• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Legitimate Non-Threatening Questions Posed To Matt Nelson

719 posts in this topic

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.

 

You can go ahead and speak for me all you want, Brian. We are on the same page. 893applaud-thumb.gif

 

Since you and Brian are in full agreement here, please feel free to enlighten me further and explain how your endless defense of any seller's obligation to openly and upfrontingly disclose pressing is actually the beneficial way to go in encouraging them to do so. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

I don't see your guy's solutions of, "the buyer should ask" being the way to achieve this goal.

 

I've spoken to that issue dozens of times over the last several weeks. If I thought that there was the slightest chance that you'd actually read what I wrote with an open mind, I might even post it again. But since you've already decided how you feel about the topic and you only want me to post something here so that you can try to pick it apart, why don't you just spare me that effort and use the Search function to find my posts in the recent threads on the issue.

 

Thanks for that "no answer". It's ok if you want to just go ahead and admit you don't really have a solution. I've read all your threads and stand by what I've said here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

some great posts tonight... a lot better than being told (again) to lie back and take it, and settling for ASKING them to stop. I seek a solution that will force them to stop, economically or otherwise, rather than learn to live with it, or continue to collect with yet ANOTHER shady parctice to try to avoid being a victim of. This hobby has been tough enough at times dealing with borderline honest dealers... and CGC was theoretically supposed to protect us in helping us to know WITH CERTAINTY whether our books were in as good a shape as dealers had been telling us, and how our own eyes perceived them. Its a shame that a few years in we learn that they havent been detecting restoration techniques, and dont even consider pressing to be restoration. Nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott - why don't you write something for the GPA newsletter on how you feel this should play out; and, as you say, having similar opinions with others who are not comfortable with the disclosure position, you can encapsulate a general position for the other side (so to speak). I would be very keen to read a succinct argument on behalf of those who feel the kind of disclosure many have voiced is not the right way forward. What do you think? hi.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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....

 

You're addressing to this to Mark Zaid right, because I don't own a Showcase #4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Ok Brian, you say this comment above, then say:

 

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.

 

893scratchchin-thumb.gif, "battlefront", "crusade".

 

Frankly, I think both sides have learned to talk out of the side of their mouths.

 

I see one side definately talking out the side of their mouth. Especially when you see FFB's comments that are inline with your own by using the terms, "crusade", "getting in people's faces" and "launching an offensive". With all of this rhetoric the two of you are throwing our way, I'd almost forget it wasn't a war.

 

I'm using those terms to define how view the other side's comments. It's strictly definitional. Let's not play word games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

some great posts tonight... a lot better than being told (again) to lie back and take it, and settling for ASKING them to stop. I seek a solution that will force them to stop, economically or otherwise, rather than learn to live with it, or continue to collect with yet ANOTHER shady parctice to try to avoid being a victim of. This hobby has been tough enough at times dealing with borderline honest dealers... and CGC was theoretically supposed to protect us in helping us to know WITH CERTAINTY whether our books were in as good a shape as dealers had been telling us, and how our own eyes perceived them. Its a shame that a few years in we learn that they havent been detecting restoration techniques, and dont even consider pressing to be restoration. Nice.

 

I think this is where you and I most differ. I'm not seeking a solution to force them to stop, because I think I've come to the conclusion that most dealers are actually honest, reasonable people. Shocking I'm sure you would say. But I've also found I've become much more educated as a collector when I've been willing to talk straight with the dealers who talk straight to me. You'll find plenty who do and admit the problems in the industry, and you get a more honest portrait of how the industry works. By working with those dealers, rather than painting a broad brush, I think you can make further strides that have a more realistic chance of opening up the lines of communication and instituting real change rather than the campaigning and broad brushes here.

 

In fact, I think the most productive suggestion is trying to talk face to face with as many dealers as possible to get their feelings on pressing. Direct questions like do you or don't you, without the agenda of trying to "out" people, but rather to get information on who does or doesn't and then why it is, or is not, a good thing.

 

It seems to me that people like Lauterbach, Storms, Fischler, Zurzolo, Soltz, Yee, Van Liew, Wyatt, and a whole host of other dealers are more than happy to talk to me about any subject... without any animus and with honesty. And they talk just as freely to people who they may disagree with like Brad (Redhook) when they meet as well. Sometimes in person conversations produce more results -- when they haven't seen wild comments on the internet calling them all scumbags and a--holes.

 

My first step suggestion is to try and work with the dealers -- I know more people are suspicious of dealers and don't want to get voluntarily compliance... but to me, that's the most effective way to get most dealers on board.

 

In the absence of a regulatory agency, I see no way of ever forcing a dealer to disclose on this controversial subject.

 

And the way to convince them to disclose is to show them that it will actually help them in the long run with their bottom line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's strictly definitional. Let's not play word games.

 

 

This whole discussion is definitional...and word games are exactly what's being played.

 

Of course...you already know this. wink.gif

 

yes... I suppose that's true. I meant contextually to this little exchange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Ok Brian, you say this comment above, then say:

 

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.

 

893scratchchin-thumb.gif, "battlefront", "crusade".

 

Frankly, I think both sides have learned to talk out of the side of their mouths.

 

I see one side definately talking out the side of their mouth. Especially when you see FFB's comments that are inline with your own by using the terms, "crusade", "getting in people's faces" and "launching an offensive". With all of this rhetoric the two of you are throwing our way, I'd almost forget it wasn't a war.

 

I'm using those terms to define how view the other side's comments. It's strictly definitional. Let's not play word games.

 

I agree about not playing word games. I just found it funny that you and FFB didn't have any qualms about using these kind of terms to describe the other's side of the debate, but not your own.

 

I never jumped into this word association game you and Scott are playing, but am just stating an observation of how this "Holy War" seemed to start. Here's part of a post from you on the 16th. Note that we are now on a "crusade":

 

This is more about the mandated disclosure aspect because the debate about calling it restoration isn't truly that important for me. But this crusade to get it disclosed as a mandate is important, and I feel it's very important to voice the other side of the coin and not make it seem like there's some moral cause for righteousness that is voiced in one opinion and not in the other.

 

Then Scott jumped on this "crusade" bandwagon on the 17th:

 

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.

 

In other comments, Scott calls us Mark Zaid's "foot soldiers" and you refer to Mark's positon on the issue a "campaign" rather than discussion based. You then proceed to give a lecture to Aman over his wording in this comment:

 

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.

 

He used one warlike term by saying "battle". Well, no wonder he used it since you and Scott are out proclaiming we are "foot soldiers" out on a "crusade" for Mark's "campaign".

 

Then after your statement to Aman for using the one word, "battle", you continued on with the heavy words saying:

 

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.

 

Using the term "adversarial battlefront" and again using the word "crusade". So, are you guys really comparing us with religous fanatics or are you playing the heavy handed language game yourselves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just think of everything as 'tactics'. Logic dictates that noone would bother trying to silence voices that weren't being heard.

 

The word is spreading, and more & more opposition is being raised. There would be no reason to raise one's defenses, if one truly believed that the offence was insignificant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you saying that Foolkiller and FFB are the frontline in the defense of pressing? And working in collusion with a group in opposition to the anti-pressing voices?

 

I dont see it that way at all. I think they are two who just dont see a solution except personal vigilance as consumers, and are just speaking theor own minds on the issue, and who are, unfortunately, on the other side of this mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to make some general points and comments that are not particularly addressed to any one person, though certainly I have especially in mind FFB, Foolkiller and LearnedHand since they have seemingly adopted the "crusade" of the other side to counter what I and others have to say.

 

And that is frankly what I wish to address first. I have never made the debate about restoration or pressing into a "crusade" or "campaign". I have never recruited "soldiers". I have never, to my knowledge, turned any of my views into a personal attack on someone, whether that be dealer or collector alike. That is not to say I may not have crossed the line at times and become too personal in a response, but only because I -rightly or wrongly - felt provoked.

 

I have expressed my position on the issues of pressing and restortation, and do feel strongly about these matters, among many matters. If people have agreed with my position, fantastic. If they have not, so be it. I am still not clear as to why some people feel so annoyed or threatened by these views. I am still not clear why so people are so passionate about my being so passionate, if that is what I am, and why they seem preoccupied that I devote so much time to these issues to the perceived exclusion of apparently other important issues. The fact is I am all too eager to take on any number of important issues. I surely wish those who seem to think I spend too much time on these issues would identify some, as well as explain what they have been doing themselves to address the problems.

 

I've seen two problems mentioned over this weekend: lack of new readership and Internet security for transactions (i.e., combatting fraud). I agree both are serious problems for the comic book community. While I am not clear what I can personally do to assist with the new readership problem, particularly given I have nothing to do with new comics, I have been quite active in trying to help create a more secure Internet environment for comic book transactions. I am all for pursuing solutions to these problems and would look forward to working with anyone who wishes to join me.

 

I'm not trying to make this discussion about me, but several people seem particularly critical of what I say or do in this debate. I find it ironic that every time I address that point I take flack from those same people for making this discussion about myself, yet even when I don't post a comment they see fit to bring my name into the discussion. Somehow this has become "Zaid's crusade" or "campaign". I can assure everyone that it is neither. Had I wanted to engage in a real crusade or campaign, there is so much more I would have done to promote the views I hold. In reality all I've done is basically what many other people have done on both sides - posted on these boards, written comments for Gemstone, etc.

 

In fact, let's examine whether it is accurate to assert that people are on a crusade or campaign on the issue of pressing and restoration. In the last week here are the stats for select forumites (who have argued on both sides of the equation) on the amount of time they spent addressing these specific issues. The first number represents the posts in pressing and/or restoration threads while the second number is the total number of posts (when I ran the search of course). Then the percentage of posts they made on pressing/restoration:

 

29/51 Foolkiller 57%

 

52/69 FFB 75%

 

2/2 LearnedHand 100%

 

38/84 Red Hook 45%

 

22/56 Scheradon 39%

 

80/122 EsquireComics 66%

 

Now, I've never accused anyone of launching a "campaign" or "crusade", both of which I interpret as derrogatory terms in the manner they have been used, and I won't do so now. But these stats are interesting, are they not?

 

As far as anyone who does not disclose pressing, I do personally believe that NDP is an unethical practice. Anyone who believes pressing is restoration has to feel that way because they go hand and glove. Does not restoration have to be disclosed within our community?

 

Am I forcing anyone to adhere to my views? Certainly not. Have I launched an effort to mandate disclosure of NDP? Again, if it is restoration, it does need to be disclosed. But perhaps Overstreet will change the definition. I don't know.

 

The Network of Disclosure does not mandate disclosure upon anyone who is not a member of NOD. Membership, of course, is completely a voluntary decision. I am of the opinion that as this issue receives wider recognition more and more people will adopt the disclosure stance. If dealers feel threatened by this, it must only be because they have something to hide. I am not aware of any specific dealers being targeted for anything. If they believe otherwise, they are under a misimpression. BTW, there are no dealers that I would not hesitate to contact and speak to personally on any issue. If anything people should realize I do not shy away from confrontation or direct contact.

 

I am trying my best not to endlessly, as some have exclaimed, repeat myself on these issues. Some, such as LearnedHand most recently, have noted they wish the debate would move forward. Easy to say without suggesting any ways in which to do so. That seems to be the primary tactic nowadays.

 

Nevertheless, we've all set forth our views many times, and have debated this issue back and forth. I've found it very stimulating and helpful, and I am thankful the written record exists given the fact that new forumites sign up all the time and I firmly believe that most are ignorant of this debate.

 

So, I don't think there is much left for me to address until perhaps Matt Nelson finally responds to my questions which were posed almost one week ago. Admitedly, as I believe Foolkiller noted, it is probably smarter for Matt not to respond. Given the ignorance of the community to this issue the less he speaks the more insulated he remains. Frankly, I don't believe he can honestly answer my questions and support his own position at the same time. But perhaps that is just me. I look to him, and not his "foot soldiers", to prove me wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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....

 

I've seen Mark's Showcase #4 in person. I do not think it would be improved significantly by pressing. It's a gorgeous book, and one of the best books in the hobby, but the peripheral wear it exhibits would not be mitigated by a pressing job in my opinion. I also do not believe Mark resubbed it, but rather, bought it from Mark Wilson in its current holder.

 

Scott is correct.

 

In fact, I did ask Mark Wilson - long after I purchased it - whether it had been pressed and from whom he had purchased the book. He told me someone's name but it was not one I recognized at the time. If I recall correctly, he thought he purchased it from a long time older collector in the LA area. And he did not believe the book was pressed. Of course, anyone should feel free to contact Mark Wilson if you have further questions.

 

I would never allow it to be pressed while I owned it. If someone wants to purchase it and have it pressed, more power to that person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My first step suggestion is to try and work with the dealers -- I know more people are suspicious of dealers and don't want to get voluntarily compliance... but to me, that's the most effective way to get most dealers on board.

.

 

Brian , to be fair you get around more then most. You have personal relationships with alot of dealers. Be they from past purchases when you were on a tear, or recent buys. Most people outside this forum do not have that luxury. So please dont forget this when taking into account the opposite view, not only in their stance, but also their perspective as well. Disclosure is all about networking, and who you know. But at the same time it is about a dealer selling books to strangers as pressed ,.and saying so upfront.

 

Finding the common ground is what we need to figure out.

 

Ze-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That aside, from the dealers to whom I’ve spoken, it’s clear that they feel there is a witch-hunt in process, and they’re acting accordingly.

 

Acted "accordingly"? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

Care to elaborate Peter? popcorn.gif

 

Sounds like an opposing crusade or campaign brewing or underway to me. 893naughty-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

your comment suggested the direction I wrote, I dont think I said you said what I wrote, thats why I asked teh question "Are you saying"

 

Just think of everything as 'tactics'. Logic dictates that noone would bother trying to silence voices that weren't being heard.

 

The word is spreading, and more & more opposition is being raised. There would be no reason to raise one's defenses, if one truly believed that the offence was insignificant.

 

I interpreted your post as saying that someones tactics were being utilized to silence voices. Im just tryiong to say that Foll and FFb just dont see the problem as we do...but arent trying to silence ant=yone, except maybe Mark cause he wont let up/. 27_laughing.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites