Latest Scandal! Comic Book Dealer Disbarred As Lawyer!!!!

[Sid]

modern collectors The industry depends on us dang it!

[mica]

Case 1: you don't disclose, the buyer does not ask, the buyer does not care about pressing: no harm no foul, everyone is happy

 

Case 2: you don't disclose, the buyer asks, the buyer cares about pressing: the buyer is informed, no harm no foul, everyone is happy

 

Case 3: you don't disclose, the buyer does not ask, the buyer cares about pressing: AHAH, the buyer realizes the book was pressed, wasn't told and is pissed and then posts about it on CGC and drags your company's name in the mud because you slighted him (even though, I agree, if said-customer cares about pressing, they should ask about it).

 

CASE 4: you DISCLOSE, it doesn't matter if the buyer cares or not, there is NEVER any issue when all are INFORMED.

 

It seems to me that Case 4 is the most hassle- and headache-free. Therefore I come to the conclusion that there is something that holds you back from adopting Case 4 as your business model and I would appreciate if you could articulate your reticence for adopting that Case 4 as policy.

 

Thanks Scrooge.

[drice6900]

modern collectors The industry depends on us dang it!

 

[mrwoogieman]

I woke up and it was 2006 again!

 

[mica]

I woke up and it was 2006 again!

 

You could win a lot of money. Put something down on Florida to win big in 07

[Scrooge]

Wow, well said Michael!

 

Given that you're not a grade-obsessed collector, it's nice to see clear evidence that a collector without a vested interest one way or the other can so clearly see the logic behind the pro-disclosure position.

 

I resent that. I have grade standards. I want my books to be at least complete

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

I woke up and it was 2006 again!

 

You could win a lot of money. Put something down on Florida to win big in 07

 

I've made mica's Sig Line!

 

I can die a happy man.

[MrBedrock]

Hey Rich, can I just address a question to you since you generally seem to be a voice of reason, but at the same time have been very vocal in your opposition to NOD (I was there at the little panel at SD where you sort of led the charge).

 

Why are ya'll so threatened by NOD? Don't you think by being so vehemently opposed to it you are actually validating its existence? As far as I can tell, it's an organization put together by some guys (apparently in Bill P's eyes, a bunch of penny-ante nobodies) to express their common beliefs regarding comic collecting/buying/selling. We're allowed to join clubs reflecting common beliefs, right?

 

To my knowledge, NOD has never forced anyone to join, nor have they ever targeted those who have not joined. There's never been an organized boycott of Matt, or Heritage, or Doug Schmell, for instance. Also as far as I can tell, NOD has had little impact on the business of dealers who won't join or don't subscribe to their principles. As far as I know, Matt's business is doing just fine, as are Heritage and Bill Hughes (who was part of NOD and then resigned, or am I thinking of Rob Hughes?). I have yet to see anyone go out of business because of NOD. So what's the issue, why not just live and let live?

 

If it's a personal issue with Mark Zaid that gets to you, okay, I can understand that. If you're unhappy with the statements of some members of NOD, okay, I can understand that too, although as far as I know the more extreme statements that have been made on these boards have been made by people as individuals, not on behalf of NOD, or by people who aren't even members of NOD, such as myself. So seriously, what's with all the angst?

 

Thanks for asking! My problem is not with NOD. I am sure that NOD was started with good intentions, and I have talked to most members including Mark Zaid and find them all to be nice folks. I even sold Mark some killer books. One of my closest friends in the hobby, Steve Carey, is a vocal supporter and member of NOD.

My problem is that most people, when discussing NOD say the issue is Disclosure. It is a chicken and egg argument. The issue IS pressing. The issue IS whether pressing is restoration. NOD wants it disclosed because they view it as bad. There would be no discussion if it were just about disclosure of resto as we all agree on that already. There is no evidence that anything related to pressing is bad. There is no concensus on what pressing is. For this argument, I am talking about the pressing of imperfections out of a cover to increase appearance and grade. There is no evidence that anything in the procedures used to achieve this do anything detrimental to the comic except that somewhere down the road someone will have to pay more for a book if it goes up in grade. Or someone else's book will go down in value because now it isn't the highest graded. Now here is where most of NOD folks disagree. They think pressing is bad but this isn't where they discuss. They just say it isn't about pressing it is about disclosure. They need to show me what is so wrong with pressing that I NEED to disclose it. I hope that makes sense, if not call me and I will try to explain better.

 

That's my stance, fuel to the fire. Argue away. Bash my points, debate my stance, convince me I am wrong, please. But first convince me that pressing is wrong.

[OldGuy]

I find the insistence on ‘showing your credentials’ to be extremely insulting to everybody involved in this thread. The underlying suggestion is that if you didn’t attend a certain con in a certain year, if you have never owned certain books, if you haven’t dealt with certain dealers, if you can’t count certain ‘names’ amongst your friends…your views and arguments are without merit.

 

Yes, agree or disagree, these azzhats get added to the "at my first oportunity I'll be giving these people the giant f%$k you the first time I meet them face to face" list.

[Sal]

Hey Rich, can I just address a question to you since you generally seem to be a voice of reason, but at the same time have been very vocal in your opposition to NOD (I was there at the little panel at SD where you sort of led the charge).

 

Why are ya'll so threatened by NOD? Don't you think by being so vehemently opposed to it you are actually validating its existence? As far as I can tell, it's an organization put together by some guys (apparently in Bill P's eyes, a bunch of penny-ante nobodies) to express their common beliefs regarding comic collecting/buying/selling. We're allowed to join clubs reflecting common beliefs, right?

 

To my knowledge, NOD has never forced anyone to join, nor have they ever targeted those who have not joined. There's never been an organized boycott of Matt, or Heritage, or Doug Schmell, for instance. Also as far as I can tell, NOD has had little impact on the business of dealers who won't join or don't subscribe to their principles. As far as I know, Matt's business is doing just fine, as are Heritage and Bill Hughes (who was part of NOD and then resigned, or am I thinking of Rob Hughes?). I have yet to see anyone go out of business because of NOD. So what's the issue, why not just live and let live?

 

If it's a personal issue with Mark Zaid that gets to you, okay, I can understand that. If you're unhappy with the statements of some members of NOD, okay, I can understand that too, although as far as I know the more extreme statements that have been made on these boards have been made by people as individuals, not on behalf of NOD, or by people who aren't even members of NOD, such as myself. So seriously, what's with all the angst?

 

Thanks for asking! My problem is not with NOD. I am sure that NOD was started with good intentions, and I have talked to most members including Mark Zaid and find them all to be nice folks. I even sold Mark some killer books. One of my closest friends in the hobby, Steve Carey, is a vocal supporter and member of NOD.

My problem is that most people, when discussing NOD say the issue is Disclosure. It is a chicken and egg argument. The issue IS pressing. The issue IS whether pressing is restoration. NOD wants it disclosed because they view it as bad. There would be no discussion if it were just about disclosure of resto as we all agree on that already. There is no evidence that anything related to pressing is bad. There is no concensus on what pressing is. For this argument, I am talking about the pressing of imperfections out of a cover to increase appearance and grade. There is no evidence that anything in the procedures used to achieve this do anything detrimental to the comic except that somewhere down the road someone will have to pay more for a book if it goes up in grade. Or someone else's book will go down in value because now it isn't the highest graded. Now here is where most of NOD folks disagree. They think pressing is bad but this isn't where they discuss. They just say it isn't about pressing it is about disclosure. They need to show me what is so wrong with pressing that I NEED to disclose it. I hope that makes sense, if not call me and I will try to explain better.

 

That's my stance, fuel to the fire. Argue away. Bash my points, debate my stance, convince me I am wrong, please. But first convince me that pressing is wrong.

 

all due respect and somewhat Devil's Advocacy, but why would anyone have to convince you of anything wrt pressing? further, i dunno how you can say the issue is not disclosure, when the NOD specifically takes no stance on pressing as either good or bad.

 

again, i have no problem with pressing books, but i do have a problem being sold a book that i was unaware had been pressed. i would also like to know if the staples have been replaced in a book below NM, even though that's never been considered "restoration"

[MrBedrock]

Hey Rich, can I just address a question to you since you generally seem to be a voice of reason, but at the same time have been very vocal in your opposition to NOD (I was there at the little panel at SD where you sort of led the charge).

 

Why are ya'll so threatened by NOD? Don't you think by being so vehemently opposed to it you are actually validating its existence? As far as I can tell, it's an organization put together by some guys (apparently in Bill P's eyes, a bunch of penny-ante nobodies) to express their common beliefs regarding comic collecting/buying/selling. We're allowed to join clubs reflecting common beliefs, right?

 

To my knowledge, NOD has never forced anyone to join, nor have they ever targeted those who have not joined. There's never been an organized boycott of Matt, or Heritage, or Doug Schmell, for instance. Also as far as I can tell, NOD has had little impact on the business of dealers who won't join or don't subscribe to their principles. As far as I know, Matt's business is doing just fine, as are Heritage and Bill Hughes (who was part of NOD and then resigned, or am I thinking of Rob Hughes?). I have yet to see anyone go out of business because of NOD. So what's the issue, why not just live and let live?

 

If it's a personal issue with Mark Zaid that gets to you, okay, I can understand that. If you're unhappy with the statements of some members of NOD, okay, I can understand that too, although as far as I know the more extreme statements that have been made on these boards have been made by people as individuals, not on behalf of NOD, or by people who aren't even members of NOD, such as myself. So seriously, what's with all the angst?

 

Thanks for asking! My problem is not with NOD. I am sure that NOD was started with good intentions, and I have talked to most members including Mark Zaid and find them all to be nice folks. I even sold Mark some killer books. One of my closest friends in the hobby, Steve Carey, is a vocal supporter and member of NOD.

My problem is that most people, when discussing NOD say the issue is Disclosure. It is a chicken and egg argument. The issue IS pressing. The issue IS whether pressing is restoration. NOD wants it disclosed because they view it as bad. There would be no discussion if it were just about disclosure of resto as we all agree on that already. There is no evidence that anything related to pressing is bad. There is no concensus on what pressing is. For this argument, I am talking about the pressing of imperfections out of a cover to increase appearance and grade. There is no evidence that anything in the procedures used to achieve this do anything detrimental to the comic except that somewhere down the road someone will have to pay more for a book if it goes up in grade. Or someone else's book will go down in value because now it isn't the highest graded. Now here is where most of NOD folks disagree. They think pressing is bad but this isn't where they discuss. They just say it isn't about pressing it is about disclosure. They need to show me what is so wrong with pressing that I NEED to disclose it. I hope that makes sense, if not call me and I will try to explain better.

 

That's my stance, fuel to the fire. Argue away. Bash my points, debate my stance, convince me I am wrong, please. But first convince me that pressing is wrong.

 

all due respect and somewhat Devil's Advocacy, but why would anyone have to convince you of anything wrt pressing? further, i dunno how you can say the issue is not disclosure, when the NOD specifically takes no stance on pressing as either good or bad.

 

again, i have no problem with pressing books, but i do have a problem being sold a book that i was unaware had been pressed. i would also like to know if the staples have been replaced in a book below NM, even though that's never been considered "restoration"

 

Thanks for making my point......See you guys later!

[DeeDee-migration]

It is about pressing. If pressing weren't viewed as something bad there would not be anything to disclose.It is about pressing. If pressing weren't viewed as something bad there would not be anything to disclose.It is about pressing. If pressing weren't viewed as something bad there would not be anything to disclose.It is about pressing. If pressing weren't viewed as something bad there would not be anything to disclose.

Some people believe that pressing is bad, some don't. Even if you don't believe pressing is bad, can you not understand that some people (rationally or irrationally) do believe it's bad and simply accomodate the desires of those people to know whether it's been pressed or not?

 

Whether or not I care that eating pork is wrong, if I know someone's religion prevents them from eating pork, I'm going to try to warn them that there is pork in their food rather than simply decide for myself that because I think there's nothing wrong with eating pork, I'm not going to warn him (unless he asks me first) because if eating pork is fine for me then it should be fine for him too. Why? Because it's simply the decent thing to do knowing that they think it's a big deal, and it doesn't hurt me in any way to do so.

 

Here's the problem with your argument... I don't eat pork, but i don't expect random people to inform me that whatever it is I'm about to eat contains pork... thats my choice, so its my responsibility to ask about what I'm about to eat A chef in a restaurant isn't going to come running out of the kitchen to tell me my food has pork in it... i have to ask, and i believe the same goes for pressing... if i really care about what I'm about to purchase, i should take it upon myself to ask questions about it... its my responsibility

 

not trying to pick at you, just saying

[Monstro]

i like comic books

[Flaming_Telepath]

They need to show me what is so wrong with pressing that I NEED to disclose it.

 

Totally irrelevant...unless you're buying your own books.

 

The only thing that matters is what your buyers think. Your opinions in the matter don't count.

 

Think about a list of ingredients on food and drugs.

 

The manufacturers obviously don't think they are bad for the consumer...but they have to list them to give the consumer choice.

 

No difference.

[mrwoogieman]

I woke up and it was 2006 again!

 

You could win a lot of money. Put something down on Florida to win big in 07

 

I've made mica's Sig Line!

 

I can die a happy man.

 

I think more appropriately, the man that can claim that they've made it with your sig line can die a happy man

[topofthetotem]

I expect to pay less for a pressed book vs a virgin copy in the same grade.

I don't mind pressing at all just let me know if I ask "has that book been pressed".

[Scheradon]

About Us: Mission Statement

Our definitive statement that defines to others the intended purpose and the ultimate goals of The Network Of Disclosure.

 

The Network of Disclosure is a group of comic book dealers and collectors, who have pledged to disclose any form of restoration or enhancement, known to exist, on a comic book in their possession or placed by them for sale. Our objective is to create a safer and more open environment for those buying and selling comic books. By publicly sharing this type of history of each of these books with our fellow collectors and prospective customers, we seek to foster both a greater level of confidence and sense of security within the marketplace.

 

Just thought I'd post the NOD's mission statement since there is a lot of misconception to what the NOD is all about.

 

It's not just about pressing. It's about ANY form of restoration or enhancement known to exist on a comic book (which also includes dry cleaning).

 

To say that the NOD views pressing as bad is the type of misinformation that I frankly would think offends a fair share of the members who make up the NOD. If you look at the membership list, you will find those that actively press books as well as those who have no problems whatsoever with owning and buying pressed books.

 

We're (the NOD members) a group of individuals who all have different personal opinions on such topics as pressing, dry cleaning, etc. but have a common interest in disclosure of such enhancements.

[FlyingDonut]

About Us: Mission Statement

Our definitive statement that defines to others the intended purpose and the ultimate goals of The Network Of Disclosure.

 

The Network of Disclosure is a group of comic book dealers and collectors, who have pledged to disclose any form of restoration or enhancement, known to exist, on a comic book in their possession or placed by them for sale. Our objective is to create a safer and more open environment for those buying and selling comic books. By publicly sharing this type of history of each of these books with our fellow collectors and prospective customers, we seek to foster both a greater level of confidence and sense of security within the marketplace.

 

Just thought I'd post the NOD's mission statement since there is a lot of misconception to what the NOD is all about.

 

It's not just about pressing. It's about ANY form of restoration or enhancement known to exist on a comic book (which also includes dry cleaning).

 

To say that the NOD views pressing as bad is the type of misinformation that I frankly would think offends a fair share of the members who make up the NOD. If you look at the membership list, you will find those that actively press books as well as those who have no problems whatsoever with owning and buying pressed books.

 

We're (the NOD members) a group of individuals who all have different personal opinions on such topics as pressing, dry cleaning, etc. but have a common interest in disclosure of such enhancements.

 

If that's the case, you guys need better PR, as I'd bet that if you asked 100 people in the "industry" what the NOD was, the overwhelming majority of people who had heard of NOD was would say it was an anti-pressing organization.

[Scheradon]

About Us: Mission Statement

Our definitive statement that defines to others the intended purpose and the ultimate goals of The Network Of Disclosure.

 

The Network of Disclosure is a group of comic book dealers and collectors, who have pledged to disclose any form of restoration or enhancement, known to exist, on a comic book in their possession or placed by them for sale. Our objective is to create a safer and more open environment for those buying and selling comic books. By publicly sharing this type of history of each of these books with our fellow collectors and prospective customers, we seek to foster both a greater level of confidence and sense of security within the marketplace.

 

Just thought I'd post the NOD's mission statement since there is a lot of misconception to what the NOD is all about.

 

It's not just about pressing. It's about ANY form of restoration or enhancement known to exist on a comic book (which also includes dry cleaning).

 

To say that the NOD views pressing as bad is the type of misinformation that I frankly would think offends a fair share of the members who make up the NOD. If you look at the membership list, you will find those that actively press books as well as those who have no problems whatsoever with owning and buying pressed books.

 

We're (the NOD members) a group of individuals who all have different personal opinions on such topics as pressing, dry cleaning, etc. but have a common interest in disclosure of such enhancements.

 

If that's the case, you guys need better PR, as I'd bet that if you asked 100 people in the "industry" what the NOD was, the overwhelming majority of people who had heard of NOD was would say it was an anti-pressing organization.

 

Well geez, I wonder why? Couldn't be that a small group of scared BSDs who view the NOD as some kind of threat to their livelyhood are running around and spouting stuff like "The NOD is some kind of anti-pressing organization", could it?

 

btw: McDonalds has worms in their hamburgers too.

[garthgantu]

My problem is that most people, when discussing NOD say the issue is Disclosure. It is a chicken and egg argument. The issue IS pressing. The issue IS whether pressing is restoration. NOD wants it disclosed because they view it as bad. There would be no discussion if it were just about disclosure of resto as we all agree on that already. There is no evidence that anything related to pressing is bad. There is no concensus on what pressing is. For this argument, I am talking about the pressing of imperfections out of a cover to increase appearance and grade. There is no evidence that anything in the procedures used to achieve this do anything detrimental to the comic except that somewhere down the road someone will have to pay more for a book if it goes up in grade. Or someone else's book will go down in value because now it isn't the highest graded. Now here is where most of NOD folks disagree. They think pressing is bad but this isn't where they discuss. They just say it isn't about pressing it is about disclosure. They need to show me what is so wrong with pressing that I NEED to disclose it. I hope that makes sense, if not call me and I will try to explain better.

 

With all due respect, I vehemently disagree. As additional examples of various kinds of "non-disclosure" surface, I expect the NoD (of which I am a member) to discuss them. An overview of the Jason Ewart 'scandal' would be a welcome addition to the NoD website, looking at how such trimming procedures were not caught by CGC, a discussion of whether CGC can at this point detect such trimming consistently, and if possible some 'pointers' on how the average collector can attempt to identify such trimming on his/her own. While I think we collectively (this includes you and everyone else on these boards) view trimming as restoration, I wouldn't expect the NoD to delve into this point in such an "essay" because it's not the issue - just as the debate over pressing being resto is not the issue; the disclosure of pressing is.