Scoop Pressing Follow-up

[jbud73]

True...it is curious, however, that many of the more vociferous critics of CGC really have no reason to buy slabbed books in the 1st place since they don't collect HG and/or expensive books (which is where the value is in 3rd-party grading). This isn't as true on these boards, but it is quite prominent on the ebay boards, which are dominated by Stu and the anti-CGC contingent.

 

Though you already touch on this in your response Mike, the stance "What you buy determines what you can argue for or against" Riles me up to the same degree that the "What you like is [embarrassing lack of self control], what I like is great" stance gets under Rob's skin.

 

This whole argument should not be contextualized within the spectrum of CGC, its dangerous and negligent to do so. CGC has a stance and a position and influence, but I am unwilling to give final arbitration over restoration definitions and standards to one private corporation, are you?

[jbud73]

Mike everyone holds a bias/opinion to some degree. I think what scoop did was illustrate the extreme's on both sides of the fence. Of course the issue for me is influence - Readem/slabem like it or not does not exude as much, or try to exude as much influence in the hobby, I don't thnk that can be said of the other people whose opinions were solicited for the Scoop article.

 

I personally don't think that Scoop was very transparent in the public opinions it published - the solicitation may have been transparent, but the ultimate publication definitely lacked that element.

 

Still I guess as a redress they did put forth an opinion that called into question the motives in the repsonses that were previously posted - its a mulligan / attempt at a save from a journalistic integral point of view. I still think they were reticent to publish the opinion they did without any context to at least inform general readership of the elements each individual brought to the table.

 

I would have like to see Bob Overstreet - Susan - Bob Storms responses published had those individuals repsonded to the Scoop solicitation for opinion.

 

Jason;

 

I thought your article that was published on the GPA website was very well written and thought out. I don't believe it was published on the Scoop website as one of their submissions similar to Mark's. Pleas correct me if I am wrong on this point.

 

Any chance that your article will also be published on the Scoop website, or is there a reason why it was not submitted? I think you should give it a shot since Gemstone seems to be willing to publish both sides of the argument right now.

 

Hey thanks Lou, glad you liked it. I have to say that overall I was satisfied, though parts of it were rushed and I didn't really have the time to devote to as many aspects and tangents to the NDP issue as I would have liked to. I'd also like to say that many of the themes and comments that you have brought forward here had an impact on my argument and the reasoning behind it.

 

As to why it wasn't published or referenced in Scoop, I have no idea. Probably because I did not submit it I suppose I could explore avenues to remedy that. Having just got back from the Oakland show, I can say that the topic was referenced in discussion this weekend. However, is was not a focal point, more than likely due to the fact that the participants in the discussion were all aware of the viewpoints of the other parties present. I did notice that more individuals than before were seeking to engage in the discussion with me personally, not sure if I have unwittingly become a spokesperson in the big pressing debate

 

Of course I may be over stating the fact because FFB was me all weekend by commenting that the already High Grade raw books I bought had yet to reach their full potential. But he takes great joy in making me over his comments about NDP and Canadian Hockey Teams. This is made far easier to palate because he makes a mean spinach crepe breakfast. Lord knows Liz didn't marry him for his taste in American Idol participants.

[drbanner]

Though you already touch on this in your response Mike, the stance "What you buy determines what you can argue for or against" Riles me up to the same degree that the "What you like is [embarrassing lack of self control], what I like is great" stance gets under Rob's skin.

 

I understand where you're coming from, but from my perspective, unless you've walked a mile in someone else's shoes (collected HG/expensive books in the wild, wild west of ebay and undisclosed restoration), you have no business discrediting something that makes that type of collecting safer (CGC).

 

The problem with people like Stu is that he is intolerant of everyone else's collecting habits, and frankly, it's pretty sad that he's monopolized the ebay comic boards with his bias. In addition to high grade collectors, dealers, and CGC he proclaims that:

 

"Along the same lines are price variant collectors. These guys will pay hundreds of dollars more for a Marvel comic where the price says 30 (35) cents instead of 25 (30) cents. I cannot think of a more retarded reason to buy a comic than this."

 

That's about all I'm going to say about the multiple shill/thrice-banned read_em...he has contributed to the good of the hobby by the ebay comic book faq and other positive contributions "over there", so it's not like he's a total waste. It's just pretty sad that those messages are coming from a comic book bigot that has no problem letting you know how prejudiced he is, and in no uncertain terms!

[buttock]

....you are all dealers to me...

 

Just check out the popularity of those forum marketplace threads.

 

Right.

 

90% of what I sell there is sold for 30-50% below guide, and I lose money on them about 90% of the time. Please point me to the section on your website (or any dealers web site) where your prices are 30-50% below guide and you take a loss on the books.

 

 

[joe_collector]

That said, I think most people would consider Tom and Doug to be among the top 4 or 5 Marvel Silver Age collectors in the world (ok, top 2?)

 

Banner, you have finally gone insane.

 

After the Brulato-Ewert fiasco, I can't see how you can put "collector" next to his name, and while Doug was a collector, that status is long gone once he opened up Pedigree and started selling commissioned books.

 

To even allude that these two are "collectors", circa 2006, is just too bizarre.

[tth2]

....you are all dealers to me...

 

Just check out the popularity of those forum marketplace threads.

 

Right.

 

90% of what I sell there is sold for 30-50% below guide, and I lose money on them about 90% of the time.

That just makes you a bad dealer.

[Flaming_Telepath]

"Along the same lines are price variant collectors. These guys will pay hundreds of dollars more for a Marvel comic where the price says 30 (35) cents instead of 25 (30) cents. I cannot think of a more retarded reason to buy a comic than this."

 

And that's wrong because....?

[joe_collector]

"Along the same lines are price variant collectors. These guys will pay hundreds of dollars more for a Marvel comic where the price says 30 (35) cents instead of 25 (30) cents. I cannot think of a more retarded reason to buy a comic than this."

 

You know I collect 35-cent variants, and while I obviously disagree with what Stu here has to say, it does NOT change that I agree with much of what he said concerning the overtly biased and mis-reported BS Scoop has churned out on pressing.

[drbanner]

"Along the same lines are price variant collectors. These guys will pay hundreds of dollars more for a Marvel comic where the price says 30 (35) cents instead of 25 (30) cents. I cannot think of a more retarded reason to buy a comic than this."

 

You know I collect 35-cent variants, and while I obviously disagree with what Stu here has to say, it does NOT change that I agree with much of what he said concerning the overtly biased and mis-reported BS Scoop has churned out on pressing.

 

I'm not shooting the message...

[esquirecomics]

Hey,Mark,Just for s&g,please amuse me and go back and idenitify the people in the article the way you believe Scoop should have.

 

Well, Brulotto for sure, as others have mentioned. I also referenced Matt Nelson in my article. I believe all other "dealers" were identified as dealers. Scoop probably should have identified which among them were Overstreet advisors, as I believe most of them were. That is, of course, how they were aware of the solicitation.

 

I'm not sure it was a concerted effort to get "pro-pressing" people to submit responses. I have a feeling it was simply those among the advisors who felt strongly enough about submitting their responses, or who were not really thinking when they decided to type a response. Most of the "collectors" likely submitted either b/c they saw the Scoop announcement when they read it, or perhaps after reading the thread I created with the Scoop questions.

 

Regardless, if Scoop has actually published all the comments it received, as it noted in Stu's submission, that seems really pathetic given it went to over 300,000 people. Even among the Overstreet advisors response was quite low.

[tth2]

Regardless, if Scoop has actually published all the comments it received, as it noted in Stu's submission, that seems really pathetic given it went to over 300,000 people. Even among the Overstreet advisors response was quite low.

Well, a lot of people on these boards get Scoop. So a show of hands, how many people sent in a response?

 

I have to be honest that I never even noticed the pressing article/surveys, or the request to submit a response, except after it was highlighted on these boards. I tend to, uh, skim Scoop pretty quickly when I get it.

[joe_collector]

I'm not sure it was a concerted effort to get "pro-pressing" people to submit responses.

 

Are we talking about the actual article or the secondary responses to it?

[esquirecomics]

Regardless, if Scoop has actually published all the comments it received, as it noted in Stu's submission, that seems really pathetic given it went to over 300,000 people. Even among the Overstreet advisors response was quite low.

Well, a lot of people on these boards get Scoop. So a show of hands, how many people sent in a response?

 

I have to be honest that I never even noticed the pressing article/surveys, or the request to submit a response, except after it was highlighted on these boards. I tend to, uh, skim Scoop pretty quickly when I get it.

 

You don't even need to ask for a show of hands. Everyone who submitted a comment had it published, according to Scoop. Other than the dealers, it appeared many, if not all, of the comments (particularly concluding pressing was restoration) came from forumites.

[lou_fine]

Regardless, if Scoop has actually published all the comments it received, as it noted in Stu's submission, that seems really pathetic given it went to over 300,000 people. Even among the Overstreet advisors response was quite low.

Well, a lot of people on these boards get Scoop. So a show of hands, how many people sent in a response?

 

I have to be honest that I never even noticed the pressing article/surveys, or the request to submit a response, except after it was highlighted on these boards. I tend to, uh, skim Scoop pretty quickly when I get it.

 

Well, it sounds like it is still not too late to send in a response.

 

The article states that they have been running responses for several weeks now, and are still eager for everybody's participation.

 

Well,..........any takers to their offer.

[esquirecomics]

I'm not sure it was a concerted effort to get "pro-pressing" people to submit responses.

 

Are we talking about the actual article or the secondary responses to it?

 

As I understand it, Gemstone solicited opinions via two methods. First, it published the questions in Scoop and asked anyone who is interested to send in a response. That is what generated the majority, if not all, of the pressing = restoration responses. Second, it sent solicitations, via e-mail, directly to advertisers (I believe they said that, though I never got one) and advisors. Most of the pressing does not equal restoration came from that camp. No doubt once the submissions were posted that it might have generated some additional comments, particularly in that several came from forumites who participated in discussions here.

[shadroch]

300,000 people? yeah,right.Anyone want to hazard a guess to how many people really read scoop?. For myself,I guess I've changed emails about a dozen times and never bothered to cancel, only signed up again.

[esquirecomics]

300,000 people? yeah,right.Anyone want to hazard a guess to how many people really read scoop?. For myself,I guess I've changed emails about a dozen times and never bothered to cancel, only signed up again.

 

Well, "reading" and "receiving" can certainly be two different creatures.

[Aman619]

frankly, I skim over Scoop when I get it, but dont 'read' it too carefully as 85% doesnt interest me, and, moe importantly, has never seemed "required reading" before. Perhaps, Gemstone will go further in this direction of discussing ISSUES and not just toy, art, statue sale news and convention announcements or store appearances etc. If they were to do more 'articles like this one, Id definitely pay closer attention. I used to anticipate each CBM every month!

[drbanner]

I used to anticipate each CBM every month!

 

Me too...nice to see Mr. Naiman participating again!

[joe_collector]

As I understand it, Gemstone solicited opinions via two methods.

 

Just tell me how the comments in the article got in there.

 

Or are you really saying that it was random, and that any Joe Sixpack could make the final article?