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

[Sid]

Too much slandering and mud slinging. I have a lot of respect for all of you but this thread is bizzare, because it's making me upset reading the arguments. I have a lot of respect for all of you, and would've liked to see this actually be debated, not turn into who's balls are bigger fight. Ultimately, there is no argument here since all of you are argueing opinions and going around in circles so, just relax and go back to poking fun instead of bashing.

[mica]

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.

All they do is talk about pressing

Where in the above paragraph is it even mentioned?

(((((((((( an attempt to quote Fdonut from memory, as he must have deleted it)))))

[garthgantu]

It's amazing how a book can go from new and mint off the presses to handled/read/etc. and not mint, then get pressed back to appearing mint and yet, you claim there has been "no alteration" of the original paper in any way.

 

OBVIOUSLY the gang at CGC feel the way they do, because saying it doesn't constitute restoration simply means they can claim to spot restoration. How easy do you think it would be for them to sell their resto check if they admitted they couldn't detect a huge chunk of it? It's much easier to just cross that application off their list.

 

Dealers and people wanting to "cash in" on their HG books often are the ones who hail pressing as some perfectly legitimate non-restorative process, yet these are usually the same people who have some maligned problem disclosing this work upfront to the potential buyer.

 

If pressing really is no big deal and you really believe that only a minority care about it, then disclose it up front so that ALL can be happy with their end purchase. Oh, but wait...you guys will also say that you won't disclose for fear of LOSING money because of the STIGMATIZING of pressed books.

 

So, let's see...nobody (or atleast only a small portion) cares if a book has been pressed, yet dealers don't routinely disclose because there is this huge stigma regarding pressed books that will affect the end price.

Now, that's a dumb argument!

 

This is exactly right. CGC at one time listed "pressing involving disassembly" as being resto, but now seemingly considers such pressing to be acceptable under its blue label. Why? Only rationale that leaps to mind is that some pressing that involves disassembly (but not we cleaning) cannot be consistently identified as such by CGC. So now that's an "okay" means of pressing.

 

Likewise, those who view pressing as acceptable but the disclosure of pressing as some sort of violation of the presser/seller's rights are being disingenuous; if you don't view pressing as a negative, why not disclose it and call for others to disclose it? Only rationale I can think of is that those who have climbed aboard the CGC gravy train view ANY questioning of CGC's core business practices/guidelines as a bad thing and reflexively oppose it.

 

Whether we like to admit it or not, we each have our own self-centered motives for our actions and beliefs in this regard. I think a lot of people are on the fence about pressing because they don't want to upset the applecart and don't see the issue impacting them directly. It will take a direct, personal experience with the "pressing phenomenon" to make some of them reconsider their position: the purchase of a book that's been pressed for 2-4x the cost of the book in its original state + the $40 pressing job that's been done on it, or the discovery that the previously "best known copy" of a book they own (and care about) is now the second- or third-best copy...

[Sal]

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

 

your analogy fails because of the "condition" issue. if you order takeout, and you find out when you get home that it's not cooked, and it cost you $500, you'd probably be pretty angry, even if you had asked beforehand if there was any pork in it

[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

 

your analogy fails because of the "condition" issue. if you order takeout, and you find out when you get home that it's not cooked, and it cost you $500, you'd probably be pretty angry, even if you had asked beforehand if there was any pork in it

That makes no sense.

 

I was responding to the analogy of the previous poster. The "raw" or "uncooked" condition of the food is a totally separate issue from whether or not the food contains "undisclosed" pork.

 

and why would take out cost $500?

[Red Hook]

Because it's Beverly Hills?

[Sid]

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

 

your analogy fails because of the "condition" issue. if you order takeout, and you find out when you get home that it's not cooked, and it cost you $500, you'd probably be pretty angry, even if you had asked beforehand if there was any pork in it

That makes no sense.

 

I was responding to the analogy of the previous poster. The "raw" or "uncooked" condition of the food is a totally separate issue from whether or not the food contains "undisclosed" pork.

 

and why would take out cost $500?

 

You DO live near Vegas.

[awe4one]

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

 

Any good restaurant lists the type of meat available in an entree so you don't have to ask...

 

Jim

[Mr. Zipper]

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.

 

Because "an overwhelming majority" of misinformed people think something does not make it so.

 

NOD is in an uphill battle made all that more difficult by the entrenched interests of some parties who don't want anyone to "upset the apple cart."

 

When a small group of organized collectors asking for nothing more than upfront honesty and full disclosure draw such venom from the entrenched interests, it means NOD must be doing something right.

[Scrooge]

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

 

Well, what tth2 is saying is that for someone in business who knows some of his clients will not eat pork AND will be upset if they do eat some accidentally making the conscious decision to advertize his food as containing pork (or peanuts or alcohol or any form of meat or ...) is a no-brainer. There is no negative externalities from his saying / disclosing too much and he avoids the embarassment of upsetting his clients. Heck, if my high school cafeteria could advertize that some dishes contained pork AND plan a separate dish for muslim students, comic book dealers surely can reveal, when they know it, that a comic book has been pressed. It ain't that hard.

[DeeDee-migration]

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

 

Any good restaurant lists the type of meat available in an entree so you don't have to ask...

 

Jim

They don't necessarily include all ingredients, especially in sauces, salads and stuffings, but thanks for the tip

[Sal]

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

 

your analogy fails because of the "condition" issue. if you order takeout, and you find out when you get home that it's not cooked, and it cost you $500, you'd probably be pretty angry, even if you had asked beforehand if there was any pork in it

That makes no sense.

 

I was responding to the analogy of the previous poster. The "raw" or "uncooked" condition of the food is a totally separate issue from whether or not the food contains "undisclosed" pork.

well, then his analogy failed before yours. the "cooked" and "uncooked" portion of my explanation was an attempt to draw a parallel between food and the grade of a book.

 

 

it's just a bad analogy to begin with.

 

and why would take out cost $500?

i was assuming you would be adding a couple bottles of top-shelf liquor to your order

[mica]

Heck, if my high school cafeteria could advertize that some dishes contained pork AND plan a separate dish for muslim students, comic book dealers surely can reveal, when they know it, that a comic book has been pressed. It ain't that hard.

[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

 

your analogy fails because of the "condition" issue. if you order takeout, and you find out when you get home that it's not cooked, and it cost you $500, you'd probably be pretty angry, even if you had asked beforehand if there was any pork in it

That makes no sense.

 

I was responding to the analogy of the previous poster. The "raw" or "uncooked" condition of the food is a totally separate issue from whether or not the food contains "undisclosed" pork.

well, then his analogy failed before yours. the "cooked" and "uncooked" portion of my explanation was an attempt to draw a parallel between food and the grade of a book.

 

 

it's just a bad analogy to begin with.

 

and why would take out cost $500?

i was assuming you would be adding a couple bottles of top-shelf liquor to your order

i think the analogy worked as far as explaining different views on disclosure... not necessarily on how pressing affects condition and how that in turn affects price, but I'm not going to argue about it.

 

And i'll take the liquor remark as a joke

[awe4one]

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

 

Any good restaurant lists the type of meat available in an entree so you don't have to ask...

 

Jim

They don't necessarily include all ingredients, especially in sauces, salads and stuffings, but thanks for the tip

 

Of course not...but it does throw your pork explanation out of the water...

 

Jim

[Scheradon]

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

 

your analogy fails because of the "condition" issue. if you order takeout, and you find out when you get home that it's not cooked, and it cost you $500, you'd probably be pretty angry, even if you had asked beforehand if there was any pork in it

That makes no sense.

 

I was responding to the analogy of the previous poster. The "raw" or "uncooked" condition of the food is a totally separate issue from whether or not the food contains "undisclosed" pork.

 

and why would take out cost $500?

 

Say you were buying ground up meat at the grocery store. Now say this store offered this meat packaged up nicely for you and labeled. Now, you see the label discloses that the ground up meat you are buying has beef, turkey, and chicken in it. You later find out after buying this store's meat for some time, that their meat also has a small amount of filler pork in it as well. Maybe they didn't feel it was enough to mention or that big of a deal, but if you were of the religious background that does not eat pork, it would be a horrible discovery to you.

 

You quite honestly would not have thought to ask if it had pork, because you most likely would have assumed it would have been noted on the package. You would probably also prefer it to be listed up front rather than have to dig and prod for that information.

[DeeDee-migration]

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

 

Any good restaurant lists the type of meat available in an entree so you don't have to ask...

 

Jim

They don't necessarily include all ingredients, especially in sauces, salads and stuffings, but thanks for the tip

 

Of course not...but it does throw your pork explanation out of the water...

 

Jim

You think so? ... say you have dinner at someone's house... do they hand you a detailed menu with all the ingredients used in the preperation of your meal? Should you ask or should you sit there and expect them to tell you?

 

Whatever, it doesn't matter anyways, you think you're right, and i think I'm right.

[JuliusSeizure]

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.

Yes, it makes sense, and I would look at it like this: There is value added to a transaction that is hidden from one party, making for an economic imbalance. A book gets pressed from a 9.2 to 9.8 and sold to me for 3x the price. For argument's sake, let's say the difference is $500. Well, I could have bought the book as a 9.2, had the pressing done myself - I think $40 was the figure thrown around - and had a 9.8 a lot cheaper. The fact that pressing is a viable business model suggests that the value added by pressing is greater than the cost, and based on some numbers in this thread, the difference may be extremely high. Maybe it's irrational, but most people in that situation who later find that a book was pressed are going to feel that they got jobbed.

 

Would someone value 2 9.8s, one pressed, and one not, the same? Don't know, but I would value a 9.2 a lot higher when I consider it 'pressable' and a 9.8 (pressed or not) a lot lower because I could buy a 9.2 and have it pressed instead of paying the multiple. In a rational world, buyers would bid down 9.8 prices proportionally to the likelihood that high-grade books are pressed lower-grade books, cutting into the high-grade multiples and thinning the margins sellers earn by pressing. Maybe that will happen, but who ever said this market was rational?

 

This is all purely hypothetical from my POV, as I'm a small-timer and an utter nobody. I highly doubt I'll be buying any pressed books soon. But it's an interesting economic mental exercise.

[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

 

your analogy fails because of the "condition" issue. if you order takeout, and you find out when you get home that it's not cooked, and it cost you $500, you'd probably be pretty angry, even if you had asked beforehand if there was any pork in it

That makes no sense.

 

I was responding to the analogy of the previous poster. The "raw" or "uncooked" condition of the food is a totally separate issue from whether or not the food contains "undisclosed" pork.

 

and why would take out cost $500?

 

Say you were buying ground up meat at the grocery store. Now say this store offered this meat packaged up nicely for you and labeled. Now, you see the label discloses that the ground up meat you are buying has beef, turkey, and chicken in it. You later find out after buying this store's meat for some time, that their meat also has a small amount of filler pork in it as well. Maybe they didn't feel it was enough to mention or that big of a deal, but if you were of the religious background that does not eat pork, it would be a horrible discovery to you.

 

You quite honestly would not have thought to ask if it had pork, because you most likely would have assumed it would have been noted on the package. You would probably also prefer it to be listed up front rather than have to dig and prod for that information.

This has happened to me before, but in spite of my "religious background", i don't feel guilty about things I don't know It was my fault for not looking closely enough, next time i looked more attentively.

[awe4one]

You think so? ... say you have dinner at someone's house... do they hand you a detailed menu with all the ingredients used in the preperation of your meal? Should you ask or should you sit there and expect them to tell you?

 

I'm not paying for the meal am I?

 

When I'm buying a comic I expect to be informed if any resto (to include pressing) has been done. Simple as that...

 

Whatever, it doesn't matter anyways, you think you're right, and i think I'm right.

 

Cool...

 

Jim