Legitimate Non-Threatening Questions Posed To Matt Nelson

[Forbush-Man]

Watch out guys, you're going to be called my foot soldiers!

I'm my own man.

Just stay in your trench until it's time to move out.

 

I'll tell you when you can be your "own man."

 

 

You're just mad cause I left the seat up back at the latrine.

 

Do you really have to tell the whole world?!?

[esquirecomics]

Watch out guys, you're going to be called my foot soldiers!

 

I don't really mind what they want to call me. Of course, we are all "anti-pressers" too which is not accurate.

 

Labels won't alter my views on this topic or silence me.

 

I comment in these threads because I have an interest, I care about the topic. What I don't get is why so many who don't care will argue so vociferously to the contrary. What's in it for them? If someone truly doesn't care, then why the strong retorts? Perhaps, secretly, they do care. They are concerned if disclosure of pressed books becomes the moral standard. They are concerned if their collection risks becomming tainted. They are concerned if their collections risks loosing value.

 

I'm not really sure, but what I would like from those who only like to chime in to tell everyone they "don't care" or are "sick of these threads" to add the real reason they are here posting and taking the time to get involved (even if they add no real substance to their post).

 

I don't want anyone to take this wrong, as there are those who are of opposing views that do add substance to their posts, but there have been plenty who have come on here and made it clear they are not interested in the topic.

 

I'm just curious why they bother

 

Oh you are so going to get attacked by the very people you want to answer your question. And they probably won't answer it while they slap you about.

 

But ...

[batman_fan]

My opinion, will pressing go away with all these effort? It is simple to figure it out, will there continue to be potential profit in pressing?

 

Answer: as long as there is money to be made, pressing will continue, bottom line and there is potentially a LOT of money to be made.

 

If someone is known to be a presser, there are tons of venues to sell so know one knows who you are (i.e Ebay, CLINK, Pedegree, Heritage, Hakes, ...) These forums are perfect for laundaring pressed books if someone wanted to. Undisclosed restoration was pretty popular before CGC (one of the positive aspects of CGC), so now to turn a profit, dealers are turning to other methods (micro trimming, pressing, reattaching centerforlds, etc) to make some extra cash. I do not personally like to pay a premium for pressed books, but I have a few books which were pressed when I had them restored. I have also purchased some pressed books (but only because it was not disclosed). I still find myself asking what I would do if I decided to sell off some of my collection, would I selectively press those I thought would benefit the most before having them graded? I guess I will wait until I see how my books grade out that I sent off to CGC a few weeks back.

 

Mark, I commend you for your efforts in getting this issue clearly defined and pushing for disclosure, but I am afraid your efforts won't pay off, but good luck!

[esquirecomics]

My opinion, will pressing go away with all these effort? It is simple to figure it out, will there continue to be potential profit in pressing?

 

Answer: as long as there is money to be made, pressing will continue, bottom line and there is potentially a LOT of money to be made.

 

If someone is known to be a presser, there are tons of venues to sell so know one knows who you are (i.e Ebay, CLINK, Pedegree, Heritage, Hakes, ...) These forums are perfect for laundaring pressed books if someone wanted to. Undisclosed restoration was pretty popular before CGC (one of the positive aspects of CGC), so now to turn a profit, dealers are turning to other methods (micro trimming, pressing, reattaching centerforlds, etc) to make some extra cash. I do not personally like to pay a premium for pressed books, but I have a few books which were pressed when I had them restored. I have also purchased some pressed books (but only because it was not disclosed). I still find myself asking what I would do if I decided to sell off some of my collection, would I selectively press those I thought would benefit the most before having them graded? I guess I will wait until I see how my books grade out that I sent off to CGC a few weeks back.

 

Mark, I commend you for your efforts in getting this issue clearly defined and pushing for disclosure, but I am afraid your efforts won't pay off, but good luck!

 

You may be right, but that's never stopped me, nor should it stop anyone, from trying and adhering to one's principles.

 

I still say to everyone not to underestimate the power of dissemination one can achieve of a particular view(s) in today's Internet society. Just look at these boards for example, and how many e-bay sellers have been identified as being of concern (I am not making any comparisons here between restorers and fraudulent e-bayers). At least now those on these boards know who to possibly avoid and for what reason, and the word spreads. Do the ebayers still sell online? They might. But they have fewer customers and eventually enough people complain to ebay and perhaps they are removed.

 

In any event, time will tell where this struggle will lead.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Thank you for answering for him. I forgot about the several foot soldiers of his on these boards.

 

I'm nobody's 'foot soldier', knob-head. I don't remember insulting you (until now), so you can keep your sh!te to yourself.

 

And if it bores you, don't click on the friggin' thread.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Nick -- getting answers is important -- but let's be honest, pressing isn't as problematic an issue as trimming etc.

 

Not going to argue that point, Brian, but to me, it's all part of the same disease...the deliberate manipulation of collectibles to improve their appearence in order to maximise profits.

 

Which, if we're still looking for a clear definition of restoration, seems to work quite well...

[Red Hook]

Besides, we have the time and energy to cover all aspects of restoration. Right, Nick?

[Flaming_Telepath]

Besides, we have the time and energy to cover all aspects of restoration. Right, Nick?

 

 

Not sure as to the direction of your sarcasm there, Brad. I suspect I should be pissed off....

[Red Hook]

Ease up mate. You shouldn't be insulted.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Ease up mate. You shouldn't be insulted.

 

[Foolkiller]

Besides, we have the time and energy to cover all aspects of restoration. Right, Nick?

 

I have to treat you and Nick a little differently here -- so let me ask you guys, what is your personal hope about the disclosure of pressing -- I understand you believe it's restoration -- but is intentional manipulation of a book always the wrong thing (even though I concede that it is all about the money)?

 

And I guess my broken record point is that if it doesn't damage the book, and the alteration is that slight (let's say again, for the sake of argument I accept that pressing is restoration) then what is the terrible thing about the non disclosure.

[gpanalysis]

I have to treat you and Nick a little differently here -- so let me ask you guys, what is your personal hope about the disclosure of pressing -- I understand you believe it's restoration -- but is intentional manipulation of a book always the wrong thing (even though I concede that it is all about the money)?

 

And I guess my broken record point is that if it doesn't damage the book, and the alteration is that slight (let's say again, for the sake of argument I accept that pressing is restoration) then what is the terrible thing about the non disclosure.

 

Hi Brian - if you don't want to know whether a book has been pressed it is certainly your right. There may even be other information that you may or may not want to know about books you are collecting. That is absolutely and perfectly understandable.

 

What I am not sure about though is why it is somehow illegitimate (my word in generalizing the "no need for disclosure" side, I'm sure you haven't described the pro-disclosure side's call as this) for those wanting to know as much information about each and every book they collect, in fact pay for. Whether you believe that pressing (or anything else) has a detrimental effect on a book is irrelevant - (Please do NOT read anything I say as a personal attack - I am just discussing the issue of information).

 

As an ex-molecular biologist, I know that information, even that "discovered" during the process of what appears a well-balanced experiment, is value-laden by that day's beliefs, knowledge, technology, the way data and information is analyzed, and to some extent even the cultural and political context the experiment is undertaken. "Fact" is not something that is set in concrete but completely fluid. For example, the ancient Greeks believed there were only four elements - fire, earth, air and water. During that time this was a "fact". Although we can laugh today, at the time there was no further means of discovery, interrogation or analysis that would allow them to know any more about the elements than what they could see. I may be drawing a long bow, but likewise with comics, I would want to know as much as possible about the history of a book, who owned it, how it came to be sold and re-sold, when it was graded (and possibly re-graded), if it was ever pressed, etc etc. What we may feel is irrelevant today (i.e. pressing) may have some relevance in the future - and I certainly don't mean that in a negative connotation - what if pressed books in the future are found to have some positive result on the structure of the book? Anything is possible and I take the position that no information is ever useless or irrelevant – maybe today, but maybe not tomorrow.

 

In my opinion, any and all information is good - it's how we interpret it, now and in the future that may pose dilemmas when having to disclose it.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Besides, we have the time and energy to cover all aspects of restoration. Right, Nick?

 

I have to treat you and Nick a little differently here -- so let me ask you guys, what is your personal hope about the disclosure of pressing -- I understand you believe it's restoration -- but is intentional manipulation of a book always the wrong thing (even though I concede that it is all about the money)?

 

And I guess my broken record point is that if it doesn't damage the book, and the alteration is that slight (let's say again, for the sake of argument I accept that pressing is restoration) then what is the terrible thing about the non disclosure.

 

I think my concern relates to what the future might hold. I fully intend to hold onto my books for a good long time and the possibility of reversion (even if it is only a slight possibility) concerns me. So does the long-term health of the paper and inks which, I think even Matt conceded, he could not guarantee for the simple fact that he hadn't got any books in his possession that he pressed 20 years ago.

 

Remember smoking being good for you?

 

I no longer buy books from people who are known pressers, as they fail to disclose which books have been worked on and which haven't. I now work on the basis that they are ALL pressed, which is a shame. I've bought from Matt in the past (in some numbers), but will not do so again until he discloses without being asked. And he's got some lovely books I would certainly be interested in, but until he plays the game above board, he joins Heritage, CLink, Schmell, Lauterbach and a few others on my 'sellers to avoid' list.

 

Sad, really.

[Red Hook]

Besides, we have the time and energy to cover all aspects of restoration. Right, Nick?

 

I have to treat you and Nick a little differently here -- so let me ask you guys, what is your personal hope about the disclosure of pressing -- I understand you believe it's restoration -- but is intentional manipulation of a book always the wrong thing (even though I concede that it is all about the money)?

 

And I guess my broken record point is that if it doesn't damage the book, and the alteration is that slight (let's say again, for the sake of argument I accept that pressing is restoration) then what is the terrible thing about the non disclosure.

 

Hi Brian.

 

I'll rehash my main issues as concisely as possible:

 

- I do consider pressing to be restoration, although there are many levels/degrees of it. The spot pressing Matt has done in his examples are pretty slight, but if it's not restoration, what is it? Conservation?

 

- I acknowledge that there are disagreements about pressing. Aside from you, most of the arguments I've heard supporting pressing come from people that directly or indirectly are making money from the practice. I haven't heard too many pure collectors come out in favor of pressing. That's pretty telling.

 

- I never expected that pressing would be stopped. What I continue to seek is a heightened level of awareness on the part of the consumer that the practice exists, that it can potentially raise the grade of a book (along with the price), and that in conjunction with crack-and-resub, can place before the buyer a product that has a backstory that should be made available.

 

- If someone has no problem with pressed books, then they have my blessing to add as many of them to their collections as possible.

 

- As seen in the Ewert situation....where greed is the mother of invention, there is the large risk that higher levels and more sophisticated types of manipulation will be employed as the lesser ones are accepted. So I choose to adapt a zero-tolerance definition of restoration (reasonable), as a way of drawing a line in the sand and making sellers accountable. I don't want to have a debate in five years about micro-trimming, or see a restoration expert doing a demo on MT on the boards here and explaining how it doesn't do any damage to the book...just makes them look prettier.

 

- The buyer is always at a disadavantage. Information always benefits the buyer. Lack of information benefits the seller. I believe the buyer has the right to as much information about a book as is available. Otherwise it's not an honest transaction.

 

- The fact that this discussion continues is proof that it's still a hot topic. A lot of progress has been made. Imagine if, two years ago, when Ewert denied he had his auction books pressed, Matt had come on with his demo at that time. It would have blown minds. Two years later, we realize that pressing is SOP for many individuals.

 

- I have a descending order of goals. Near the top of my list is making the general buying public aware that the practice exists. There's been a lot of progress made there. I'm happy to let the market decide if pressed books should be penalized price-wise. I tend to think that there would be some buyers that would pass on (or negotiate more realistic prices for) resubbed pressed books, but I wouldn't lose any sleep if many buyers didn't alter their buying habits regarding pressed books.

 

- In the end it's about the right to make an informed personal choice. I'm very happy with the progress and the ongoing discussions. I disagree with Matt on certain points but it's really good that he came on and is adding fact to the discussions.

 

- And finally, from a personal perspective, when it comes to ephemera like comics, I believe a very conservative non-impact approach is the best.

 

• I respect the fact that these fragile books got here in their present conditions over the course of 40-50-60 years.

 

• I respect that they are what they are.

 

• They have character.

 

• And stop a moment and think about this.....If a book happens to arrive in the year 2006 in vf or better shape all on it's own, through the chance and happenstance of decades......it's something to marvel at. It takes the special-ness of naturally highgrade books away, when they are made more common by the artificial manipulations of profit-seekers who care more about the money than the books themselves.

 

Brad

[Flaming_Telepath]

• And stop a moment and think about this.....If a book happens to arrive in the year 2006 in vf or better shape all on it's own, through the chance and happenstance of decades......it's something to marvel at. It takes the special-ness of naturally highgrade books away, when they are made more common by the artificial manipulations of profit-seekers who care more about the money than the books themselves.

 

Brad

 

I wish I'd have written that....

 

[Aman619]

...and that is the core (always has been) of the value of one comic over another. You are NOT ALLOWED to tampr with the natural or man-made deterioration of a comic, to turn back the clock and reverse any damages suffered. that has ALWAYS been considered RESTORATION and subsequently shunned by collectors.

 

duh. I just thought we collectors were all on the same page about this, so i scratch my head when I read nuanced posts basically giving pressing a pass ("Its a minor form of resto that doesnt ADD anything, blah blah blah..).

 

 

WAKE UP. Lets work together to STOP it, not learn to live with it. Lets work to shove this shady secret practice back deeper into its cave, rather than foster MORE of it. Lets NOT throw up our hands and "deal with it." or take an "If you cant beat em, join em" mentality.

 

okay. Im done.

[OldGuy]

I think he has an e-mail address.......

 

Or are all of you asking Matt questions not really interested in his answers?

[FFB]

I have to treat you and Nick a little differently here -- so let me ask you guys, what is your personal hope about the disclosure of pressing -- I understand you believe it's restoration -- but is intentional manipulation of a book always the wrong thing (even though I concede that it is all about the money)?

 

And I guess my broken record point is that if it doesn't damage the book, and the alteration is that slight (let's say again, for the sake of argument I accept that pressing is restoration) then what is the terrible thing about the non disclosure.

 

Hi Brian - if you don't want to know whether a book has been pressed it is certainly your right. There may even be other information that you may or may not want to know about books you are collecting. That is absolutely and perfectly understandable.

 

What I am not sure about though is why it is somehow illegitimate (my word in generalizing the "no need for disclosure" side, I'm sure you haven't described the pro-disclosure side's call as this) for those wanting to know as much information about each and every book they collect, in fact pay for. Whether you believe that pressing (or anything else) has a detrimental effect on a book is irrelevant - (Please do NOT read anything I say as a personal attack - I am just discussing the issue of information).

 

As an ex-molecular biologist, I know that information, even that "discovered" during the process of what appears a well-balanced experiment, is value-laden by that day's beliefs, knowledge, technology, the way data and information is analyzed, and to some extent even the cultural and political context the experiment is undertaken. "Fact" is not something that is set in concrete but completely fluid. For example, the ancient Greeks believed there were only four elements - fire, earth, air and water. During that time this was a "fact". Although we can laugh today, at the time there was no further means of discovery, interrogation or analysis that would allow them to know any more about the elements than what they could see. I may be drawing a long bow, but likewise with comics, I would want to know as much as possible about the history of a book, who owned it, how it came to be sold and re-sold, when it was graded (and possibly re-graded), if it was ever pressed, etc etc. What we may feel is irrelevant today (i.e. pressing) may have some relevance in the future - and I certainly don't mean that in a negative connotation - what if pressed books in the future are found to have some positive result on the structure of the book? Anything is possible and I take the position that no information is ever useless or irrelevant – maybe today, but maybe not tomorrow.

 

In my opinion, any and all information is good - it's how we interpret it, now and in the future that may pose dilemmas when having to disclose it.

 

Couldn't you use this same rationale to force a duty of disclosure on a dealer who finds a pedigree-quality collection, yet does not want to disclose the identity or back story of the original owner (Pacific Coast, for example)? A good (or bad!) pedigree background story can have a material impact on the value of a book, and so one could argue that the back story might be a material aspect of the purchase and sale of a book to someone else.

 

Leaving aside a relatively few pedigree copies that are distinguishable, it is the rare book for which its entire distribution and ownership history is known. While these details may be interesting and/or desirable to know, at what point do the details cross the line from being interesting factoids to material facts that are required to follow the book around ad infinitum, like a bad set of luggage? And if pressing is a material fact that requires disclosure, at what point do we start imposing negligence liability on a purchaser who fails to find out that a book was pressed, and then re-sells it to someone else who finds an old Heritage scan of the same book with a bent corner and a lower grade?

 

Mind you, I am still not saying in the context of this post that I do or don't think pressing needs to be disclosed. (My position on the matter hasn't changed.) I just think these are questions that haven't been fully considered yet.

[uclapeterg]

Nick -- getting answers is important -- but let's be honest, pressing isn't as problematic an issue as trimming etc.

 

I'm curious why you dont think so. We may not see the effects of pressing of a book now, but what about 5 years from now?

[uclapeterg]

Mark, I commend you for your efforts in getting this issue clearly defined and pushing for disclosure, but I am afraid your efforts won't pay off, but good luck!

 

Do you think Jason Ewert would still be selling?