Pressing project results--post here

[lou_fine]

Hi Mushroom, you're quoting from the restoration section of my website, which is a service meant for low grade books. Pressing is a part of the restoration process, but pressing by itself better suits high grade books. Check out the conservation service for more details on that. If I was to disassmble and restore the lower graded books used in the project, they would have certainly graded higher. Hope this clears things up.

 

Hi Matt;

 

Thanks for responding to several of my postings from the weekend.

 

All I can say is that if you ever decide to leave the resto business, you should probably strongly entertain the idea of going into politics with the way you are able to deflect questions and put a positive spin into all of your responses.

 

It seems one of the common points being brought out with your experiment here is that the ideal books were not being presented to you for pressing. As a result, the before and after improvements to most of these books were not that great, and in fact hardly even noticeable in several cases.

 

Your comments above, along with similar comments made by others in this thread, seem to indicate that the benefits of pressing would be most noticeable with high grade books. Based upon some of your work that I have seen, the opposite would appear to be true. For example, the following before and after scans of this Superman book that underwent the pressing process would indicate a massive improvement in grade to me:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the other thread where these scans came from, it was stated that this book underwent your basic pressing process for only your minimal fee for a book in this value range. From my point of view, the above scans indicate that a simple pressing job can do amazing wonders for an extremely low grade book. I am not sure why people were turning in books that would barely see a noticeable improvement from your pressing when they should have been turning in these low grade beaters.

 

Can you confirm for us that the above book was done using your most basic press job for the minimal fee only, as others have claimed, and would have still garnered a blue label by CGC after it was all said and done.

 

Thanks again, Matt!

 

P.S. Amazingly beautiful job BTW!!!

[Comicdey]

I do feel, given my well-established and I think articulated view, that since pressing is restoration it must be disclosed. So, yes, I do feel that your conduct to knowingly sell books yourself that you know for a fact to be pressed is a bad practice and, quite candidly, unethical. It could also be argued as being fraudulent (though that legal case has yet to be presented of course).

 

 

You know Mark, I'm willing so swim through your long-winded responses and even try to reply to them, but when I read something like this, it infuriates me. Are you insinuating that you would consider suing me over my practices in the future? Tell me straight up before I go any further.

 

 

This thread is no where near as enjoyable to read as I would have hoped. It's really too bad, that I couldn't learn something about the process through visual observation of the books that were pressed. All of these litigious comments regarding ethical responsibility to the masses of collectors flys in the face of the enjoyment of the hobby for me.

 

I'm having three books pressed in the experiment, they will all be very apparent, as two will be "restored" upon completion by CGC's definition. One will not, even though I fully believe that pressing in the form of this experiment is restoration. No I do not believe that folding a corner back, or placing my comics under a book is restoration, but I do believe the mechanical processes that professional "conservationist/restorers" perform is. With that said, I have no problem with it. So, when this diatribe is all said and done, could we please have a thread with just the images before, after, and then some commentarty inserted with the images explaining the results.

 

I know this is a pipe dream, but hey, I collect funny books as a hobby. It's not up to me to decide if a pressed 9.8 bronze age book is worth more than a raw 9.8, or an encapsulated unpressed 9.8. Disclosure would be great, if practical, but we are the keeper of these books for what 1-5-10-20 years each depending on if we are collecting, dealing, flipping etc. The only way I can see at this point how to verify that pressing is fully disclosed over the next generation is to place a stamp on the books (Scarlet Letter P) that can be seen under a black light. Then we can all sleep well at night. Luckily I live in Alaska, so I can use a black light 24/7 during the winter. I will be diligent.

 

Now if I could only have that 1/2 hour back.

[esquirecomics]

Good luck to your group in trying to force the affirmative duty down dealers' throats through endless bloviating, chest pounding, and internet-chat-board-intimidation. There's nothing like a hurricane of churlish wind-baggery to make someone change his mind.

 

Absent the more vocal participants in this debate displaying any willingness to understand the other side of the debate or to compromise in any way, I have a feeling that in a few years' time, this is going to wind up being not much more than what it is now -- a few shrill collectors who waste their time typing post after post while hoping for a change in human nature, and growing increasingly disenchanted with the hobby along the way.

 

What's your basis for these derrogatory accusations Scott? Quite frankly, IMHO, you always seem to revert to this position at some point. Nice terms. You are far better than I am with descriptive words to be sure. "Bloviating". "Chest pounding". "Intimidation". "Churlish wind-baggery". Very professional argument.

 

"Willingness to understand"? "Compromise"?

 

Let me ask you something, and I am not inferring your post was directed at me, but that is irrelevant.

 

Nevertheless, do you believe my very direct questions to Matt above constituted "intimidation" in any way? Where they fair or unfair questions? Inappropriate or appropriate?

 

Do you believe Matt substantively answered them?

 

What is the other side of the debate to which you refer?

 

I presume the compromise is the equivalent of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, although for pressing I suppose it would be more aptly termed "ask, tell".

 

Thanks Mark. I will spare you MHO about the position you typically revert to in these and all discussions.

 

As for your questions, I don't answer to you and I don't have the energy to respond to eight questions here and what I am sure will be 20 questions in the next post - along with the standard refrains of "you dodged my question," "you lack professionalism in your argument," and "my code of ethics and integrity, etc."

 

You crack me up sometimes counselor!

 

I seem to recall you recently asserting I had not responded to a specific question and I therefore did, but I guess I do answer to you. If I get Elizabeth to ask the above questions, will you answer? Surely you answer to her!

 

When you find the energy to answer, please do. When you do answer substantively none of those alleged standard refrains will likely be seen, even if I disagree with your answers.

[esquirecomics]

First item - Darth could you Thumbnail or reduce the scans I hate having to scroll righ twhen Scott is telling me to

 

Second Item - Liz he's using the big words again and worse this time ethnocentric ones at that. I had a general idea what "bloviate" meant, but I have to admit to looking it up.

 

This word is almost entirely restricted to the United States; it doesn’t appear in any of my British English dictionaries, not even the big Oxford English Dictionary or the very recent New Oxford Dictionary of English. Yet it has a long history.

 

It’s most closely associated with U S President Warren Gamaliel Harding, who used it a lot and who was by all accounts the classic example of somebody who orates verbosely and windily. It’s a compound of blow, in its sense of “to boast” (also in another typical Americanism, blowhard), with a mock-Latin ending to give it the self-important stature that’s implicit in its meaning.

 

You made me check two dictionaries before resorting to the internet Needless to say I expect the real cheese next time with the Spinach Crepe's

 

Ok, now to your points. I do understand the arguments on the other side of the debate - I admit to find them wanting, but I understand them nevertheless. But when they allow for a practice such as a top professional restorer to offer books he's restored for sale in public auction without disclosure, I have to question their basis.

 

Scott, I believe that you and I agree that pressing is restoration. I know we have a difference of opinion on the pragmatic appeal and implications of it (probably less than you think) I was pretty early to chime in that I believe work on the level displayed by Matt to be non-damaging to the comic at the time of application. I also consider it to be the most minute form of restoration possible. I have always been in favour adopting a restoration scoring system based on Matt Nelson's formula - in fact some of my earliest posts here were kudos to him for coming up with a more standardized classification system.

 

It might be that the "if asked" option is the only workable olive branch in the future, I honestly don't know. All I have tried to do is point out inconsistencies and out right hypocrisy that I have witnessed in this discussion - I know a Kansas City Suffle when I see one. I will argue for a resotration definition that strives to be the utmost in transparency and is inclusive rather than narrowly defined to cater to financial incentives.

 

As always I respect your opinion and understand the pragmatic stance you have taken in this discussion.

 

And for that last kind comment, you'll get the real cheese in the next batch of crepes!

 

On a more serious note, I agree with most of what you said, especially in terms of professional pressing being a very mild and non-harmful form of restoration, not conservation, not preservation (unless you're pressing a badly creased and wrinkled book so that it doesn't catch an edge every time you put it back into the mylar -- maybe then it's conservation AND restoration).

 

Where I disagree (aside from the affirmative-disclosure vs. disclosure-when-asked issue, and my opinion on that is purely based on pragmatism and my wanting to see real progress made instead of years and years of bitter arguments over a standard that I think most dealers won't agree to) is in your characterization of Matt's responses to questions. I think he's done a pretty good job of trying to respond. No one answers every question perfectly in a format like this (it ain't a deposition for Chrissakes), and especially not when certain questions are asked in an extremely loaded manner by people (such as yourself ) who are not really interested in an answer so much as they are interested in trying to trip him up. So cut him some slack if he misses a question here and there and if you have to re-ask it, or if he gets a little defensive, as most of us would under the circumstances. This thread is supposed to be a "post your pressing results" thread anyway, not a "jump in with your questions about Matt's ethics, and jump on Matt if you disagree with the answers he gives" thread. This thread started out as a very civil, informative discussion and it turned a bit ugly (unnecessarily) in the last couple of pages. Let's get back to the posting of results and a discussion of what could and could not be fixed. We can discuss the ethics of it all in any number of the other 50 pressing threads around here.

 

I believe the first real instance of name-calling came in your post Scott. Before that I saw a friendly discussion that at worst contained comments like "you are avoiding the question". There was nothing "ugly".

 

Perhaps Matt should hire you to respond for him so he doesn't feel he is being tripped up, although I would think Matt can fend for himself.

[esquirecomics]

I do feel, given my well-established and I think articulated view, that since pressing is restoration it must be disclosed. So, yes, I do feel that your conduct to knowingly sell books yourself that you know for a fact to be pressed is a bad practice and, quite candidly, unethical. It could also be argued as being fraudulent (though that legal case has yet to be presented of course).

 

 

You know Mark, I'm willing so swim through your long-winded responses and even try to reply to them, but when I read something like this, it infuriates me. Are you insinuating that you would consider suing me over my practices in the future? Tell me straight up before I go any further.

 

Again with the deflecting insults Matt. I answered your questions directly and candidly. You specifically asked for my opinion. I am sorry that you are threatened or unhappy with it.

 

I've not written anything different here than said a thousand times elsewhere on these boards and in conversation, though no reason why you would necessarily know that as I will not assume you have read all the relevant threads.

 

Numerous lawyers who post on these boards have indicated there are sound legal arguments to be made surrounding the non-disclosure of pressing under certain factual circumstances. This will vary from state to state depending on the law in a particular jurisdiction. FFB posted an anlysis under CA law just yesterday in another pressing thread. Foolkiller gave it the . I believe tth2 also chimed in, or at least he has in prior discussions of the topic.

 

Am I considering suing you? No.

 

Have I been asked to investigate your practices? No.

 

Am I trying to bait you into incriminating yourself? No.

 

Am I looking to for some honest, straightforward answers from an expert in the field to my legitimate, non-attacking questions, particularly after I have answered yours in an honest and candid manner? Yes.

[FFB]

I do feel, given my well-established and I think articulated view, that since pressing is restoration it must be disclosed. So, yes, I do feel that your conduct to knowingly sell books yourself that you know for a fact to be pressed is a bad practice and, quite candidly, unethical. It could also be argued as being fraudulent (though that legal case has yet to be presented of course).

 

 

You know Mark, I'm willing so swim through your long-winded responses and even try to reply to them, but when I read something like this, it infuriates me. Are you insinuating that you would consider suing me over my practices in the future? Tell me straight up before I go any further.

 

Again with the deflecting insults Matt. I answered your questions directly and candidly. You specifically asked for my opinion. I am sorry that you are threatened or unhappy with it.

 

I've not written anything different here than said a thousand times elsewhere on these boards and in conversation, though no reason why you would necessarily know that as I will not assume you have read all the relevant threads.

 

Numerous lawyers who post on these boards have indicated there are sound legal arguments to be made surrounding the non-disclosure of pressing under certain factual circumstances. This will vary from state to state depending on the law in a particular jurisdiction. FFB posted an anlysis under CA law just yesterday in another pressing thread. Foolkiller gave it the . I believe tth2 also chimed in, or at least he has in prior discussions of the topic.

 

Am I considering suing you? No.

 

Have I been asked to investigate your practices? No.

 

Am I trying to bait you into incriminating yourself? No.

 

Am I looking to for some honest, straightforward answers from an expert in the field to my legitimate, non-attacking questions, particularly after I have answered yours in an honest and candid manner? Yes.

 

I believe what I said was, if a dealer lies about pressing after being asked if a specific book is pressed, the buyer would probably be able to rescind the transaction but would probably have a tough time proving damages, since the limited evidence we have seems to indicate that pressed books don't sell for less money. If the buyer does not ask about pressing, I do not think he would have a strong case. There is no clear industry standard surrounding disclosure of NDP-style pressing, unlike trimming, where there is a clear industry standard requiring affirmative disclosure.

[FFB]

I believe the first real instance of name-calling came in your post Scott. Before that I saw a friendly discussion that at worst contained comments like "you are avoiding the question". There was nothing "ugly".

 

Perhaps Matt should hire you to respond for him so he doesn't feel he is being tripped up, although I would think Matt can fend for himself.

 

I didn't call anyone names. I described your conduct and the conduct of others as I saw it. And there was nothing friendly about the discussion that was going on before then, unless you think accusing someone of being evasive, disingenuous, and unethical is a "friendly" thing to do.

[esquirecomics]

I believe the first real instance of name-calling came in your post Scott. Before that I saw a friendly discussion that at worst contained comments like "you are avoiding the question". There was nothing "ugly".

 

Perhaps Matt should hire you to respond for him so he doesn't feel he is being tripped up, although I would think Matt can fend for himself.

 

I didn't call anyone names. I described your conduct and the conduct of others as I saw it. And there was nothing friendly about the discussion that was going on before then, unless you think accusing someone of being evasive, disingenuous, and unethical is a "friendly" thing to do.

 

I never accused anyone of being disingenuous.

[Aman619]

I respect what you do for a living, and your accomplishments are something to be admired. But using the same approach in this field that you do on the job is not the way to go about getting what you want. It takes years of education, hard work, networking, creativity, a little luck, and above all, a positive vibe. Pounding people's heads into a wall day after day will not get you where you want to go. It will make you a few fast friends, but not the kind that will stick around for the long haul.

 

I just have to add, in the same vein of my earlier responses, that we shall see how many of your 'friends' will stick around should the pendulum reverse, and your special niche talent makes you a pariah. We'll see how all your networking, creativity, luck, and oh yeah, a positive vibe when people no longer return your phone calls and destroy your emails.

 

Theres something so inherently phony and wrong about improving books and selling them as untouched...

[Aman619]

And the reason there is still all this controversy is because of a very small number of individuals who continue to propagate their agenda. I'm not saying it's bad to have an agenda. But this whole thing must be put into perspective.

 

Matt, what agenda do you think is at work that has propagated this controversy? Honestly, I would like to know as I have difficulty grasping what it could be for the vast majority of us.

 

I certainly believe that most of those, such as you, who speak in favor of pressing have an agenda. Some hide it. Others don't. For you it is both obvious and understandable. This directly impacts your business (more so than the random dealer), though frankly I strongly disagree with some of your arguments and feel you would do far better with your business to simply be more upfront and declare pressing for what it is (and for what I honestly believe you know it is), disclose the books you pressed when you personally sell them and join forces to destigmatize the negative view of restoration.

 

With all due respect, I don't think you have a strong enough grasp on the mechanics of the restored comic market, slabbing, high end books, or pressing to assume my business would do better by taking your side. Business is doing just fine as it is. I really believe that what you're pushing would do much more harm to the hobby than what you believe undisclosed pressing will cause. This is not a defensive remark on my part--it's something that has been heavily discussed among many people who are very active in comics, and know the market inside and out.

 

That being said, let me appeal to you to stop the hard line you take in this hobby, and focus on becoming the honest dealer that you want to be. It's impossible to succeed by doing both. I know, because it's been attempted before, and met with failure. It's fine to have strong beliefs in something, but it's always better to conduct yourself with subtlety and a positive attitude.

 

I respect what you do for a living, and your accomplishments are something to be admired. But using the same approach in this field that you do on the job is not the way to go about getting what you want. It takes years of education, hard work, networking, creativity, a little luck, and above all, a positive vibe. Pounding people's heads into a wall day after day will not get you where you want to go. It will make you a few fast friends, but not the kind that will stick around for the long haul.

 

If I read this response correctly - and I'd like to think that I did, its an appeal to acquiescence. Basically real world business practises and transparent efficacy have no place in the comics, especially at the upper echelon. Any effort to enact them on the existing cabal will meet with firm resistance and the bearer will face being ostracized - I again find it ironic how Matt attributes being an 'honest dealer' as being mutually exclusive of the transparency and accountability that Mark Zaid is trying to push in the comics industry.

 

Essential this plea amounts to informing Zaid that he will need to capitulate to the existing status quo and get a "little dirt on him" before he can affect change from the inside. I'm tempted to quote Darth Vader here, however there is no need as Matt took care of that for me, with this morally bereft beauty.

 

It's fine to have strong beliefs in something, but it's always better to conduct yourself with subtlety and a positive attitude.

 

Translation: Ethics have zero place in comicdom, its better to subtly over everybody with a smile on your face and purport your undying love of comics.

 

oooh, you said it better, and first! nice!

[FFB]

I believe the first real instance of name-calling came in your post Scott. Before that I saw a friendly discussion that at worst contained comments like "you are avoiding the question". There was nothing "ugly".

 

Perhaps Matt should hire you to respond for him so he doesn't feel he is being tripped up, although I would think Matt can fend for himself.

 

I didn't call anyone names. I described your conduct and the conduct of others as I saw it. And there was nothing friendly about the discussion that was going on before then, unless you think accusing someone of being evasive, disingenuous, and unethical is a "friendly" thing to do.

 

I never accused anyone of being disingenuous.

 

You may not have used the actual word "disingenuous," but that is essentially what you (and others) have accused him of being.

[esquirecomics]

I believe the first real instance of name-calling came in your post Scott. Before that I saw a friendly discussion that at worst contained comments like "you are avoiding the question". There was nothing "ugly".

 

Perhaps Matt should hire you to respond for him so he doesn't feel he is being tripped up, although I would think Matt can fend for himself.

 

I didn't call anyone names. I described your conduct and the conduct of others as I saw it. And there was nothing friendly about the discussion that was going on before then, unless you think accusing someone of being evasive, disingenuous, and unethical is a "friendly" thing to do.

 

I never accused anyone of being disingenuous.

 

You may not have used the actual word "disingenuous," but that is essentially what you (and others) have accused him of being.

 

I've attempted to engage Matt in a very substantive, professional discussion regarding his area of expertise. Sorry you don't see it that way.

 

And sorry to see you don't feel the need to comment on how Matt's response to me was, as others have noted, somewhat insulting and derriding. Fortunately I am very adept at defending myself, although frankly I just want substantive responses to my very legitimate, non-threatening questions.

[Davenport]

 

You may not have used the actual word "disingenuous," but that is essentially what you (and others) have accused him of being.

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/disingenuous.html

dis·in·gen·u·ous

adjective

Definition:

1. withholding information: withholding or not taking account of known information

 

 

In a sentence: The disingenuous policy of "only tell if asked" benefits retailers of altered goods.

 

No?

[FFB]

 

You may not have used the actual word "disingenuous," but that is essentially what you (and others) have accused him of being.

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/disingenuous.html

dis·in·gen·u·ous

adjective

Definition:

1. withholding information: withholding or not taking account of known information

 

 

In a sentence: The disingenuous policy of "only tell if asked" benefits retailers of altered goods.

 

No?

 

Like I've said what seems like a thousand times -- the solution needs to be one that dealers en masse are likely to agree to, otherwise you've accomplished nothing other than further polarizing collectors and dealers. The disclose-truthfully-when-asked policy allows those who care about pressing to get the information that is important to them, and is likely to achieve widespread compliance by dealers. As people in the collecting public are further educated about what pressing is and isn't, each collector can make up his own mind about whether he or she cares about pressing, and if he cares about it, he can get the information.

[esquirecomics]

 

You may not have used the actual word "disingenuous," but that is essentially what you (and others) have accused him of being.

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/disingenuous.html

dis·in·gen·u·ous

adjective

Definition:

1. withholding information: withholding or not taking account of known information

 

 

In a sentence: The disingenuous policy of "only tell if asked" benefits retailers of altered goods.

 

No?

 

I think of disingenuous as being when someone intentionally neglects or avoids known information when making their point.

 

"Pressing is not restoration because CGC says it is not."

 

That is, IMHO, disengenuous because it purposefully avoids the known fact that Overstreet, Cicconi, Hecht, and all known professional organizations consider pressing restoration. It is an argument to be sure, but intentionally incomplete.

[Ze-man]

 

You may not have used the actual word "disingenuous," but that is essentially what you (and others) have accused him of being.

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/disingenuous.html

dis·in·gen·u·ous

adjective

Definition:

1. withholding information: withholding or not taking account of known information

 

 

In a sentence: The disingenuous policy of "only tell if asked" benefits retailers of altered goods.

 

No?

 

Like I've said what seems like a thousand times -- the solution needs to be one that dealers en masse are likely to agree to, otherwise you've accomplished nothing other than further polarizing collectors and dealers. The disclose-truthfully-when-asked policy allows those who care about pressing to get the information that is important to them, and is likely to achieve widespread compliance by dealers. As people in the collecting public are further educated about what pressing is and isn't, each collector can make up his own mind about whether he or she cares about pressing, and if he cares about it, he can get the information.

 

Scott, I can understand and appreciate the direction you have chosen to take. But it baffles me as a lawyer who's profession relies heavily on the written word that Matts very eloquent tapdance around the various issues does not raise your dander a wee bit. Perhaps because you have a working relationship with him you view this differently then I.

En masse solutions are one thing. Trying to get people to change one person at a time is more likely the way to get there if you ask me.Similar to lobbying for votes in Congress.

If Matt was to be a true to form leader he would change the way he lists his books, openly discloses what was done to each book then whatever stigma surrounds pressing will be all the less stigmacticy(did I just make up a word?) And let the chips fall by as they may. Thinking of oneself first is not how I define a leader in ones field.

 

Its a pickle to be sure.

 

Ze-

[Aman619]

Matt is on what he feels is a winning team right now. Not entirely 'okay' or 'legit' or 'ethically pure'. perhaps, but running within the pack 'runnin' things'. And an important member of that team, too. He makes the magic happen..

 

But perhaps things are so good right now he fails to take the long view. I think its wrong, so I dont get my books "improved". and plenty of them could use it to catch up! But in the long run, if Matt et al are right, I can always get the work done. But if this 'sweet spot' of silent collusion gets exposed etc. or collector interest goes the other way (as it did in the 90s) collections will be devalued and reputations will be ruined... I wonder who will send books to Matt then?

 

It wont matter so much if CGC cant spot the pressing if the books can be traced back to the presser.

[Davenport]

 

Like I've said what seems like a thousand times -- the solution needs to be one that dealers en masse are likely to agree to, otherwise you've accomplished nothing other than further polarizing collectors and dealers.

Well, say it again.

 

I understand what you're saying.

 

[esquirecomics]

Let me be clear, at least from my own perspective, so no one gets the wrong impression.

 

I, and I think most of those involved in this discussion, are not looking to harm Matt's business in the slightest. I have no objection to pressing in the same vein I have no objection to any form of restoration.

 

I hope Matt can become a millionaire doing what he does. But I don't agree with the manner in which he currently does it (and so what, I am critical of how much the price of gas is yet the oil companies keep profiting and I don't like some USGOV policies either. I don't just complain, I act to effect change), and I've said repeatedly I would be happy to collaborate in an effort to destigmatize the negatives surrounding restoration (which includes pressing).

 

Of course, I need to better understand his publicly stated views and I don't at this stage because my questions for elaboration of his views remain unanswered.

[Aman619]

I dont wish harm either, but should things catch up with him/them, well.... you reap what you sew.