Scoop Pressing Follow-up

[FlyingDonut]

....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?

 

No. If guide is $10, and you're selling it for 30% below Guide, you're selling it for $7. If guide is $10, and you're selling it for 30% of Guide, you're selling it for $3. 50% of Guide and 50% below Guide are the same.

[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?

 

No. If guide is $10, and you're selling it for 30% below Guide, you're selling it for $7. If guide is $10, and you're selling it for 30% of Guide, you're selling it for $3. 50% of Guide and 50% below Guide are the same.

 

 

Ok, in that case then Aces is correct.

 

 

BTW Bob, I'm still waiting for the flood of links to dealer websites that sell at a loss. That, or you can concede the fact that just because a person sells comics, doesn’t make them a dealer.

[Zonker]

waiting for the flood of links to dealer websites that sell at a loss. That, or you can concede the fact that just because a person sells comics, doesn’t make them a dealer.

 

Reminds me of the old joke whose punchline is:

 

"Lady, we've already established what you are, now we're just haggling over the price!"

[awe4one]

One week left to make your opinion known...and Scoop is apparently posting all responses...

 

Jim Wilkerson

Collector

My opinion on what is restoration? The altering of a comic using a non-native procedure to enhance or improve its structure and/or appearance.

 

This includes Pressing. Doesn't matter if you can't detect it 100% of the time; the rational most commonly used by dealers and CGC to counter the non-restoration argument. Microtrimming can't be detected 100% of the time either but is surely considered restoration nonetheless if CGC's and Tom Brulato's buy back of the Jason Ewert fiasco trimmed copies are any indication. Pressing uses an outside force to "improve" a comic. That is restoration in my book and I suspect would be by the majority of collectors as the extent of pressing becomes known outside a few internet message boards and comic convention corners.

 

The fact that dealers in pressed comics, including those in your first article defending the act, will not fully disclose the fact a comic is indeed pressed without being asked speaks awfully loud about what they think the reaction to disclosure would be. If they have nothing to hide, then the full admission of their pressed comics shouldn't be a problem. But the reverse is common practice...putting the onus on the buyer rather than showing true integrity and revealing the issue fully.

 

Aside from that, Pressing in this hobby is doing much more than just spurring debate though. Some of our hobby's prized Pedigree books are disappearing as dealers crack open previously slabbed comics, press them, and resubmit them to CGC without the prior label to hide its history in the hope of higher grades. There are multiple examples of this over the last two years and it seems with every Heritage Signature auction the number of lost Pedigree copies increase. That is truly a shame as fine examples of our comics heritage are being damaged by greed and deceit all in the hope of the comics reaching their "full potential", using Steve Borock's words in his defense of a Boy Comics #17 being regraded by CGC from a 4.0 to 9.0 on its third resubmit.

 

This Pressing resub game, speculated as being a minor problem two years ago, has reared it's ugly head with a vengeance and no amount of spin by those benefiting from the practice can change the ill effect this restoration procedure is having on this hobby. Or the opinions of those who see it for what it is...

 

Thank you for your time.

 

Jim

[infinite_comics-migration]

It appears that Scoop has bigger balls than CBG!

[tth2]

Good response, Jim. I need to get my act together and send in my response.

[Scheradon]

Good response, Jim. I need to get my act together and send in my response.

 

Yes you do Tim

 

I see mine made in this installment along with a few other familiar names.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/sho...p;vc=1&nt=9

 

I see they are working on Trimming's definition next.

[awe4one]

[i see they are working on Trimming's definition next.

 

Curious isn't it...

 

This whole question on the redefining restoration by Overstreet is curious anyway. Makes you seriously wonder how much of a mistake the omission of the grading definitons in OSPG was in the first place...

 

Jim

[FFB]

It appears that Scoop has bigger balls than CBG!

 

You have to give Gemstone credit. Having realized that they made a mistake with the restoration definition in this year's guide, they are doing their best to learn from their mistake by inviting and publishing commentary from everyone who wants to participate in discussing the hot button issues. I applaud them for doing that.

[esquirecomics]

For the life of me I cannot see how Gemstone can appropriately in good conscience modify the definition of restoration based on the comments they have received.

 

It is quite clear that varying opinions exist on this topic and I did not witness any overwhelming number of comments (much less many substantive comments) that held much merit to justify modification of the definition (unless you want to count "collector" comments from Brulatto or conspiracy insinuations from Lauterbach, and the other dealers who have not surprisingly been tied to pressing books and have personal motivations to change the definition). To date still no one has addressed most of the substantive comments I set forth in my comments, and that includes CGC (which is just another disappointing example that CGC does not know how to handle itself publicly except to avoid making any statements and hope the controversy goes away).

 

I would personally lose a great deal of respect for those at Gemstone/Overstreet if they reversed their own established definition in large part due to what certainly appears to be pressure from those with significant personal financial stakes in the business.

[esquirecomics]

I also want to commend FoolKiller for his submission to Scoop.

 

While I disagreed with some of his comments, it was one of the few submissions that I respected (of those that were somewhat contrary to my views) due to the honesty it conveyed and the recommendations it sugggested for others to follow.

[lou_fine]

Jim;

 

Excellent response here on the controversial issue of pressing! Your response covered a lot of the points which I would have brought up myself.

 

I just wish they would have place your response at the top instead of near the bottom. Some people like me tend to get tired and might give up reading before they get to the end of the article.