How have label chasers affected the hobby

[Norrin_Radd]

I aims to pleeze

 

No. Here's aiming to please.

 

 

[Larryw7]

[october]

Ah, the sharp pain right through the eyeball and into the deepest recesses of my mind that I experience everytime I read your posts... So cleansing, so purifying!

 

[krazykat-migration]

He should go check out how much most non-comic related original commercial art from the 1930s-1960s is worth and then get a clue about how the value of comic original art is totally inflated because of the value of the comic books.

 

Great comment, and very true.

 

That comment is so stupid...not great at all ?!!?!?

 

Its like me saying to you,....you should check out what 1960's LIFE MAGAZINE'S is worth and then get a clue about how the value of comic books are totally inflated.

 

In case you havent noticed,...its THE GENRE !

Ah, the sharp pain right through the eyeball and into the deepest recesses of my mind that I experience everytime I read your posts... So cleansing, so purifying!

 

Its called 'THINKING', and maybe if you exercised your brain a little more, it wouldnt be such a strain.

[arexcrooke]

How would you know what thinking was about? Unless it was to create a lie about which piece of OA that you are going to tell people you own next?

[krazykat-migration]

How would you know what thinking was about? Unless it was to create a lie about which piece of OA that you are going to tell people you own next?

 

"You Dont own any Great art KrazyKat,..you dont own any great art at all !"

 

You sound like a 5 year old. Give it a rest already.

[THE_BEYONDER]

Tim, I think using Steve B. and my buddy Doug are not good examples because they are both vested in the marketing of such books.

I meant Steve B before CGC. Clearly a lot of CGC`s grading philosophies reflect philosophies held by Borock before CGC. In some cases, such as downgrading for non-color breaking creases, this has been good in my opinion, and in other cases, such as pressing, this has not been so good.

 

And yet...were CGC not to slam books with non-color breaking creases so severely...there would be less incentive to press them.

[tth2]

I aims to pleeze

 

No. Here's aiming to please.

 

 

[tth2]

Tim, I think using Steve B. and my buddy Doug are not good examples because they are both vested in the marketing of such books.

I meant Steve B before CGC. Clearly a lot of CGC`s grading philosophies reflect philosophies held by Borock before CGC. In some cases, such as downgrading for non-color breaking creases, this has been good in my opinion, and in other cases, such as pressing, this has not been so good.

 

And yet...were CGC not to slam books with non-color breaking creases so severely...there would be less incentive to press them.

There would be NO incentive to press books if they were all given PLODs.

 

In fairness to Borock and CGC, they probably had no idea when they embarked on creating CGC that people would pay such huge multiples for .2 differences.

 

BTW, is the fact that CGC downgrades for non-color breaking creases really controversial? I mean, when people hold a so-called NM book to the light and see all sorts of non-color breaking crumples and indentations in the cover, do they really not mind?

[CW]

Man all this negativity is getting me down. Everybody has his/her own collecting preference and it amazes me when people are so critical of that. The amount of time spent by people putting each other down could be spent enjoying the hobby. KrazyKat, just remeber that somethings aren't about MONEY and you shouldn't criticize people for loving comics more than OA or not liking OA at all. Investment value doesn't always imply cash value sometimes it implies emotional attachment or fond memories. Not to tell everyone their business but maybe it is time to start talking about why we love comics and/or original art instead of why this guy is this and that guy is that. At the San Diego forum dinner the fellow we know as Goldust said something to me which has stuck with me. He said to the affect "You don't put people down for what they collect". He meant that if someone collects books that cost $.25 that is just as acceptable as someone who collects books that are worth $1000's or art that is worth (whatever art is worth) don't think less of one than the other, some people like high grade (I am one), some people like to read (Also me), and some like the art that created the books in the first place (again me) . Sorry about the rant but I feel that we should be trying to learn about each others different collecting habits so that we can better understand comics and their various parts. I apologize if I have stepped on any toes and I meant no disrespect to ANYONE.

 

CW

[THE_BEYONDER]

Tim, I think using Steve B. and my buddy Doug are not good examples because they are both vested in the marketing of such books.

I meant Steve B before CGC. Clearly a lot of CGC`s grading philosophies reflect philosophies held by Borock before CGC. In some cases, such as downgrading for non-color breaking creases, this has been good in my opinion, and in other cases, such as pressing, this has not been so good.

 

And yet...were CGC not to slam books with non-color breaking creases so severely...there would be less incentive to press them.

There would be NO incentive to press books if they were all given PLODs.

 

In fairness to Borock and CGC, they probably had no idea when they embarked on creating CGC that people would pay such huge multiples for .2 differences.

 

BTW, is the fact that CGC downgrades for non-color breaking creases really controversial? I mean, when people hold a so-called NM book to the light and see all sorts of non-color breaking crumples and indentations in the cover, do they really not mind?

 

I just find it somewhat mind-numbing that CGC can give these defects the smack-down on one hand, and take a stance that the removal of the same defects is "no big deal" on the other.

[october]

 

I just find it somewhat mind-numbing that CGC can give these defects the smack-down on one hand, and take a stance that the removal of the same defects is "no big deal" on the other.

 

I agree with you here. From what I understand, CGC takes a contrary stance on soiling. They generally don't give a big hit for dirt, and don't consider its removal restoration. Why not apply the same standard to non-color breaking creases (or change their stance on soiling)?

[tth2]

Man all this negativity is getting me down. Everybody has his/her own collecting preference and it amazes me when people are so critical of that. The amount of time spent by people putting each other down could be spent enjoying the hobby. KrazyKat, just remeber that somethings aren't about MONEY and you shouldn't criticize people for loving comics more than OA or not liking OA at all. Investment value doesn't always imply cash value sometimes it implies emotional attachment or fond memories. Not to tell everyone their business but maybe it is time to start talking about why we love comics and/or original art instead of why this guy is this and that guy is that. At the San Diego forum dinner the fellow we know as Goldust said something to me which has stuck with me. He said to the affect "You don't put people down for what they collect". He meant that if someone collects books that cost $.25 that is just as acceptable as someone who collects books that are worth $1000's or art that is worth (whatever art is worth) don't think less of one than the other, some people like high grade (I am one), some people like to read (Also me), and some like the art that created the books in the first place (again me) . Sorry about the rant but I feel that we should be trying to learn about each others different collecting habits so that we can better understand comics and their various parts. I apologize if I have stepped on any toes and I meant no disrespect to ANYONE.

 

CW

Good post, CW, and in fact MOST people here are pretty good about not criticizing others' tastes in collecting. Which is undoubtedly why KK is as unpopular as he is.

[tth2]

I just find it somewhat mind-numbing that CGC can give these defects the smack-down on one hand, and take a stance that the removal of the same defects is "no big deal" on the other.

[Red Hook]

You might be on to something there, Tim!

 

BTW....I'll chime in with the fact that as much as I like seeing close-to-perfect specimens encased in slabs, I also get a kick out of seeing much-love, much-read reader copies of interesting books posted here. I also welcome the opportunity to be introduced to titles I either never knew of or was never interested in. That's one of the nice things about the boards.

 

Redmond Barry

[Aman619]

I just find it somewhat mind-numbing that CGC can give these defects the smack-down on one hand, and take a stance that the removal of the same defects is "no big deal" on the other.

 

Thats the post of the year! We've been all over the pressing thing for a long time and NOBODY ever pointed out this ridiculous inconsistency!!

Bravo!

 

I feel the corners and edges etc are much more important to the grade than printing creases that only show up at odd angles when bathed in light. Creases due to handling damage is different, of course. But if I look at a glossy square cornered. tight spine comic that has a printers crease somewhere on the cover I say so what! At least I used to pre-CGC.... and I sure hope to again someday after the madness ends.

[tth2]

I feel the corners and edges etc are much more important to the grade than printing creases that only show up at odd angles when bathed in light. Creases due to handling damage is different, of course. But if I look at a glossy square cornered. tight spine comic that has a printers crease somewhere on the cover I say so what! At least I used to pre-CGC.... and I sure hope to again someday after the madness ends.

Creases due to a printing/manufacturing defect are okay, or at least should not be a reason for a structural downgrade. But I think this is a relatively small problem, maybe most prevalent in square bounds (and CGC clearly grades squarebounds on a curve anyway).

 

However, books should definitely be downgraded for non-color breaking creases. They definitely detract from a book's structural integrity. Haven't you ever seen a beautiful book with sharp corners and perfect edges/spine where, once you pulled it out of the mylar, you could see indents and creases that were significant but not color-breaking, and seriously detracted from the book's appearance?

 

I'm probably even harsher than CGC on these defects. I had a gorgeous JIM 83 that I personally graded as a VF- because somewhere along the way it had been dropped or handled improperly in the lower front corner area, leaving a series of non-color breaking creases around that corner (although the corner itself was razor sharp). Otherwise, the book was gorgeous, with white pages, and it was difficult to see the creases through the mylar and definitely close to impossible to detect in a scan. CGC graded it as a 9.0, which is what I sold it as. It'd probably be a fantastic pressing candidate. If anyone sees a JIM 83 with a small Stan Lee signature on the cover (interestingly, it did not get a GLOD but just a notation on the blue label saying "Stan Lee written on the cover") that is graded higher than a 9.0, beware...

[Aman619]

I could have written a longer more specific note before. but did not bother, opening me up to misinterpretation. I was only speaking about the creases in the image area of covers, usually in the middle area of the cover, from the paper going thru the rollers funny....you know, creases that handling could never cause...

 

spine folds as you describe (if I picture them right) are more serious and much more noticeable. Even if caused during printing they are pretty obvious and ugly, right? I only meant the horizontal creases in the paper that just arent apparent w/o some effort and unnaturally good light.

[tth2]

I could have written a longer more specific note before. but did not bother, opening me up to misinterpretation. I was only speaking about the creases in the image area of covers, usually in the middle area of the cover, from the paper going thru the rollers funny....you know, creases that handling could never cause...

 

spine folds as you describe (if I picture them right) are more serious and much more noticeable. Even if caused during printing they are pretty obvious and ugly, right? I only meant the horizontal creases in the paper that just arent apparent w/o some effort and unnaturally good light.

Aman, I have to admit I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't think I've seen the kind of horizontal printing creases that you're referring to. At first I thought you were talking about nut sac creases, but those don't need to be held to the light to see them.

[joe_collector]

In fairness to Borock and CGC, they probably had no idea when they embarked on creating CGC that people would pay such huge multiples for .2 differences.

 

Come on, that's their whole business plan.