Scoop Pressing Follow-up

[rob_react]

No, I haven't judged Stu based solely on his "side" in the grand debate here as I don't really take part in that never-ending war (although the venom and personal attacks he brings to that debate don't exactly speak well for him in my eyes), so whether or not there's "more" to his hatred of CGC isn't the deciding factor in my opinions of the guy (as proof of that I liked MajorKhaos and he was almost Stu's equal in terms of his unbridled animosity towards CGC).

 

Now if you're asking if there's "more than I want to let on" about Darth being an evil, speculating person_having_a_hard_time_understanding_my_point who deserves years and years of insults, obsession, e-stalking and all-around hostility just because he collects price variants and sold some high grade graded moderns, then the the answer is a big, fat "no."

 

The same goes for Flying-Donut and any of the other people Stu has chosen to let his venom fly at just because of a difference of opinion in terms of what's a "worthy" collectible.

 

Then what are you trying to say in regards to his Scoop article? He didn't attack any of those people in his response?

 

I thought his points in the Scoop article were dead on target...

 

Jim

 

Are you actually reading the thread? I'm saying NOTHING about the scoop article or about CGC's business practices or anything even remotely connected to that. I pointed out who he was (it is relevant, no?) and then made a relatively snarky comment about him being a hater which has (surprisingly since I honestly didn't know that anyone actually liked him) led me into a debate about his personality.

 

A debate which I'm giving up on since wasting time typing about this guy as much as I have is teh lame. I just didn't want to get painted into the "well, you just think he's a jerk because you disagree with him about CGC" corner (an easy corner to get painted into around here.)

[awe4one]

Well your "hater" statement sure seemed an attempt to discredit his comments in the Scoop article...why bring it up regardless? And I'd have to say it just not CGC in which he has a problem...he has been more much vocal considering PGX's activities than CGC's...

 

Jim

[drice6900]

Either way, I do appreciate Rob telling us who he was on this board - now I have a better idea of Stu's slant on things.

[joe_collector]

Well your "hater" statement sure seemed an attempt to discredit his comments in the Scoop article...

 

Obviously, and now Robbie's trying to backtrack.

[divad]

Well your "hater" statement sure seemed an attempt to discredit his comments in the Scoop article...

 

Obviously, and now Robbie's trying to backtrack.

 

Nothin' but "haters" on this thread

 

 

 

[drbanner]

Please don't pigeon-hole a true fan of the art-form as a 'hater' simply because they have never joined the 'Cheerleaders for CGC' club.

 

There's a difference between not joining the "Cheerleaders for CGC" club, and starting the "Let's rip CGC a new one every chance we get, and why stop there when there are so many dealers that are obviously only in this hobby for the money...etc...etc..." club. There are collectors in this hobby that love the books, but hate all the institutions out there that support the hobby (like Overstreet, Wizard, CGC, Heritage, etc.,.) that just so happen to make money while doing so. Most collectors wish there were no dealers at all! Of course then, there would be a much smaller selection of books available...

 

The dude's a hater, and his comments here have always been that way so Rob is doing everyone a favor by pointing out the frame of reference from which Stu's comments are coming.

[Aman619]

even a hater gets it right once in a while, if you agree with him, and I agree with what he said. Those were not exacly 'man-on-the-street' random opinions presented.... as Im sure you know. Whether SCOOP solicited specific peoples comments, or CGC contacred them, or some other form of organized comment making, I have no idea, but none of them were impartial, and I am sure SCOOP knew that much.

[drbanner]

even a hater gets it right once in a while, if you agree with him, and I agree with what he said.

 

You agree Brulato is a big-time dealer and not a collector?

 

You agree that Matt Nelson "will not disclose" if a book he's selling has been pressed?

 

Have you read much of the ebay comics board, where he says to go if you "really want to know the opinion of true collectors"?

 

Like Rob's, my comments aren't really on the content of Stu's post (although, ironically, his comments are just as biased as he claims the original Scoop comments are), but are to reinforce Rob's point that someone like that will find fault with whatever actions another party takes if they aren't in agreement with their own - "What I collect is cool, what you collect sucks."

 

There's alway been animosity between collectors and dealers, high-grade collectors and "true collectors" (the majority of the ebay comics board participants aren't looking for NM/high grade books, and for the most part don't spend the kind of money that makes CGC's services worth-while), and just like the disconnect on these boards between CGC's customers (submitters), and CGC's customers customers (collectors buying slabbed books), anyone that doesn't collect like Stu collects is some kind of evil, money-grubbing scum. He's just as bad as the evil, money-grubbing scum are!

[esquirecomics]

Without reference to any particular submission to Scoop, it is always relevant to assess/understand a person's motivation behind a particular statement - if there is one. There does not always have to be.

 

Some people wear their motivations on their sleeves. Others hide them. Others have help disguishing them.

 

I applaud Scoop's publication of all relevant submissions, but I do question some of the omissions of identifying information for some of the submitters.

[shadroch]

Without reference to any particular submission to Scoop, it is always relevant to assess/understand a person's motivation behind a particular statement - if there is one. There does not always have to be.

 

Some people wear their motivations on their sleeves. Others hide them. Others have help disguishing them.

 

I applaud Scoop's publication of all relevant submissions, but I do question some of the omissions of identifying information for some of the submitters. [/q

 

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.

 

Without getting into any particulars,it seems to me,that the pro-pressing forces appear much more organized than the anti crowd. When an article appeared and comments were called for,they seemed to act in concert and in public.Meanwhile the anti-pressing folks limited their responses to this board.

Did anyone from here even respond ,after Scoop directly asked for comments?

[arexcrooke]

Without reference to any particular submission to Scoop, it is always relevant to assess/understand a person's motivation behind a particular statement - if there is one. There does not always have to be.

 

Some people wear their motivations on their sleeves. Others hide them. Others have help disguishing them.

 

I applaud Scoop's publication of all relevant submissions, but I do question some of the omissions of identifying information for some of the submitters. [/q

 

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.

 

Without getting into any particulars,it seems to me,that the pro-pressing forces appear much more organized than the anti crowd. When an article appeared and comments were called for,they seemed to act in concert and in public.Meanwhile the anti-pressing folks limited their responses to this board.

Did anyone from here even respond ,after Scoop directly asked for comments?

Must... learn... to.... use.... quote.... function....

[Aman619]

even a hater gets it right once in a while, if you agree with him, and I agree with what he said.

 

You agree Brulato is a big-time dealer and not a collector?

 

You agree that Matt Nelson "will not disclose" if a book he's selling has been pressed?

 

Have you read much of the ebay comics board, where he says to go if you "really want to know the opinion of true collectors"?

 

Like Rob's, my comments aren't really on the content of Stu's post (although, ironically, his comments are just as biased as he claims the original Scoop comments are), but are to reinforce Rob's point that someone like that will find fault with whatever actions another party takes if they aren't in agreement with their own - "What I collect is cool, what you collect sucks."

 

There's alway been animosity between collectors and dealers, high-grade collectors and "true collectors" (the majority of the ebay comics board participants aren't looking for NM/high grade books, and for the most part don't spend the kind of money that makes CGC's services worth-while), and just like the disconnect on these boards between CGC's customers (submitters), and CGC's customers customers (collectors buying slabbed books), anyone that doesn't collect like Stu collects is some kind of evil, money-grubbing scum. He's just as bad as the evil, money-grubbing scum are!

 

I read his letter once and quickly. And what I gareed with the the tone that it was ridiculous for SCOOP to have just quoted the particular list of "collectors" they did. No I dont agree with everything he said. I spoke hastily in my post. Is Brulato a collector or a dealer? As Bob Storms for an opinion. He deals with that "subtle" distinction all the time and has spoken about it. It can be a tough call, but when you have everything already and buy mostly to package and sell, and rarely find an upgrade anymore to add to your colletcion, well, you end up 'dealing' more than actively 'collecting' anymore, right?

[blazingbob]

Tom Brulato is a "dealer". He was a co-owner of VIA and has bought and sold thousands of books.

 

The only times he's a collector is when he's buying something for his personal collection.

 

He likes making money just like everybody else on this board and you are all dealers to me

 

Just check out the popularity of those forum marketplace threads.

[Red Hook]

[arexcrooke]

The only difference is the volume

[drbanner]

...but when you have everything already and buy mostly to package and sell, and rarely find an upgrade anymore to add to your colletcion, well, you end up 'dealing' more than actively 'collecting' anymore, right?

 

That's certainly true once you get to the end of the tunnel in your collecting goals. 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?), their dealer-hats notwithstanding.

 

As far as Stu, here's a link to his ebay page that gives some insight as to his "hater-ness". This quote pretty much sums up his frame of reference, and why he might not see any value in 3rd-party grading: "I'm a comics reader and am looking for the comics listed below in low, low grade: GOOD, FAIR, and sometimes POOR. Basically I like cheap reading copies..."

[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.

 

[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.

[lou_fine]

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.

[drbanner]

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.