They're Still Out There! 22 22

[MrBedrock]

1 minute ago, N e r V said:

 

We live in an era now of social media judgements which are often quick and uninformed lacking some or all the facts. Opinions can often trump the reality of things. It’s kinda become the norm. 
 

I am surprised however by the amount of people here who don’t use CGC but have such strong opinions about their business since it shouldn’t be of a concern to them one way or another. 
 

I mean if I read Yelp and someone doesn’t like to eat Italian food, never goes out to eat Italian food but wants to be a critic of Italian food restaurants how much weight should I put on their reviews? 

+2

[drbanner]

2 hours ago, buttock said:

Theories imply there is some rationale or evidence behind what is being theorized.  To just throw out random uninformed opinions about people's personal lives and livelihood is a different story.  Especially when you do it ALL. THE. TIME.  

+3

[VintageComics]

On 7/4/2021 at 3:06 PM, lou_fine said:

Yeah, but isn't this the same guy who forgot to proactively inform the collecting base for the first 5 years of CGC's operations about this rather significant change in terms of their restoration definition and grading standards, especially since everybody within both the hobby and industry had viewed standalone pressing as restoration back then.  

Actually, not sure if he was involved with this cabal of crooks from the get go that foisted as lot of what would then be considered to be restored books into the marketplace as Universal unrestored books.  Interesting to note when the whole fiasco came to light on the boards here, one of these crooks (i.e. Jason) had apparently broken the "crook's agreement" that this cabal had in place at the time by taking their misdeeds one step further (i.e. micro-trimming of books) , and was then summarily booted out not only from the group, but blackballed from ever submitting books ever again.  

Personally, I think you're taking it a little too far...unless you're trying to be funny using the term 'cabal of crooks' and not succeeding.

Pressing is not stealing. There was no cabal of crooks. Books were being pressed before CGC (albeit not in as great numbers or percentages but it was not something that began when CGC began).

There were just some people who found a new way to make money and as word spread so did the pressing of books.

You want to start a pressing war all over again, go ahead but you're really taking it over the top IMO.

 

[lou_fine]

1 hour ago, VintageComics said:

Pressing is not stealing. There was no cabal of crooks. Books were being pressed before CGC (albeit not in as great numbers or percentages but it was not something that began when CGC began).

There were just some people who found a new way to make money and as word spread so did the pressing of books.

I believe you are thinking with a post 2005 mind frame here when it was decided that pressing was good to go and basically opened the floodgates for all of the manipulation to take place.  If pressing was so accepted and above board prior to 2005, why did CGC not bother to come out and proactively declare this and why were the comic book mechanics who were secretly performing this work not advertising this service in the trade publications like how they are passionately advertising it today.  

Of course books were pressed before CGC, but like it has been stated here ad nauseam, this was a procedure that was usually as the final step after other restoration activities had already been performed on a book.  Of course, there were also some unscrupulous people performing standalone pressing without disclosing that this work had been done, all for the purpose of making money.  Just because some people were doing it before CGC doesn't make it right when it was clearly not accepted as such within the hobby place at the time.  If you call this form of hidden and undisclosed restoration (which is what it was at the time, but not now) as nothing more than a new way to make money, then I guess that's on you then.  

If you truly believe what you are saying and I am sure the usual others will jump on board and agree wholeheartedly with you, then this must also mean that people like Dupchak and Ewert who performed trimming and micro-trimming respectively were also not crooks because books were also trimmed before CGC (albeit not in great numbers or percentages but it was something that was done).  So, are you saying these trimmers were also just some people who found a new way to make money because guess what, both trimming and pressing clearly fell under the restoration umbrella in the hobby at the time prior to 2005.  

 

1 hour ago, VintageComics said:

You want to start a pressing war all over again, go ahead but you're really taking it over the top IMO.

Definitely not trying to start a pressing war all over again since that war was clearly lost back some 15+ years ago.  Just not sure why boardies like you try to rewrite or to delete it from comic book history (okay, I do and it's probably all to do with money and justification) and make it seem like standalone pressing has been active in the hobby from the get go and as such, has always been accepted in the hobby place as a legitmate and proper process for books to have gone through when it clearly was not.    

Edited July 7, 2021 by lou_fine

[VintageComics]

13 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

I believe you are thinking with a post 2005 mind frame here when it was decided that pressing was good to go and basically opened the floodgates for all of the manipulation to take place.  If pressing was so accepted and above board prior to 2005,

Twisting my words, I never said it was 'so accepted'

14 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

why did CGC not bother to come out and proactively declare this and why were the comic book mechanics who were secretly performing this work not advertising this service in the trade publications like how they are passionately advertising it today.  

For the same reason that people thought slabbing was nuts in 2000 or a $50K AF #15 was nuts and now it's fully accepted. People's perceptions change over time.

15 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

but like it has been stated here ad nauseam

No, what has been stated ad nauseam is that some people were just a little smarter, had a little more ingenuity who took the old 'placing your comic between encyclopedias or under mom's iron to another level.

You might not like it, but it's not a criminal element and you're wrong for calling it so but won't admit you're wrong because of sour grapes.

17 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

If you truly believe what you are saying and I am sure the usual others will jump on board and agree wholeheartedly with you, then this must also mean that people like Dupchak and Ewert who performed trimming and micro-trimming respectively were also not crooks because books were also trimmed before CGC (albeit not in great numbers or percentages but it was something that was done).  So, are you saying these trimmers were also just some people who found a new way to make money because guess what, both trimming and pressing clearly fell under the restoration umbrella in the hobby at the time prior to 2005.  

I don't know, are 6 year old kids trying to make their books look flat going to become career criminals?

I said nothing about trimming, keep trying to move goal posts to fit your sour grapes.

18 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

Just not sure why boardies like you try to rewrite or to delete it from comic book history (okay, I do and it's probably all to do with money and justification) and make it seem like standalone pressing has been active in the hobby from the get go and as such, has always been accepted in the hobby place as a legitmate and proper process for books to have gone through when it clearly was not.    

Nobody is rewriting history. Nobody said it was big 20+ years ago.

Everything has a starting point and growth over time.

Pressing in some shape or form has been around for decades (I was doing it as a kid in the 70's with my mom's iron in her laundry room) and as the proliferation of slabbing and by extension the hobby expanded, by necessity anything associated with the hobby was going to grow and like key issues, the things that made the most money were going to grow the fastest.

If it was a secret in early days, it's because it was profitable and people don't share proprietary information easily. No proper business person does.

I'm not going to get back into a pressing debate. I'd rather put you on ignore, but you calling people who pressed or press books a criminal cabal is the reason I called you out.

[namisgr]

Can pressing worsen staples that are already slightly impacted?  Ask Matt.  Or, as I did, Steve Ritter at the time he and Matt were business partners and before Matt came on board CCS and CGC.  The answer is yes.  So while it's true that badly impacted staples aren't all the result of an overzealous press, it's also true that they sometimes are.  I got to see dozens of examples of the latter after selling my Silver Age slabbed collection, and seeing some back on the market with new certification numbers and worse looking staples, sometimes despite having higher numerical grades.

The incentive to press comics with staples that are already slightly impacted, and so at risk of being made worse by the extreme pressure essential to pressing, comes from the instances where CGC grades are improved despite staple impactions being made worse.  It doesn't help when there's incentive in the marketplace when sale prices reward the higher grade more so than the decline in eye appeal that comes from worse staple impaction.

In the end, and as is usually the case, it's the hobbyists and the marketplace in charge.  But it would be nice if more attention was paid to the state of a book's staples before going into the press, and there was a willingness to at least occasionally forego pressing the relatively few books with staples that are already problematic.

Edited July 7, 2021 by namisgr

[jimbo_7071]

5 hours ago, namisgr said:

Can pressing worsen staples that are already slightly impacted?  Ask Matt.  Or, as I did, Steve Ritter at the time he and Matt were partners and before Matt came on board CCS and CGC.  The answer is yes.  So while it's true that badly impacted staples aren't all the result of an overzealous press, it's also true that they sometimes are.  I got to see dozens of examples of the latter after selling my Silver Age slabbed collection, and seeing some back on the market with new certification numbers and worse looking staples, sometimes despite having higher numerical grades.

The incentive to press comics with staples that are already slightly impacted, and so at risk of being made worse by the extreme pressure essential to pressing, comes from the instances where CGC grades are improved despite staple impactions being made worse.  It doesn't help when there's incentive in the marketplace when sale prices reward the higher grade more so than the decline in eye appeal that comes from worse staple impaction.

In the end, and as is usually the case, it's the hobbyists and the marketplace in charge.  But it would be nice if more attention was paid to the state of a book's staples before going into the press, and there were a willingness to at least occasionally forego pressing the relatively few books with staples that are already problematic.

Yes, there's something rotten in the state of certified grading if a book can look trashed after pressing yet still get a higher grade. (Cf. the Cole Schave thread.)

CGC has made damaging books profitable, and all of the Stepford collectors blithely accept the situation.

Edited July 7, 2021 by jimbo_7071

[waaaghboss]

On 7/4/2021 at 10:16 AM, Pickie said:

Interesting, that seems a lot to me. As a teenager, over a period of approx. 4 yrs I read only 4-6 issues a month.

To clarify, my thoughts are not about the costs but only about the reading effort/time ...

Oh wait, recollection sets in. That had to be only the issues bought by myself off the newsstands. In the same period of time I read numerous back issues from the collections of friends or copies bought second hand at the flea market. But still not hundreds and hundreds ...

Yup.  I only bought a few comics a month, but as a kid I sat at the grocery store newsstand with my sister and read every single comic on the rack as my mom stopped  😀

 

[MrBedrock]

11 hours ago, jimbo_7071 said:

 Stepford collectors

I hate those folks. There is something too perfect about them...and their books!

[jimjum12]

2 minutes ago, MrBedrock said:

I hate those folks. There is something too perfect about them...and their books!

They also pass gas that smells almost as lousy as their cologne. GOD BLESS....

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[D84]

I was a Stepford Wife. Does that count?

[VintageComics]

18 hours ago, jimbo_7071 said:

Yes, there's something rotten in the state of certified grading if a book can look trashed after pressing yet still get a higher grade. (Cf. the Cole Schave thread.)

CGC has made damaging books profitable, and all of the Stepford collectors blithely accept the situation.

I think that there's a tendency to make everything look like a pressing problem by those who don't like pressing and a tendency to try to obfuscate the problems pressing brings by those that don't mind pressing. That bias is human nature.

The answer is somewhere in between.

I've done far more damage to my own books after downing a gin and tonic or mishandling them, or from shipping than I've seen from all the books I've had pressed and I think that's really the main perspective I'm trying to bring to the discussion IMO.

 

Edited July 8, 2021 by VintageComics

[batman_fan]

First Bat Book I have seen 

[skypinkblu]

I haven't seen this posted before, if it was, let me know and I'll delete the link.

https://bleedingcool.com/comics/the-promise-collection-1939-1940-batman/

[Randall Ries]

On 7/7/2021 at 5:44 AM, jimbo_7071 said:

CGC has made damaging books profitable, and all of the Stepford collectors blithely accept the situation.

Har! I like that. Stepford collectors. All glassy eyed and when you mention iffy grading or damage caused by CGC, they get all Manchurian Candidate and blame the "high volume of books and how swamped they are and of COURSE there will be damage it can't be helped" but when iffy grading or damage caused by "The Other Grading Companies" is mentioned, we are treated to a diatribe about how horrible they are and they should be drummed out of town. Nothing like zealot spewing hypocrisy.

[Straw-Man]

THE MOST OVERGRADED 3.0 I HAVE EVER SEEN!!!!!!

[Straw-Man]

not.  

[sfcityduck]

On 7/23/2021 at 12:21 PM, skypinkblu said:

I haven't seen this posted before, if it was, let me know and I'll delete the link.

https://bleedingcool.com/comics/the-promise-collection-1939-1940-batman/

Thanks for posting.  It does not appear that Seifort and BC are getting paid by Heritage for this article (or they are not acknowledging it) as with that prior Promise piece that broke the story, but it still is just a puff piece without substance or accurate facts on the back story.  If you want to know the info that matters here it is:

The Promise Collection includes Batman 1-3, Detective 33, 38, 39, 43-46, New York World's Fair 1, Special Edition 1, and Whiz 2, 3, 7 and 9.  Disclosed page quality ranges from cream to off-white and grades range from 4.0 to 7.0 (although we know that there is also a Batman 9 3.0).

Edited July 23, 2021 by sfcityduck

[skypinkblu]

On 7/23/2021 at 5:05 PM, sfcityduck said:

Thanks for posting.  It does not appear that Seifort and BC are getting paid by Heritage for this article (or they are not acknowledging it) as with that prior Promise piece that broke the story, but it still is just a puff piece without substance or accurate facts on the back story.  If you want to know the info that matters here it is:

The Promise Collection includes Batman 1-3, Detective 33, 38, 39, 43-46, New York World's Fair 1, Special Edition 1, and Whiz 2, 3, 7 and 9.  Disclosed page quality ranges from cream to off-white and grades range from 4.0 to 7.0 (although we know that there is also a Batman 9 3.0).

Thank for the additional insight.

Actually, I was just looking at the promise of a list all in one place, eventually.

Someone from Heritage was nice enough to tell me about a few books that will be in the collection when I asked about something totally different and not connected to the collection. They called me (which I suspect was one of those calls to not too subtly remind people to bid), but I never thought about writing even those few down. I was only interested to see if there was one specific book in one title, never thinking that maybe I'd like to know some others, lol.

Edited July 24, 2021 by skypinkblu
auto correct is not always your friend;)

[Dr. Love]

Seifort may not know the grades on the Bats, but I do.  

Batman	1	2.0	CR-OW
Batman	2	2.0	CR-OW
Batman	3	4.0	OW