Anyone attend the NOD panel at SD Con?

[Forbush-Man]

Anyone attend the Network of Disclosure panel at SD Con? Anyone care to let us all know what transpired?

 

[Rocketeer]

...I don't know nuthin,..I'm just a puppet,...

[ShoNuff-migration]

[Forbush-Man]

...I don't know nuthin,..I'm just a puppet,...

 

 

[drbanner]

...I don't know nuthin,..I'm just a puppet,...

 

 

[Jokerman]

 

 

 

 

 

Joker--

[Sal]

you know, waiting for the "official" version of this, i realised it might be the first time i've hoped Esquirecomics will NOT be brief in a post.

 

 

 

 

[Mushroom]

...I don't know nuthin,..I'm just a puppet,...

 

hey....if the glove fits.....

[Silvers24]

& The Strings match...

[Scheradon]

[Foolkiller]

Ahhhh... back in Philly:

 

I'm going to post a full con-report (even though I was there one day) with pics as soon as I get the chance.

 

I ended up going to the meeting -- wanted to see what would be said there -- and I ran into Hari Nadu, Rocketeer, Tim Hugh, Borg, Richard Evans, Ed Jaster, Matt Nelson, tth, Tom Gordon, Nelson, Lon Allen, Steve Eichenbaum, Steve Borock, Peter Klee and some others that I didn't recognize.

 

The meeting was run by Mark Zaid, Brent Moeshlin -- Arnold Blumberg and the last AACC president were also there (name escapes me, but he was very eloquent).

 

The basic take -- and the most vocal commentator, was Richard Evans. Now, Rich has been around a long, long time and is one of the most respected and honest dealers that I've ever known -- and also has a good reputation with most other dealers as well.

 

Basically, the take appeared to be that while they admired the purpose of the NOD, they thought that it was an idea that would benefit a newbie dealer, but not benefit the established dealer at all (something that I believe many of us have observed). While the ideas and system for dispute resolution are over complicated in my opinion, if I'm being fair -- it is a new organization and there are kinks to work out. However, the whole problem is, dealers are asking why they would submit to arbitration and join as a member of the NOD. They fear it is creating an even more adversarial relationship.

 

What Richard Evans suggested, and it was an excellent suggestion (and something that myself, Learned Hand, and others have talked about but not as detailed as what Evans suggested) was to be about education first, not dispute resolution between dealer and collector (which is the point that got stuck on). Educate collectors on what pressing is, educate on a number of points about collecting, investing, grading etc. Set up a body to do that, and consult and work with the dealers. This is a great idea.

 

I know the detractors will say that it's just a continuation of the good old boy, insider network, but I don't think that's the case at all. If the purpose of the NOD is truly to help the collector insure a more safe and secure evnivronment -- perhaps it'd be better to give collectors a tool and a resource to go to in order to figure out what information will hep them in their collecting.

 

A lot of people afterwards equated Zaid and the NOD with McCarthyism -- I think that's a bit hyperbolic, but I understand the philosophy. Moreover -- while I know it was said tongue and cheek about McCarthyism, there was almost no positive reaction, and among some of the few collectors afterwards who I saw there and spoke to, most thought the idea was confused and misdirected. However, I think one of the problems for the NOD was that most of the attendees were once again well established collectors or dealers -- making it hard to really talk to some of their core audience: new collectors.

 

While I have remained vocally outspoken on the issues against the purpose of the NOD and the need to disclose pressing -- what I saw was an opportunity to have approached this differently and gotten some voluntary compliance from many dealers in discussing issues concerning pressing and disclosure without acting as if there was some threat over their head.

 

I'm sure this meeting won't dissuade any of the NOD members or the heads: that's fine -- I have never been against disclosure -- but rather against mandatory disclosure. The NOD meeting brought forth the debate that has been going on on the boards, and truly, I heard little support for the NOD from anyone in the audience, other than in a simple principle that trying to protect the collector/consumer is a good idea -- but that the approach is misguided.

 

That was my take...

[nearmint]

The panel could have gone better.

 

Mark has been both verbose and ubiquitous on the issue of pressing(both here on the boards and on Scoop!), to the point where many present at the panel clearly felt that he's on a pressing crusade. These same people seemed to believe, I think incorrectly, that NOD is part of that crusade.

 

Mark and Brent did their best to point out that NOD is not just about pressing, but about the disclosure of any work done to a book, but the conversation came back to pressing, again and again and again.

 

There was also a general concern that many long-time dealers had not been brought into the discussion from the start, before by-laws had been written, and committee elections had taken place. Mark and Brent responded that many dealers had been approached, but very few had responded.

 

The most vocal people during the panel were Ed Jaster from Heritage, Richie Evans from Bedrock City, and Matt Nelson. Stevie B. also made a few comments.

[Foolkiller]

NM:

 

were you up front in the beard?

[Aces]

A lot of people afterwards equated Zaid and the NOD with McCarthyism

[nearmint]

NM:

 

were you up front in the beard?

 

No, I was two rows back from him. I was the guy taking the pictures, who suggested that the NOD committee's first term be reduced to 3 or 6 months, instead of a year, so that more dealers could be approached about the organization, and a new, more inclusive election could take place.

 

Wish I'd known you were there. I would have said hi.

[Foolkiller]

I sat almost directly behind you with hari nadu. was the asian guy in the row in front of Steve Borock

[Scheradon]

The most vocal people during the panel were Ed Jaster from Heritage, Richie Evans from Bedrock City, and Matt Nelson. Stevie B. also made a few comments.

 

No real surprise there.

 

I wish I could have been part of this. Not saying I could have swayed any opinion one way or another, just would have liked to heard all the comments in person and got a feel for the tone.

 

I think it could have been fairly predicted how many of the attendees to this panal would react based on the Scoop responses. Most of the big dealers already made how they feel about pressing and disclosure know there. So, like I said, no real surprises.

[Rocketeer]

There was also a general concern that many long-time dealers had not been brought into the discussion from the start, before by-laws had been written, and committee elections had taken place. Mark and Brent responded that many dealers had been approached, but very few had responded.

 

...I think that was the issue that led to the "McCarthyism" coment,...there was a lot of concern about who was approached to be the core members of the group who were responsible for drafting the by laws and how they would go about deciding how long members would stay on the board if the other members weren't pleased with their performance,...

[Davenport]

The panel could have gone better.

The reports make it sound like a kind of bassakwards approach.

 

I thought I read a long ago thread where the model was going to be that 25 year old "Universal Autograph Collectors Club" (UACC)??

http://www.uacc.org/

 

If you click their "Registered Dealer Program" it's a very long list. But it's collectors accepting dealer's applications...not dealers accepting other dealers.

http://www.uacc.org/rdlist.htm

[shadroch]

I had thought the idea was to have a collectors organization.Sometime between the initial meeting in Feb,and now,it got co-opted into something else. I know that dispite stating here and in several PMs,that I was very interested in participating,the first I heard was whenit was sprung full-born on us.