Legitimate Non-Threatening Questions Posed To Matt Nelson

[FFB]

[

 

If anyone is right, it’s because the facts support their statements. In this case, the so-called experts – CGC and Susan Cicconi have both said that intact pressing (or spine roll removal), when properly performed, is impossible to detect.

"As an added concern, most professional jobs would be very hard to detect and in my opinion, it would be difficult to "disclose" that a service has been rendered. However, depending on the right circumstances such as age of book, type of book and provenance, I feel confident that I could detect if pressing was administered." -Susan Cicconi Policy on Pressing

 

http://www.therestorationlab.com/article.php?article_id=2

 

I flew to Israel last night by flapping my arms. I'm pretty sure I could do it again.

 

prove it! or I guess youre saying Susan just SAYS she detected pressing, huh? Lets suggest Matt send those two halves to Susan, or soem other "test", not that it will prove anything.. except her varacity and truthiness!

 

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

[FFB]

Although I dont consider myself a HG collector, I do fully appreaciate finding a true un-altered HG book. To me its a thing of beauty and preservation over the years, as I believe alot of collectors feel the same. In a case like this I dont have an issue for spending more than guide on a book if I really want it.

 

There is no way for me to express in words how I look at true HG books so I will use a small analogy, stupid as it may be.

 

 

You find a woman you want to go out with, not very attractive but OK. You will probably take her out of couple of times, go to OK restaraunts, put some of kind of an effort hoping to get lucky but if you dont, not a big deal.

 

 

Now you find a smoker of a woman, and you really want to impress her, so you take her to great bars, Class A establishments and hope like heck you get lucky.

 

Now granted not a great analogy but I hope you see what I am trying to say. There are lots of women out there but not alot of knockouts, so when you have a chance for a knockout lady you go for it. This is how I believe alot of HG collectors feel about high grade books.

 

I understand what you're saying in the context of hot women, but I don't understand how the analogy applies to pressed comic books. A pressed comic book is akin to a hot woman who used to be perhaps "less hot," but hit the gym every day for six months and can now fit into a size 2 dress.

 

And I have no qualms with that.

[Aman619]

you are right... but cmon. just because only 1 in 30 collectors are worried about the issue shouldnt mean they have to be silent, or not take steps to prevent it, right? What it really means IMO (or should mean perhaps), is that maybe those 29 out of 30 NOT afffected ought to just stay out of the discussion since it does not affect them in the least. Everyone's opinion is valid of course so Im not saying to anyone "mind your own business." But why NOT just keep the discussion between those it DOES affect? Why should all manner of disinterested (except at a voyeurs level) opinions be involved in what (BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION) does not matter to them or what they collect.

 

If pressing doesnt bother someone, or just isnt on their radar or a worry for their collection, then dont all their comments beyond stating "I dont mind pressing. So be it." boil down to, basically, (as has crept thru many comments), a sort of reverse snobby "have-not's envy"? I dont mean to provoke a class war... so I hope you know what I mean by that. If its affects so few, then let just those affected hash it out amongst themselves....

 

No. If you are trying to establish industry standards, you need some kind of an industry consensus. If the issue is whether there's an affirmative duty to disclose something on an industry-wide basis, the fact that 99.99% of the people in the hobby don't care about it should carry some weight in the discussion of what the industry standard should be. If you only polled those who care about pressing, you'd have an extremely skewed sample that would be misleading and statistically worthless. It would be like basing the US presidential election results on only those votes cast in the smallest town in Rhode Island.

 

or like the current standard where its the smallest town in Ohio or Florida!

[FFB]

you are right... but cmon. just because only 1 in 30 collectors are worried about the issue shouldnt mean they have to be silent, or not take steps to prevent it, right? What it really means IMO (or should mean perhaps), is that maybe those 29 out of 30 NOT afffected ought to just stay out of the discussion since it does not affect them in the least. Everyone's opinion is valid of course so Im not saying to anyone "mind your own business." But why NOT just keep the discussion between those it DOES affect? Why should all manner of disinterested (except at a voyeurs level) opinions be involved in what (BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION) does not matter to them or what they collect.

 

If pressing doesnt bother someone, or just isnt on their radar or a worry for their collection, then dont all their comments beyond stating "I dont mind pressing. So be it." boil down to, basically, (as has crept thru many comments), a sort of reverse snobby "have-not's envy"? I dont mean to provoke a class war... so I hope you know what I mean by that. If its affects so few, then let just those affected hash it out amongst themselves....

 

No. If you are trying to establish industry standards, you need some kind of an industry consensus. If the issue is whether there's an affirmative duty to disclose something on an industry-wide basis, the fact that 99.99% of the people in the hobby don't care about it should carry some weight in the discussion of what the industry standard should be. If you only polled those who care about pressing, you'd have an extremely skewed sample that would be misleading and statistically worthless. It would be like basing the US presidential election results on only those votes cast in the smallest town in Rhode Island.

 

or like the current standard where its the smallest town in Ohio or Florida!

 

TOUCHE!!!!!

[nik]

Or you can say a pressed comic could have been a very beautiful woman before a boob job or a nip and tuck turned her into a smoker

[october]

you are right... but cmon. just because only 1 in 30 collectors are worried about the issue shouldnt mean they have to be silent, or not take steps to prevent it, right? What it really means IMO (or should mean perhaps), is that maybe those 29 out of 30 NOT afffected ought to just stay out of the discussion since it does not affect them in the least. Everyone's opinion is valid of course so Im not saying to anyone "mind your own business." But why NOT just keep the discussion between those it DOES affect? Why should all manner of disinterested (except at a voyeurs level) opinions be involved in what (BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION) does not matter to them or what they collect.

 

If pressing doesnt bother someone, or just isnt on their radar or a worry for their collection, then dont all their comments beyond stating "I dont mind pressing. So be it." boil down to, basically, (as has crept thru many comments), a sort of reverse snobby "have-not's envy"? I dont mean to provoke a class war... so I hope you know what I mean by that. If its affects so few, then let just those affected hash it out amongst themselves....

 

That's what's happenning, isn't it? The people arguing about this issue all have stakes in the high grade game, to one extent or another, don't they? As for my comment, it just irks me on a personal level when people paint using broad strokes. To me, the implication that this anti-pressing movement is being perpetrated for "the good of the hobby as a whole" is laughable almost to the point of being offensive. If you guys want to debate this issue, fine, but don't drag the rest of us into it by making false claims about how it pretains to the community at large.

[FFB]

Or you can say a pressed comic could have been a very beautiful woman before a boob job or a nip and tuck turned her into a smoker

 

No, that's "pieces added" and "TRIMMED."

[Red Hook]

 

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

 

You really are an insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

[FFB]

 

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

 

You really are an insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

 

And your opinion really matters to me.

[october]

 

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

 

You really are an insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

 

[mica]

To me, the implication that this anti-pressing movement is being perpetrated for "the good of the hobby as a whole" is laughable almost to the point of being offensive. If you guys want to debate this issue, fine, but don't drag the rest of us into it by making false claims about how it pretains to the community at large.

How about if people that want to continue do so with a disclaimer that "it probably won't work" or "not much chance in success but hey why not go for it"? Or "For the supposed good".... Would this satisfy?

[mica]

[Red Hook]

 

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

 

You really are an insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

 

And your opinion really matters to me.

 

I just find it incredibly sad that you never miss an opportunity to take a cheap shot at Susan, over and over.

[Flaming_Telepath]

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

 

C'mon, Scott...are you now saying that the best-known, most respected restorer in the business isn't all she's cracked up to be?

 

And you know this because of Chinese whispers?

 

It'll never stand up in court, my learned friend.

[FFB]

 

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

 

You really are an insufficiently_thoughtful_person.

 

And your opinion really matters to me.

 

I just find it incredibly sad that you never miss an opportunity to take a cheap shot at Susan, over and over.

 

I guess I don't see it as a cheap shot. I have a lot of respect for Susan's abilities as a restoration artist. That does not mean that I accept everything she says about detecting pressing blindly, especially not in light of her past (relatively well known) failures at detecting restoration that actually does involve the addition of foreign matter to a comic book. I didn't make that part up, either.

[mica]

I just find it incredibly sad that you never miss an opportunity to take a cheap shot at Susan, over and over.

Is that the one that charges 50 to look the book over and he doesn't like it?

[FFB]

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

 

C'mon, Scott...are you now saying that the best-known, most respected restorer in the business isn't all she's cracked up to be?

 

And you know this because of Chinese whispers?

 

It'll never stand up in court, my learned friend.

 

So because she is the best at restoring books, she must be able to detect a procedure that just about everyone else concedes is undetectible if done correctly, simply because she says she believes she can? I don't think so.

[Flaming_Telepath]

That's what's happenning, isn't it? The people arguing about this issue all have stakes in the high grade game, to one extent or another, don't they? As for my comment, it just irks me on a personal level when people paint using broad strokes. To me, the implication that this anti-pressing movement is being perpetrated for "the good of the hobby as a whole" is laughable almost to the point of being offensive. If you guys want to debate this issue, fine, but don't drag the rest of us into it by making false claims about how it pretains to the community at large.

 

Andy, I can see your point...but I suspect that asking for disclosure & honesty...and maintaining pressure on dealers to behave in an ethical way...is beneficial to all collectors.

 

Obviously, within the next five posts, somebody will explain why it isn't and paint me as a 'foot solider' or crank, but there you have it...my humble opinion.

[october]

That's what's happenning, isn't it? The people arguing about this issue all have stakes in the high grade game, to one extent or another, don't they? As for my comment, it just irks me on a personal level when people paint using broad strokes. To me, the implication that this anti-pressing movement is being perpetrated for "the good of the hobby as a whole" is laughable almost to the point of being offensive. If you guys want to debate this issue, fine, but don't drag the rest of us into it by making false claims about how it pretains to the community at large.

 

Andy, I can see your point...but I suspect that asking for disclosure & honesty...and maintaining pressure on dealers to behave in an ethical way...is beneficial to all collectors.

 

Obviously, within the next five posts, somebody will explain why it isn't and paint me as a 'foot solider' or crank, but there you have it...my humble opinion.

 

I see your point as well, but the "ethics" of pressing and its disclosure are certainly matters up for debate (hence this thread).

[Flaming_Telepath]

From what I've heard from several people, Susan had a hard enough time detecting slight color touch and glue on some books in the old Sotheby's auctions when she was the restoration consultant. I'm going to need more than just her say-so before I'll believe that she can detect professional pressing with any degree of reliability.

 

C'mon, Scott...are you now saying that the best-known, most respected restorer in the business isn't all she's cracked up to be?

 

And you know this because of Chinese whispers?

 

It'll never stand up in court, my learned friend.

 

So because she is the best at restoring books, she must be able to detect a procedure that just about everyone else concedes is undetectible if done correctly, simply because she says she believes she can? I don't think so.

 

No, you're missing the point.

 

You posted that Susan had declared intact pressing 'undetectable'. Susan was then quoted as saying something different...and that came from the horse's mouth, not yours.

 

Whether she can or she can't, neither you nor I have evidence either way.

 

However, you mis-quoted her and then attempted to undermine her expertise...even though you were prepared to quote her when you thought it supported your argument...and that was the point.