Scoop Pressing Follow-up

[Aces]

....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.

 

 

Don't ya mean 30-50% of guide?

[FlyingDonut]

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?

 

Yes, it was. Must you see a conspiracy in everything?

 

The vast majority of Overstreet Advisors didn't respond.

[tth2]

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?

Before accusing them of conspiracy to suppress opposing opinions, why don't you first test it and send in your response? If they do indeed "suppress" your opinion, then rail away at the conspiracy.

[shadroch]

Do you think the world is ready for JC?

[joe_collector]

Before accusing them of conspiracy to suppress opposing opinions, why don't you first test it and send in your response?

 

What are you talking about? The ARTICLE on Pressing is long-since completed and I'd need a time machine to "test your theory".

[tth2]

Do you think the world is ready for JC?

Well, I can't imagine he'd be any more scathing than Stu was.

[tth2]

Before accusing them of conspiracy to suppress opposing opinions, why don't you first test it and send in your response?

 

What are you talking about? The ARTICLE on Pressing is long-since completed and I'd need a time machine to "test your theory".

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the feedback responses.

[joe_collector]

Before accusing them of conspiracy to suppress opposing opinions, why don't you first test it and send in your response?

 

What are you talking about? The ARTICLE on Pressing is long-since completed and I'd need a time machine to "test your theory".

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the feedback responses.

 

No problem, but I feel like I'm hitting my head against the wall trying to people to understand I'm talking about the Original Article that started all this, not a pile of secondary reader responses to those original comments.

[FlyingDonut]

Before accusing them of conspiracy to suppress opposing opinions, why don't you first test it and send in your response?

 

What are you talking about? The ARTICLE on Pressing is long-since completed and I'd need a time machine to "test your theory".

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the feedback responses.

 

No problem, but I feel like I'm hitting my head against the wall trying to people to understand I'm talking about the Original Article that started all this, not a pile of secondary reader responses to those original comments.

 

The original request went out to everybody as well on April 21, same as the responses.

 

Which they started to publish on April 28

 

Again, the vast majority of OS Advisors have not responded.

[Scheradon]

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.

 

 

Just for the record, I did submit a response to them after reading the responses by Matt Nelson, Tom Brulato, and company. Now, my response never got published, so maybe it's the one "off-topic" response they are referring to. I don't think it was, but ?

 

Here's the response I recieved back from them:

 

"John,

Thanks for replying. We appreciate you taking the time to share your opinion.

 

Mark Huesman - Production Coordinator"

 

So, I guess I atleast know they recieved it.

[esquirecomics]

Before accusing them of conspiracy to suppress opposing opinions, why don't you first test it and send in your response?

 

What are you talking about? The ARTICLE on Pressing is long-since completed and I'd need a time machine to "test your theory".

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the feedback responses.

 

No problem, but I feel like I'm hitting my head against the wall trying to people to understand I'm talking about the Original Article that started all this, not a pile of secondary reader responses to those original comments.

 

JC, now you are confusing me as well. What "Original Article" are you referring to?

 

The synopsis generally went as follows:

 

- Overstreet issued its 36th edition with changed definitions;

 

- I contacted them about the changes, publicized it and asked that they publicly retract them;

 

- Gemstone publicly retracts the changes through Scoop and at the same time solicits the opinions of the community as to what constitutes restoration. They also directly contact all Overstreet advisors;

 

- Scoop begins to publish the comments it receives, and each week also solicits opinions on related topics, as well as publishing any new comments received on the prior topics;

 

- GPAnalysis issues an e-newsletter containing articles, such as the one I authored, on the debate;

 

- Scoop publishes my article, with the permission of myself and GPAnalysis, as a submission.

 

As far as anyone knows, Scoop has published every response it has received, whether as a result of the original solicitation or a subsequent reference, and regardless of the opinion expressed.

 

You should submit one as well, as should everyone who cares about the issue.

[FlyingDonut]

Before accusing them of conspiracy to suppress opposing opinions, why don't you first test it and send in your response?

 

What are you talking about? The ARTICLE on Pressing is long-since completed and I'd need a time machine to "test your theory".

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the feedback responses.

 

No problem, but I feel like I'm hitting my head against the wall trying to people to understand I'm talking about the Original Article that started all this, not a pile of secondary reader responses to those original comments.

 

JC, now you are confusing me as well. What "Original Article" are you referring to?

 

The synopsis generally went as follows:

 

- Overstreet issued its 36th edition with changed definitions;

 

- I contacted them about the changes, publicized it and asked that they publicly retract them;

 

- Gemstone publicly retracts the changes through Scoop and at the same time solicits the opinions of the community as to what constitutes restoration. They also directly contact all Overstreet advisors;

 

- Scoop begins to publish the comments it receives, and each week also solicits opinions on related topics, as well as publishing any new comments received on the prior topics;

 

- GPAnalysis issues an e-newsletter containing articles, such as the one I authored, on the debate;

 

- Scoop publishes my article, with the permission of myself and GPAnalysis, as a submission.

 

As far as anyone knows, Scoop has published every response it has received, whether as a result of the original solicitation or a subsequent reference, and regardless of the opinion expressed.

 

You should submit one as well, as should everyone who cares about the issue

 

and therein lies the rub, my friend. BTW, they looked awful tonight. Just awful.

[joe_collector]

JC, now you are confusing me as well. What "Original Article" are you referring to?

 

The first couple of response articles, before it degenerated into what we have right now. Call me a realist, but I don't think it was a big coincidence that a lot of dealers and big names were in there.

[shadroch]

How about I call you a welcher and say that the people with the most to lose responded.

[esquirecomics]

You should submit one as well, as should everyone who cares about the issue

 

and therein lies the rub, my friend.

 

In the grand scheme of collecting, no doubt. But I think the people who care really do care. More so than those who hold the opposing view. Those who hold no view are clearly the majority, but that is for a lot of reasons.

 

BTW, they looked awful tonight. Just awful.

 

Sigh, I know. What do you expect after a 2 game winning streak. Like we can expect that to continue! I can't even give away my tickets. 3 were wasted tonight.

[esquirecomics]

JC, now you are confusing me as well. What "Original Article" are you referring to?

 

The first couple of response articles, before it degenerated into what we have right now. Call me a realist, but I don't think it was a big coincidence that a lot of dealers and big names were in there.

 

I'm not sure why you say "degenerated", but no matter, you should submit a response. I would not be surprised at all if Scoop published it.

[awe4one]

I'm not sure why you say "degenerated", but no matter, you should submit a response. I would not be surprised at all if Scoop published it.

 

What's the e-mail address? I don't read Scoop, mostly because it seemed to me to be nothing but a "insert hype here" internet rag, and missed the solicitations for comments on restoration/pressing...

 

But then again...I'd probably be termed a "hater" if I did submit an opinion...

 

Jim

[tth2]

I'm not sure why you say "degenerated", but no matter, you should submit a response. I would not be surprised at all if Scoop published it.

 

What's the e-mail address? I don't read Scoop, mostly because it seemed to me to be nothing but a "insert hype here" internet rag, and missed the solicitations for comments on restoration/pressing...

 

But then again...I'd probably be termed a "hater" if I did submit an opinion...

 

Jim

Click on the link in the very first post in this thread, and then follow the links.

[awe4one]

Click on the link in the very first post in this thread, and then follow the links.

 

Thanks!

 

Response sent...

 

Jim

[OldGuy]

....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.

 

 

Don't ya mean 30-50% of guide?

 

I'm missing something here. Are we not saying the same thing?