Legitimate Non-Threatening Questions Posed To Matt Nelson

[awe4one]

Yes..but your question is so absurd to be really taken seriously...are you really trying to compare the two? It makes you look rather foolish if that's the best you got...

 

Jim

 

Interesting. I find your daily dose of sanctimony to be absurd, so I guess it's all "eye of the beholder." As for "looking foolish," I think you look foolish doing this fumbling-around routine while you try to think of a reason why one form of restoration "must" be disclosed, yet another does not. If you're removing defects, or "trying to return the item to an original or assumed state," it's "restoration" whether you use a tacking iron, dry mount press, weighted glass, or your finger, right? (Or is it your opinion that the IIC's and AIC's and Overstreet's and everyone else's definition of "restoration" does or doesn't apply depending on what tool the restorer uses?) And if it's "restoration," then the Law of Big Jim automatically requires that it be disclosed, right?

 

Now, are you planning on answering the question, or should I just let you get back to your regularly scheduled sermonizing?

 

I did answer the question above...but don't let that stop you from ranting...

 

And you're calling me sanctimonious...

 

Jim

[FFB]

Of course there was a substantive reason for my bringing your name up in the discussion. My point was that I don't think it's appropriate for any one collector's sensibilities to form the yardstick by which the rest of the industry's standards are created, or once created, later modified. You've been very vocal about your stance on disclosure since you got here and I think there's little question about where you stand on the issue. You're also one of the few people who have actually taken some steps (however small) to impose those opinions on the rest of the industry. There was nothing negative about my using your name in that context.

 

Yep, you got me. I'm completely incapable of independent thought. And of course, that being the case, why did I choose to follow Mark's philosophy on the subject and not yours? Perhaps he's the better debater

 

Give us a little more credit here. People can agree through forming their own independent conclusions on this matter. Is your position influenced by Matt, or Foolkiller, or CGC's "imposing" their views on us? I may disagree with your view, but I won't insult you by saying you are incapapble of forming your own thoughts on the matter.

 

Whoa, Nellie! I wasn't saying that you "foot soldiers" were swayed by Mark at all. All I said was that he has tried to impose his opinions on the industry. I know you're wayyyyy to independent a thinker to be swayed by someone else's opinion!

 

You don't think you're still being a little melo or overdramatic a tad, Scott? "Impose my opinions on the industry"? So every time you offer your "opinion" to people on these boards or to Gemstone, and I have a feeling most would agree that you hold some strong opinions and don't hesitate to express them, you're just offering an alternative viewpoint worthy of consideration?

 

And I notice you conveniently neglected to respond to whether you think Matt Nelson is equally trying to "impose" his views on the rest of the industry? Or CGC, a company that merely started in 1999? But then again no reason to question their for-profit motives for advocating one position over any other. G-d save the Queen!

 

I guess I don't see Matt engaging in a crusade the way you are, getting in people's faces, accusing people of being unethical because they don't do things the way he wants them to, and even hinting at a lawsuit if the industry doesn't change to suit his opinions. There is a difference between putting one's opinions out there and launching an offensive. But that's just one guy's opinion, I guess.

 

As for CGC, I do believe you're correct that they've imposed their views on the industry. Some of those views are views that I don't agree with. But the industry seems to have shifted largely in favor of following CGC's way of doing things. That's the difference -- when your way of doing things becomes the "industry standard," then perhaps you're justified in doing things that way and perhaps even expecting others to do likewise. No one forced people to agree with CGC's way of doing things. For better or worse, CGC's way of doing things has just seemed to work for most people.

[FFB]

To a much earlier post by Silver Surfer, I too have seen books with that "just off the griddle" feel. One was a blue holdered Green Hornet book pressed so flat the spine was split part way through the paper the entire length. But it was a blue holdered book so it's "okay".

 

And what was the grade? 9.8?

 

8.5

 

I am not saying all pressed books have that pancake look, but I have seen some in blue holders.

 

Me too. I saw an Action Comics #2 in a CGC 6.0 holder (the only one, I think) that looked pancaked. It also looked like an easy 7.0 at arm's length, but I understand that it was downgraded because of the way the press job was done.

[FFB]

FFBs just being obsinate. I dont know why.... Its like we opendthe door to the argument clinic, and FFB was behind the door talking about bending back corners and stuff just to be argumentary. Dont worry, when our money runs out he'll stop.

 

Sorry, no obstinance here. Just some honest questions. Still waiting for some honest answers that make any sense re: why you guys are drawing lines in the sand where you are.

[Red Hook]

FFBs just being obsinate. I dont know why.... Its like we opendthe door to the argument clinic, and FFB was behind the door talking about bending back corners and stuff just to be argumentary. Dont worry, when our money runs out he'll stop.

 

Sorry, no obstinance here. Just some honest questions. Still waiting for some honest answers that make any sense re: why you guys are drawing lines in the sand where you are.

 

I just figure when you guys start relying on what you consider witty insults, you're running out of steam.

 

Now you're trying to lump everyone into a single-minded homogenous group that agrees exactly on every single point, which (if you're interested in accuracy....) is far from the truth. That's weak.

 

We're in general agreement about disclosure and many of us are in general agreement about the pressing being restoration, but there's plenty of room for a variance of opinion.

 

Besides, six months from now you'll be threatening to sue Matt when you get skunked on a deal.

 

[Foolkiller]

Brad,

 

The thing is, I think we'd agree on the fact that generally there is a need for disclosure in the comic book hobby and generally what restoration is. Even on the pressing front I'm not saying that the dealer shouldn't disclose the pressing but rather that there is no obligation to do so.

 

What has irritated me recently about the way Zaid has chosen to go about things is the repeated efforts to consistently start things that are clearly (and not thinly veiled) targetted at raising questions and points made to further the same exact discussion. The "new" questions raised in this thread are basically being discussed in the pressing experiment thread and have been discussed multiple times over in multiple threads. The problem is, let's say even if I agreed with everything that Mark was saying, is that you are wearing people out on a controversial topic that a lot of people don't care about. I'm not suggesting that nobody ever talk about it, and of course those people could not read the threads -- but pressing is not as clearly a defined a problem as the Ewert trimming scandal. And my problem with Jason on pressing was the fact that he lied about doing it showing a pattern of behavior. And even on Ewert and other discussions, there is a limit to how much people want to hear about any one subject without real progress.

 

Whether Zaid wants it or doesn't, whether you want it or not, Mark has become the symbol of the disclosure movement on these boards, and clearly the most vocal proponent. From a personal standpoint, I have no problem with Mark -- I suspect we will see each other in San Diego again. But -- where I have a direct isse is with the pressing discussion becoming more akin to a campaign rather than a discussion -- it is not the biggest issue in the comic book hobby and while the dealer greed is a motivating factor for them doing it, I still don't view it as harmful.

 

But at the end of the day, dealers who press could end all the speculation and thoughts about the problems with pressing by voluntarily disclosing it. As I and others have repeatedly stated, that if you don't disclose it, you appear as if you are hiding something to people. If you believe in the practice then stand behind it -- because it may in the short term hurt your bottom line, but in the long run, it will benefit the hobby and ultimately their own financial interests.

[awe4one]

it is not the biggest issue in the comic book hobby

 

What do you think is the biggest issue in the hobby...from a collector buying perspective?

 

And I only ask it that way because the lack of new readership is clearly #1 in my opinion...

 

Jim

[Aman619]

I guess I don't see Matt engaging in a crusade the way you are, getting in people's faces, accusing people of being unethical because they don't do things the way he wants them to, and even hinting at a lawsuit if the industry doesn't change to suit his opinions. There is a difference between putting one's opinions out there and launching an offensive. But that's just one guy's opinion, I guess.

 

The hint at a lawsuit was Matt getting a bit concerned that answering questions was feathering his jail cell, or at least, a voluntary and public deposition. If I were he I would have come to the same conclusion perhaps, but Mark's only lawsuit comments were back in the Ewert case. But, since constant blathering and bleating about presing is wearing people down, maybe thats the only thing that could work. .. if it comes to that. (though bringing the "law" into it aint a guarantee of anything except costs to be borne.

 

 

 

As for CGC, I do believe you're correct that they've imposed their views on the industry. Some of those views are views that I don't agree with. But the industry seems to have shifted largely in favor of following CGC's way of doing things. That's the difference -- when your way of doing things becomes the "industry standard," then perhaps you're justified in doing things that way and perhaps even expecting others to do likewise. No one forced people to agree with CGC's way of doing things. For better or worse, CGC's way of doing things has just seemed to work for most people.

 

Yes we have all adjusted williingly to CGCs changes. BUT, much more so initially. All of us have altered our views on CGC and their product since then, no? And not toward MORE trust or transparency. CGC has actually become a large part of the problem of the new "PFP" movement (pressing for profit). Without numerical grades which spawned multiples for each tier up the ladder, slight bumps in geade via pressing werent worth near as mucch as post-CGC.

 

Youre a smart, tough lawyer. Wish you were on our side. The battle would be over by now. Think about it instead of picking on Mark on style points. It sounds petty.

[Foolkiller]

And I only ask it that way because the lack of new readership is clearly #1 in my opinion...

 

You and I are complete agreement.

 

New readership is far and away the #1 issue.

 

If you went with the back issue market, I would say that internet security and comfort with transactions is a far more important issue.

 

This is a niche issue (pressing) in a niche market (high grade). And while high grade collectors are important to the overall health of the back issue market, and while pressing is an important issue, it is not the most important issue that collectors in the broad comic book world want to discuss.

[Foolkiller]

Youre a smart, tough lawyer. Wish you were on our side. The battle would be over by now. Think about it instead of picking on Mark on style points. It sounds petty.

 

What sounds petty is this kind of line drawing in the sand. There is no "battle" and this isn't a "war". This is an internal debate in the comic book hobby and it's a struggle for ideas discussed on an internet message board.

 

Maybe there's more people than just a handful who are tired with the heavy handed language and verbiage spouted out.

 

Aman, I respect your passion on this issue, but I do think that this type of language makes it extremely unsympathetic and unpersuasive to your cause.

 

I think this is divisive, rather than productive.

[Red Hook]

If you believe in the practice then stand behind it -- because it may in the short term hurt your bottom line, but in the long run, it will benefit the hobby and ultimately their own financial interests.

 

I've only been suggesting this for two years.

[Foolkiller]

Brad --

 

I've agreed with you on that point for two years.

[FFB]

FFBs just being obsinate. I dont know why.... Its like we opendthe door to the argument clinic, and FFB was behind the door talking about bending back corners and stuff just to be argumentary. Dont worry, when our money runs out he'll stop.

 

Sorry, no obstinance here. Just some honest questions. Still waiting for some honest answers that make any sense re: why you guys are drawing lines in the sand where you are.

 

I just figure when you guys start relying on what you consider witty insults, you're running out of steam.

 

Now you're trying to lump everyone into a single-minded homogenous group that agrees exactly on every single point, which (if you're interested in accuracy....) is far from the truth. That's weak.

 

We're in general agreement about disclosure and many of us are in general agreement about the pressing being restoration, but there's plenty of room for a variance of opinion.

 

Besides, six months from now you'll be threatening to sue Matt when you get skunked on a deal.

 

 

First of all, I think you are suffering from some serious reading comprehension problems.

 

Second of all, Nostradamus you ain't.

[Aman619]

Youre a smart, tough lawyer. Wish you were on our side. The battle would be over by now. Think about it instead of picking on Mark on style points. It sounds petty.

 

What sounds petty is this kind of line drawing in the sand. There is no "battle" and this isn't a "war". This is an internal debate in the comic book hobby and it's a struggle for ideas discussed on an internet message board.

 

Maybe there's more people than just a handful who are tired with the heavy handed language and verbiage spouted out.

 

Aman, I respect your passion on this issue, but I do think that this type of language makes it extremely unsympathetic and unpersuasive to your cause.

 

I think this is divisive, rather than productive.

 

I know... I havent said anything until now, but you AND FFB could help a lot, more than a mouth like me. You both write well and think clearly. I wish you three were on the same page.... I finally wrote that divisive post this morning after seeing the issue get waylaid once again by the finger-bending argument. Yo me thats equal to the Church stacking argument. It doesnt help and only makes the discussion backtrack to rework old discussions.

[Aman619]

Post deleted by aman619

[Foolkiller]

I'm going to reiterate this:

 

I don't think Mark, Scott and myself are not on the same page per se. We certainly are with Ewert.

 

But as you might expect, we also have our own lives and our own personalities with different abilities and time constraints to devote to comic book issues.

 

I'm no longer on the same page with Mark on the pressing issue and he and I don't agree on the finer of point of mandating disclosure. I won't speak for how Scott feels on the issue.

 

I feel badly that I have not, since February, been able to devote the time I promised to the new Comic Book Association -- with the work at my old firm bringing a tremendous amount of time consuming and travel -- and now managing an office for a new firm, my focus hasn't been on comics. But with the time I do have, I would prefer to spend time focussed on the larger and broader issues facing collectors -- and that is where I see the efforts most being needed.

 

There are other ways to achieve the goal of encouraging dealers to disclose pressing voluntarily -- and not turning it into an adversarial battlefront. This isn't the kind of important issue that requires a crusade because to me, under the rules of this particular system, it's not illegal. People want disclosure to make informed choices, and I believe that if the dealers respect you, and you listen to their concerns and interests as well, and not to try paint them all as greedy b**tards -- you will do more to engender the discussion that will eventually get you to the end point you wish to achieve.

[jokersrevenge]

No respose from Matt yet?

[Aman619]

I hear you... I dont see how dealers can respect us when they can so easily pull the wool over our eyes. But you are right, of course, they are not all greedy bastards. Ive dealt with one or two that were truly above board, and even he had to make a living off his inventory. But that would explain too high prices, not selling me a book that had had (what I and many many others consider) WORK done to it to make it into or appear the same as a more valuable comic book.

[Foolkiller]

No respose from Matt yet?

 

And wisely, I don't believe Matt will give one. It gains him nothing to answer these questions in this atmosphere.

[jokersrevenge]

honestly, I haven't read this whole thread, but I'd like and answer to this question. I was just looking at your showcase number 4 9.2 online. It's a beautiful book.

1. did you resub to get that grade?

2. Would pressing improve the grade?

If I pay for the pressing and resub, can I have half of the difference between the 9.2 value and the 9.4-9.6?

Seriously, that's a lot of money, tell me your thoughts on that book......also any background on that comic would be interesting....