work it out.

As for me, more worthwhile things await...like sitting back in a lawn chair downing a beer...or going to the dentist...

Edited May 12, 2018 by newshane

[newshane]

Just now, RockMyAmadeus said:

I don't like misinformation, really. If someone agrees with me, great. If someone disagrees with me, no problem. I'm not here to convince anyone. 

But if someone says "comic books cannot be shipped Media mail", I'm going to say "...according to...?"

There's nothing that explicitly says they can't, and the advertising issue can be argued as I have above. 

Doesn't mean they should be...but it also doesn't mean they can't be, either.

As I said before, thanks for the clarification. It's appreciated. But I don't deal in Media Mail soooo....maybe it's really helped someone else out.

[newshane]

WAIT A MINUTE!

Hmmmm

This isn't a government site...maybe it's not legit but...

Actually, it IS...

 

Edited May 12, 2018 by newshane