SD Comic-Con Panel Discussion On Noteworthy Community Issues - Input Sought

[esquirecomics]

 

I'll splain it to you over beers at the Brickskeller Friday night.

 

My old stomping grounds? And no invite!!!

 

Thanks fellas.

 

Check your e-mail!!!!

[tth2]

Of course state of mind concerning a book is important, but for the most part, owning a high grade book has to do with aesthetic appeal, not how it's been preserved.

I beg to differ. As I explained in my earlier post, BOTH factors are important to me. A book that's aesthetically pleasing because of artificial intervention is NOT the same same as an aesthetically pleasing book that's "naturally" that way. I don't know how much more clear I can make it than that, and if you don't appreciate that that distinction makes all the difference in the world to to some of us, then so be it. But ask yourself this: would your respect for Lance Armstrong's achievements diminish if it turned out that he'd been doped up the whole time he won the 6 Tour de France's? I know mine would. It's the same thing.

 

If you can't tell the book is pressed, then quite honestly, how is it different to you unless you know it's different? That's what I'm cavalier about. Honestly, think about it, you don't know the book is pressed -- you will probably never find out it is pressed. It's a comic book, not some ultimate truth in life, so the "deception" is really irrelevant. Listen, would I rather know a book is pressed rather than not know? Sure, but why? It honestly doesn't matter to me.

Brian, I'm not smart enough to debate metaphysical concepts regarding absolute truths. I understand that the reality is that there are undetectably pressed books. Sometimes ignorance is bliss. But there is a difference between intentional ignorance (the Bernie Ebbers defense) and ignorance where I have taken reasonable measures to not be ignorant. If pressing IS irrefutably detected in a particular book (and I've indicated several methods by which it might be detected with a great degree of certainty), so now I DO know that it's been pressed, surely you're not requiring me to continue treating that book the same as a natural book?

[THE_BEYONDER]

Maybe they are Canadians trying to get even for Ben Johnson!

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

A book that's aesthetically pleasing because of artificial intervention is NOT the same same as an aesthetically pleasing book that's "naturally" that way. I don't know how much more clear I can make it than that, and if you don't appreciate that that distinction makes all the difference in the world to to some of us, then so be it.

 

I've attempted to express this distinction between " pure " & " manipulated " before, but the result has always been the same....

[Darthdiesel]

Comics from that era were meant to be read and not with preservation in mind, so I love the fact that a 40+ year old book could have naturally defied all the odds and survived for so long in pristine condition with no artificial intervention other than good storage techniques. This is why NM 40+ year old books are generally pretty unique, and it makes it fun to try to collect them because it's so damn hard.

 

I have been taking that position for a long time now. My last attempt at explaining this was a few months back when I said "Why do high grade books command so much more money? the answer is so blatant but so often ignored. It is because the odds of a book, and especially SA and GA, surviving intact in a raw, untouched high grade are quite slim. (Barring warehouse finds). these books, untouched by any process, deserve a special place simple because they have survived." It is great to actually see it being expressed by someone else, as it is usually met with resounding silence.

 

 

[crickets chirping...]

 

[FFB]

I don't think collectors who disagree with your position are going on with eyes wide shut as you put it. To me, collectors who are continuing on about pressing and the need for disclosure (by the way, professional pressing) without a shred of evidence that it will truly damage the book is just talking to hear themselves talk.

Brian, whether pressing results in any damage or not is completely and utterly irrelevant to me. And I don`t think a lot of HG collectors who are opposed to pressing oppose it on this basis either. It`s all about the rarity of finding something naturally wonderful, and I think a lot of HG collectors would agree me with on this. Think of it like this: a guy who can naturally run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds, fantastic. A guy who can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds, or 9.5 seconds, or 9.4 seconds, because he`s on all sorts of steroids and other enhancements. BFD!

 

A more apt set of analogies would be:

 

Unpressed book NM+ book from 1960: A guy who can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds without working out. Defies all odds. The man is a freak. Where do they find these guys. Fantastic.

 

NDP pressed NM+ book from 1960: A guy who has to work out like the dickens every day for 20 years so that he can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds. Still all original body parts, hormones, etc. Nothing "unnatural" added to the athlete. Very impressive and praiseworthy. Still fantastic.

 

Restored NM+ book from 1960 (see pictorial example below): A guy who works out every day and takes performance enhancing drugs so he can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds. Not all original body parts, but still mostly original and it's not like Joe Schmoe on the street could just start shooting up on Roids and suddenly run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds. Still impressive, though not as impressive as the first two athletes.

 

[tth2]

[Forbush-Man]

I don't think collectors who disagree with your position are going on with eyes wide shut as you put it. To me, collectors who are continuing on about pressing and the need for disclosure (by the way, professional pressing) without a shred of evidence that it will truly damage the book is just talking to hear themselves talk.

Brian, whether pressing results in any damage or not is completely and utterly irrelevant to me. And I don`t think a lot of HG collectors who are opposed to pressing oppose it on this basis either. It`s all about the rarity of finding something naturally wonderful, and I think a lot of HG collectors would agree me with on this. Think of it like this: a guy who can naturally run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds, fantastic. A guy who can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds, or 9.5 seconds, or 9.4 seconds, because he`s on all sorts of steroids and other enhancements. BFD!

 

A more apt set of analogies would be:

 

Unpressed book NM+ book from 1960: A guy who can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds without working out. Defies all odds. The man is a freak. Where do they find these guys. Fantastic.

 

NDP pressed NM+ book from 1960: A guy who has to work out like the dickens every day for 20 years so that he can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds. Still all original body parts, hormones, etc. Nothing "unnatural" added to the athlete. Very impressive and praiseworthy. Still fantastic.

 

Restored NM+ book from 1960 (see pictorial example below): A guy who works out every day and takes performance enhancing drugs so he can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds. Not all original body parts, but still mostly original and it's not like Joe Schmoe on the street could just start shooting up on Roids and suddenly run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds. Still impressive, though not as impressive as the first two athletes.

 

 

That's a "Slight (P)"?!?

One, or the other,.....but all three?!?

[esquirecomics]

That is a gorgeous AF #15. It stirs up the questions in me once again regarding CGC's restoration criteria.

 

Where is the line between slight, moderate and extensive?

 

Piece added? Where? How large a piece?

 

Tear seal? How long?

 

I believe CGC informally has told people where they stand on these issues, but for the life of me I do not understand why they do not publicize restoration criteria.

[esquirecomics]

What did you all think of my title selection?

 

**********************

 

4:00-5:30 Comic Collecting & the 21st Century: A Dialogue of Pressing Issues—This panel discussion of experienced dealers, collectors, and industry experts will engage in a dialogue on the key issues facing the comic book collecting community today. Some of the topics to be debated include the current state of collecting or investing in comics, the existence of ethics in the community, the stigma of restoration, the controversy of pressing, the impact and role of independent grading services, and other matters of concern. The discussion will be followed by a 30-minute Q & A audience participation session. Panelists include Mark S. Zaid, EsquireComics.com; Steve Borock, president/primary grader, CGC; Jon Berk, Overstreet advisor, past president of American Association of Comicbook Collectors; Mark Wilson, PGCMint Comics; Tom Gordon III, Gemstone Publishing managing editor; and others.

[BassGMan]

Sounds good Mark. This panel would have made the top of my list even if I wasn't a member of this forum or knew who any of you guys were. My one question is how many people this thing is gonna draw (other than us, of course). We'll see.

[esquirecomics]

Sounds good Mark. This panel would have made the top of my list even if I wasn't a member of this forum or knew who any of you guys were. My one question is how many people this thing is gonna draw (other than us, of course). We'll see.

 

Guess we'll all find out at the same time. I would encourage all board members to pass the word around, not only to those who might attend the convention but to dealers as well.

 

Perhaps we can get dealers to have an announcement flyer at their booths.

[Darthdiesel]

I suggest you "tap" the latent superpowers of the pornstars and strippers attending to draw your typical comic fanboy to attend your panel

[esquirecomics]

I suggest you "tap" the latent superpowers of the pornstars and strippers attending to draw your typical comic fanboy to attend your panel

 

Hey, let me tell you that this thought has not escaped my attention!

[esquirecomics]

Steve Borock has notified me he can no longer participate on the panel.

 

Disappointing to say the least as there will be many CGC related issues to be discussed and Steve, with all his experience, would certainly have been in an excellent position to respond.

 

I am working on finding a replacement.

[BassGMan]

Steve Borock has notified me he can no longer participate on the panel.

 

Disappointing to say the least as there will be many CGC related issues to be discussed and Steve, with all his experience, would certainly have been in an excellent position to respond.

 

I am working on finding a replacement.

 

Damn, that is disappointing. I have all the respect in the world for Steve and I am sure he has good reasons, but it certainly would have been nice to hear from him at the panel. I, and I imagine a few others here thought this may happen. The way people talk about CGC and their policies on this Forum, I'd be hesitant about making a public appearance too if I was a CGC bigwig facing this crowd, IF that is one of the reasons. However, knowing Steve, he will answer straightforwardly any questions when asked directly in person. Well, anyway, I'm sure it will still be a great panel and I'll see ya' all there and around the con and the Forum dinner.

[FFB]

Steve Borock has notified me he can no longer participate on the panel.

 

Disappointing to say the least as there will be many CGC related issues to be discussed and Steve, with all his experience, would certainly have been in an excellent position to respond.

 

I am working on finding a replacement.

 

Maybe you should have made some concessions on the title of the panel (after he raised concerns about it a couple of times) if you really wanted him to stay on the panel. I'm sure it wouldn't have limited your discussion topics, but might have made it seem a little less targeted at one specific topic.

 

Personally, I'm not really sure why he agreed to sit on the panel in the first place, since I believe it was basically a setup for you to take public potshots at CGC's stance on pressing. Kind of like asking to have one's face kicked in publicly.

[awe4one]

I believe it was basically a setup for you to take public potshots at CGC's stance on pressing.

 

Assuming for a second that you're correct and I have faith that Mark wasn't setting Steve up...what does he have to worry about if pressing, as has been mentioned repeatedly, isn't a big deal? Especially with the normal collector as has been suggested repeatedly as well. If that was the case, it should be easy to counter any attacks concerning pressing as the room would be pretty much to the whole matter...

 

Addressing pressing questions straight away is a whole lot more reputable than running away from them and giving the impression, right or wrong, that CGC's stance isn't defendable in an open forum...

 

Jim

[drbanner]

Personally, I'm not really sure why he agreed to sit on the panel in the first place, since I believe it was basically a setup for you to take public potshots at CGC's stance on pressing. Kind of like asking to have one's face kicked in publicly.

 

My thoughts exactly...first the title of the panel (and with pressing as one of the listed subjects, the title was not some hidden joke known only to forum members) and second, the fact that the "moderator" is anything but a moderate on the issue, and I'll borrow a phrase from Rob_React regarding a similar setup at one of the forum dinners a few years ago (paraphrasing): "...this will really promote an open discussion and a free form exchange of ideas..."

[BassGMan]

Personally, I'm not really sure why he agreed to sit on the panel in the first place, since I believe it was basically a setup for you to take public potshots at CGC's stance on pressing. Kind of like asking to have one's face kicked in publicly.

 

My thoughts exactly...first the title of the panel (and with pressing as one of the listed subjects, the title was not some hidden joke known only to forum members) and second, the fact that the "moderator" is anything but a moderate on the issue, and I'll borrow a phrase from Rob_React regarding a similar setup at one of the forum dinners a few years ago (paraphrasing): "...this will really promote an open discussion and a free form exchange of ideas..."

 

I wouldn't go that far. I trust that Mark would move along the subjects and questioning and only cover the CGC and pressing issue as one of many subjects. Sure, Steve may have been in the hot seat for a part of this, and whether CGC's stance is popular or not, it is important to get out there, but I do not believe as if the subject of pressing was going to dominate the discussion. If that was to happen Mark would lose his credibility and trust as he has already promised many times that this would NOT happen, and I really don't think he would allow it to anyway.