• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Intriguing Definitional Changes In New 2006 Overstreet Guide

Started by esquirecomics,

264 posts in this topic

marvelcollector

marvelcollector

Posted
Posted

yeah, but the rising paper costs was said by Arnold, and he did NOT say it as THE reason.... just in passing that as the book gets bigger each year that rising paper costs are an increasingly serious issue and steps will have to be taken. I inferred that this years issues were not related to paper costs...

 

Actually, I think it was Tom that cited the rising paper costs....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Forbush-Man

Forbush-Man

Posted
Posted

First off, my spelling will suck....as I have No desire to worry about spelling right now.

 

The latest Overstreet, in my oppinion, was paving the way to say "pressing is okay, go for it! thumbsup2.gif"

 

 

Too many factors lead me to this view. Pressing is, in fact, the most detrimental procedure allowed in a papers-collectible field: it is the senseless manipulation of a paper collectible for one purpose & one purpose only.....to improve the cosmetic appearnce of the collectible. We should make clear the definition of conservation & restoration and do so LOUDLY!!! sumo.gif

 

We have obviously gotten the attention of those who's livelihoods depend on our continued participation.......as in $$$$ and they are sceptical as to proceeding without having a clear direction (don't fix that book until we are sure what a fixed book is.)

 

Just MHO. flowerred.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
Good luck and good luck trying to get answers to all of those questions.

 

That's ok. Silence is a form of an answer as well. Sometimes more telling.

 

Sure it's more telling, but it also presents fewer opportunities for cross-examination or outright attacks from all sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Point Five

Point Five

Posted
Posted
As far as the intentional omission of the grading standards, which I believe to be a terrible decision (geez, if you are going to cut something, how about keeping marketplace reports down to less than a novel!)

 

That's a great point...some of the marketplace reports ramble on for pages and pages. Seems like if Gemstone wants to eke out another few pages for the grading standards, all they have to do is cut the longest marketplace reports in half and say "the full text of this report is available at (web site address)". Newspapers do that all the time...

 

Then you're only mildly inconveniencing the few hundred people who would actually read a 20-page marketplace report through to the end once or twice, as opposed to inconveniencing literally everyone who purchased the guide and is going to need to understand the grading system all year round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
Personally, I think the grading guide is pretty crappy overall. Picture detail is just not there.

 

I think the last edition was a great start and a vast improvement over the prior guide in many ways, but it needed improvement in several areas. In many cases, the pictures did not match the text general descriptions of the grades and too many frequently occurring defects were completely unaddressed or just weren't addressed sufficiently (like a subscription crease). Also unaddressed was any kind of a discussion re: how to grade restored books. But I still think it is a good resource and wouldn't call it "pretty crappy overall." It was a vast improvement over what came before.

 

P.S. Dear Gemstone -- please consider using the loose leaf binding and not the glue binding, as that falls apart too quickly. I had my local copy shop slice the binding off of my guide and put on a loose leaf binding when the pages started falling out. The guide is much more useful now, as it will lie flat on a table (unlike the guide when it has the glue binding).

 

nelson4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
marvelcollector

marvelcollector

Posted
Posted
Personally, I think the grading guide is pretty crappy overall. Picture detail is just not there.

 

Couldn't agree with you more!

 

The second edition, while needed to reflect the new grading system and having a very glossy look, was basically a step backwards.

 

The photos fail to show the defects effectively, there are next to no close ups, etc.

 

There is also the long standing situation where many terms (moderate, slight, etc)

need precise defining, along with addressing some common defects that aren't even mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldGuy

OldGuy

Posted
Posted
Maybe I won't be buying a guide this year after all. I think I can wait and see if everything is restored and correct for next year's edition.

 

I'm not buying it this year (first time in six years), but I can come up with several better reasons then this.

 

 

Well, shoot away then. I've never bought one before and was planning on making this the first year of doing so. I really wouldn't be using it until mid to late August anyway, so it wouldn't kill me to hold off until next year's issue where they may correct the restoration definitions and possibly put the grading section back in.

 

What's your reason(s)?

 

Ok, if you have never owned a copy then go buy it. I don't think you'll find a better single source of information about comic books anywhere. That being said, the information doesn’t change much from year to year so starting this year I'm only going to buy it every few years. That would be the major reason I'm not buying it. Other reasons are:

 

1. The values assigned to books are basically meaningless to me. I buy and sell mostly on the internet and I can't even remember the last time I thought "I wonder what guide price is for this book?" Guide price is irrelevant. In an auction environment a book sells for the highest bid, not guide price.

 

2. The majority of what's been added to the guide in the recent past is meaningless to me. Big Little Books and Platinum Age books for example.

 

3. The market reports are not only wishful thinking, but more closely resemble hucksterism. They cater to "a sucker being born every second".

 

4. People still advertise in print? I can't even remember the last time I saw a print add and was motivated to spend money with the advertiser.

 

There are more reasons, but those would be the main ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
esquirecomics

esquirecomics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I'd still like to know which Gemstone employee had the responsibility for the Glossary section to have allowed the "error" to have occurred.

 

And although it has been noted to have been an "error", let us not forget it was also stated that the included language was a draft. That means Gemstone was working on new definitions.

 

Q. Who was working on these new definitions?

 

Q. Why was someone working on these new definitions?

 

Q. What was the basis for the draft language change for the definitions of "restoration" and "pressing"?

 

Q. Who was being consulted from outside Gemstone for the language of these new definitions?

 

Q. What other definitions, if any, were being considered for modification?

 

popcorn.gif

 

bumpit.gifpopcorn.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
esquirecomics

esquirecomics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
As far as the intentional omission of the grading standards, which I believe to be a terrible decision (geez, if you are going to cut something, how about keeping marketplace reports down to less than a novel!), I have the following questions:

 

Q. Whose idea was it to remove the grading standards?

 

Q. How high up did the decision go?

 

Q. What was the actual basis for the deletion?

 

I don't find it to be plausible that the sole reason, if any, was that two pages of space were needed for something else.

 

bumpit.gifpopcorn.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing