Legitimate Non-Threatening Questions Posed To Matt Nelson

[esquirecomics]

This conversation began in the Restoration Section in the thread about the results from Matt Nelson's pressing demonstration. The contents soon spilled over into a substantive debate. It was accurately pointed out that this discussion was an aside to the topic of the thread. As I dislike when a thread gets pulled off topic, I will initiate a separate thread in the General Section here.

 

I have been responding to Matt Nelson's substantive comments wherein he has tried to explain his expert opinions regarding restoration, conservation and pressing. I do not believe any of the questions below have been substantively answered by Mr. Nelson.

 

I do not see this as attacking in any way, intimidating or hostile. Mr. Nelson is an expert in this field and I do not see why he would be unwilling to address these questions. I am not looking for him to persuade me towards his positions, but I would like to better understand them. If anyone thinks these questions are inappropriate, then please state so and indicate why you think so.

 

I've posed similar questions to Tracey Heft and Susan Cicconi, both recognized experts (and Mr. Nelson's peers) in the restoration field and neither have been unwilling to engage in a back and forth substantive and professional dialogue. And Mr. Heft, as everyone knows, openly conducts commercial pressing so this is clearly not my attempt to isolate Mr. Nelson.

 

Questions

 

(1) How do you define conservation? In what respect does pressing constitute conservation? Is your definition of conservation supported by any of your peers or professional organizations that relate to the appropriate fields?

 

(2) Do you not believe there is an ethical requirement to disclose conservation treatment? If not, why would the ethical obligations that bind your area of expertise only apply to restoration and not conservation? Can you find any support from among your peers or professional organizations that relate to the appropriate fields that conclude conservation does not need to be disclosed?

 

(3) Should Overstreet maintain its definition of restoration as including pressing, will you adopt that position or continue to reject it?

 

 

12 days later.

 

20 days later.

[ShoNuff-migration]

[heydude-migration]

And NDP is not banned – it’s just seen as unethical - by some.

 

Thanks for the update. We're not worthy of this greatness.

[Foolkiller]

I hope, and continue to hope, that Matt will not be so foolish as to respond in this thread, where there is nothing to be gained by coming here and answering questions he owes no obligation to anyone here.

[Thegoldenage]

Amen to that.

[Scheradon]

I hope, and continue to hope, that Matt will not be so foolish as to respond in this thread, where there is nothing to be gained by coming here and answering questions he owes no obligation to anyone here.

 

Ya, wouldn't want him to share his opinions like the rest of us.

[Ze-man]

I hope, and continue to hope, that Matt will not be so foolish as to respond in this thread, where there is nothing to be gained by coming here and answering questions he owes no obligation to anyone here.

 

 

Yeah, who would want him to come here and continue to spin answers. He chose to answer what suited him, and avoided the rest. Take it or leave it. I was originally glad to see him become active on the boards, only to be let down when the excuse is made that we are too hostile, and scare away all the good people. Whatever

( I am not saying this was entirely the case with Matt, or that you said anything like that in your post. It more an observation)

 

Sure he doesn't OWE anybody anything, but because of his position in our hobby why is it wrong, or foolish to be asked direct questions from people in that hobby? Be they softballs, OR zingers.

 

You are right BK, since Matt has a vested interest in the hobby I can see why it would be foolish to come here and answer Marks leading questions.

 

Good advice.

 

 

 

Ze-

[Flaming_Telepath]

I hope, and continue to hope, that Matt will not be so foolish as to respond in this thread, where there is nothing to be gained by coming here and answering questions he owes no obligation to anyone here.

 

Sorry, Brian, but I cannot for the life of me believe this to be correct.

 

You wouldn't know what could be gained if Matt decided to be open and forthcoming regarding ALL of his workings....and that includes proactive disclosure when selling books....because he refuses to do so.

 

And as for him having no obligation...wrong. If he continues to work as the premiere manipulator of books currently active in the hobby, and a large percentage of purchasers in the hobby believe manipulation to be wrong, he has EVERY obligation to discuss his stance.

 

Seen how many books he's currently selling? All of them disappearing into the market, to surface further down the road with undisclosed restoration as part of the package.

 

Here's one benefit for Matt coming on here and being open with us. Despite prior purchases from Matt, I will no longer buy any of his items, under any circumstances, no matter how badly I might want them.

 

However, if he came clean, and pro-actively identified which books he had worked on, and to what extent, I would again buy from him.

 

Simple, really. Behave ethically and openly and, even if we don't see eye to eye on all things, I'll spend my money with you.

 

'Nothing to be gained by coming here'?

 

Well, apart from my dollars, no...

[FFB]

I hope, and continue to hope, that Matt will not be so foolish as to respond in this thread, where there is nothing to be gained by coming here and answering questions he owes no obligation to anyone here.

 

Sorry, Brian, but I cannot for the life of me believe this to be correct.

 

You wouldn't know what could be gained if Matt decided to be open and forthcoming regarding ALL of his workings....and that includes proactive disclosure when selling books....because he refuses to do so.

 

And as for him having no obligation...wrong. If he continues to work as the premiere manipulator of books currently active in the hobby, and a large percentage of purchasers in the hobby believe manipulation to be wrong, he has EVERY obligation to discuss his stance.

 

Seen how many books he's currently selling? All of them disappearing into the market, to surface further down the road with undisclosed restoration as part of the package.

 

Here's one benefit for Matt coming on here and being open with us. Despite prior purchases from Matt, I will no longer buy any of his items, under any circumstances, no matter how badly I might want them.

 

However, if he came clean, and pro-actively identified which books he had worked on, and to what extent, I would again buy from him.

 

Simple, really. Behave ethically and openly and, even if we don't see eye to eye on all things, I'll spend my money with you.

 

'Nothing to be gained by coming here'?

 

Well, apart from my dollars, no...

 

Just so we're clear -- you're saying that if Matt affirmatively discloses pressing, you'll start buying those books from him? Sure you would.

 

Regardless of where you stand on the disclosure issue, I have a hard time believing that someone who would refer to Matt as "the premiere manipulator of books currently in the hobby" would also be a buyer of those books.

 

I agree with Brian. Matt has nothing to gain except a headache from coming here and being subjected to what he was subjected to in the other pressing results thread.

[THE_BEYONDER]

[ShoNuff-migration]

However, if he came clean, and pro-actively identified which books he had worked on, and to what extent, I would again buy from him.

Just so we're clear -- you're saying that if Matt affirmatively discloses pressing, you'll start buying those books from him? Sure you would.

Why is that so hard to believe? I'd start buying from him as well if he'd start disclosing what work, if any, had been done to his books. This doesn't necessarily mean I'd start buying his pressed books. It means I could pick and choose which books I want to buy from him based on full disclosure and whether I want pressed books in my collection or not.

[Foolkiller]

I'm not going to wage a back and forth here because I won't have the time to adequately respond.

 

A) Classics Incorporated has been doing just fine in sales on ebay without changing a thing -- what on earth would motivate them to change their business model? Why does Matt need your dollars? The answer is, he doesn't. This represents such a tiny minority viewpoint that until the economic impact becomes significant, there's no reason to change your behavior. Because he's selling the books without you bidding right now -- would he realize anything extra cause of your bids? Nope. Nick, you might be someone who would spend money on the books, and I might put Scheradon, Brad, and maybe Kenny here and there in that category. But frankly, most people who are anti pressing don't collect the books he's selling or wouldn't buy at the high end level. So the most vocal here aren't into the era that he mostly sells, SA Marvel/DC, some HG Bronze.

 

B) I still disagree about what he owes -- he does not owe it to anyone to come on and on a public message board respond to questions. Since we can't conduct a survey, I don't know what percentage of people are happy or not happy about pressing. But even assuming that a large percentage of people don't like it, there's really no obligation to discuss, disclose it, or anything else. There's no regulatory body in comics, and at the end of the day, the only voice you have is with your dollars. I have no problem with people educating, advocating and promoting their point of view in a manner that is persuasive. But where I have the biggest problem is acting as if this dealer, or any other, owes anyone in the collecting community anything on this issue... it's still controversial in terms of whether or not it's restoration, whether or not it's harmful, and whether it impacts value. Until that becomes generally settled, I don't see why dealers would continue to press and not disclose unless asked.

 

I still don't understand where this obligation originates. What's the reason for disclosure in products? Their potential to do you harm. Nutritional information is disclosed to tell you what goes in a product so you know what goes into your body, pharmaceuticals disclose the nature of the chemical makeup and warn about potential side effects -- other products like automobiles, clothing etc. tell you what is contained in them so you can make sure you get value for your money. To make sure it is worth what you paid. While pressing is certainly a matter of personal taste, if it does not intrinsically alter the value of the product, and only affects the customer's personal preference, then it is incumbent on the consumer to ask. Once asked, the burden shifts to the dealer to respond honestly and with full disclosure within the scope of his or her knowledge.

 

But I have not once seen an external reason to indicate what possible obligation could exist for the dealer to "have" to disclose. Nobody has said, here's the logic behind it other than we as individuals think we are entitled to it. That doesn't constitute a rationale or any logic.

[EastEnd]

However, if he came clean, and pro-actively identified which books he had worked on, and to what extent, I would again buy from him.

Just so we're clear -- you're saying that if Matt affirmatively discloses pressing, you'll start buying those books from him? Sure you would.

Why is that so hard to believe? I'd start buying from him as well if he'd start disclosing what work, if any, had been done to his books. This doesn't necessarily mean I'd start buying his pressed books. It means I could pick and choose which books I want to buy from him based on full disclosure and whether I want pressed books in my collection or not.

 

Same with me.

[EastEnd]

I'm not going to wage a back and forth here because I won't have the time to adequately respond.

 

A) Classics Incorporated has been doing just fine in sales on ebay without changing a thing -- what on earth would motivate them to change their business model? Why does Matt need your dollars? The answer is, he doesn't. This represents such a tiny minority viewpoint that until the economic impact becomes significant, there's no reason to change your behavior. Because he's selling the books without you bidding right now -- would he realize anything extra cause of your bids? Nope. Nick, you might be someone who would spend money on the books, and I might put Scheradon, Brad, and maybe Kenny here and there in that category. But frankly, most people who are anti pressing don't collect the books he's selling or wouldn't buy at the high end level. So the most vocal here aren't into the era that he mostly sells, SA Marvel/DC, some HG Bronze.

 

B) I still disagree about what he owes -- he does not owe it to anyone to come on and on a public message board respond to questions. Since we can't conduct a survey, I don't know what percentage of people are happy or not happy pressing. But even assuming that a large percentage of people don't like it, there's really no obligation to discuss, disclose it, or anything else. There's no regulatory body in comics, and at the end of the day, the only voice you have is with your dollars. I have no problem with people educating, advocating and promoting their point of view in a manner that is persuasive. But where I have the biggest problem is acting as if this dealer, or any other, owes anyone in the collecting community anything on this issue... it's still controversial in terms of whether or not it's restoration, whether or not it's harmful, and whether it impacts value. Until that becomes generally settled, I don't see why dealers would continue to press and not disclose unless asked.

 

I still don't understand where this obligation originates. What's the reason for disclosure in products? Their potential to do you harm. Nutritional information is disclosed to tell you what goes in a product so you know what goes into your body, pharmaceuticals disclose the nature of the chemical makeup and warn about potential side effects -- other products like automobiles, clothing etc. tell you what is contained in them so you can make sure you get value for your money. To make sure it is worth what you paid. While pressing is certainly a matter of personal taste, if it does not intrinsically alter the value of the product, and only affects the customer's personal preference, then it is incumbent on the consumer to ask. Once asked, the burden shifts to the dealer to respond honestly and with full disclosure within the scope of his or her knowledge.

 

But I have not once seen an external reason to indicate what possible obligation could exist for the dealer to "have" to disclose. Nobody has said, here's the logic behind it other than we as individuals think we are entitled to it. That doesn't constitute a rationale or any logic.

 

It does alter the value of the comic; otherwise he'd disclose it.

[Scheradon]

I don't think you can make any definitive statement on whether pressing will alter the value of the book because it's not disclosed enough to know. If one doesn't disclose a micro-trimmed book, it will it's value will not be altered either. Only once it has been disclosed, does the consumer make the informed decision on value.

 

If CGC didn't note PQ on the slabs, PQ wouldn't alter the value of the books, but since it is disclosed to the buyer, it does affect what some people will pay for a certain book.

 

Without any disclosure, we won't know how things we can't readily spot or see will affect the value.

[ShoNuff-migration]

While pressing is certainly a matter of personal taste, if it does not intrinsically alter the value of the product...

If this were true, then Matt would have nothing to lose by offering full disclosure up front, without being asked.

[THE_BEYONDER]

While pressing is certainly a matter of personal taste, if it does not intrinsically alter the value of the product...

If this were true, then Matt would have nothing to lose by offering full disclosure up front, without being asked.

 

The value was 'altered' the moment the book went from a 9.0/9.2 to a 9.6/9.8 as a result of pressing.

 

For Brian to imply that pressing doesn't alter value has me very confused.

[tth2]

However, if he came clean, and pro-actively identified which books he had worked on, and to what extent, I would again buy from him.

Just so we're clear -- you're saying that if Matt affirmatively discloses pressing, you'll start buying those books from him? Sure you would.

Why is that so hard to believe? I'd start buying from him as well if he'd start disclosing what work, if any, had been done to his books. This doesn't necessarily mean I'd start buying his pressed books. It means I could pick and choose which books I want to buy from him based on full disclosure and whether I want pressed books in my collection or not.

He has said he`ll disclose if asked. So if he`s got a book you want, then ask him if it`s pressed, and if it`s not, then you can buy it.

[ShoNuff-migration]

He has said he`ll disclose if asked. So if he`s got a book you want, then ask him if it`s pressed, and if it`s not, then you can buy it.

Why should I have to ask if someone has fooled with a book every time I want to buy one? Why can't he just disclose it up front? Instead of thousands of collectors having to ask about the thousands of books on eBay, why can't the ones who are pressing simply disclose it up front about the books they're selling?

 

The reason is very obvious...money. And I refuse to do business with people that aren't forthcoming about what they're selling because they know it'll hurt their bottom line. It's a passive way of deceiving collectors, and it's wrong no matter how one tries to slice it.

[THE_BEYONDER]

He has said he`ll disclose if asked. So if he`s got a book you want, then ask him if it`s pressed, and if it`s not, then you can buy it.

Why should I have to ask if someone has fooled with a book every time I want to buy one? Why can't he just disclose it up front? Instead of thousands of collectors having to ask about the thousands of books on eBay, why can't the ones who are pressing simply disclose it up front about the books they're selling?

 

The reason is very obvious...money. And I refuse to do business with people that aren't forthcoming about what they're selling because they know it'll hurt their bottom line. It's a passive way of deceiving collectors, and it's wrong no matter how one tries to slice it.

 

I would assume this refusal to be forthcoming about the products one sells could potentially cause buyers to question the answer they receive as well. Pressing being undetectable and all, how would a buyer ever really know?