Questions for CGC and the Liason Committee

[codfish]

OT- I like your Avatar and sig. art Sid

 

Thank you.

 

Sonja would be my ideal woman Beautiful, curvy with a bad attitude.

 

Amen to that. Strong, foxy women are high on my must have list.

[ciorac]

OT- I like your Avatar and sig. art Sid

 

Thank you.

 

Sonja would be my ideal woman Beautiful, curvy with a bad attitude.

 

Well, there are a few of those out there. How about, beautiful, curvy and deadly with a sword?

 

Are you coming on to me?

 

That kind of man love belongs in pms

 

Or bad western movies....

[Davenport]

 

So let me get this straight. Now you are telling me that the right hand side of the slab is not just an area designated for Pedigree's. Its also an area set aside for "1 time things" like the MH2 missing pallet.

 

Maybe this and an inclusin or exclusion of the Circle 8 books should be added to the Pedigree's books & collections section of CGC web page.

Reading the list and trying to figure out pedigrees IS confusing...

 

There's the "Don Rosa Collection", "Don/Maggie Thompson Collection", but no "Joe and Nadia Mannarino Collection"...

 

http://www.allstarauc.com/mannarinocollection.htm

"The books were not graded at the time of sale, the buyer submitted the books to CGC (Comics Guaranty LLC). When the collection was reviewed, the suggestion of creating a pedigree arose. We were approached and politely asked if our name could be applied, while reticent at first, eventually, we agreed. The rest as they say is history!"

 

And you can google-up older auction-hype of CGC'd "Don/Maggie Thompson Collection" books without any pedigree notation printed on the old CGC labels.

http://www.comiccollectors.net/auction_sale.php

http://scoop.diamondgalleries.com/scoop_article.asp?ai=6305&si=121

[FFB]

Where did I say anyone was beholden to CGC or that anyone "owes" CGC anything if they attend a forum dinner? I know you guys can read. Go back and try to find my point amid what you're projecting onto my post.

 

You seemed to be holding up Steve's attendance of, and monetary contribution to, CGC dinners as a sign of personal altruism and love for the industry. This may be true. I simply pointed out that

- then again, it may not be true

- I'd actually prefer that Steve NOT pay for any part of the dinner beyond his own share

 

Frankly, a real company would hold focus groups with its 'end users' (not just the aggregators, distributors, and retailers) to glean information about how they perceive the product or service in question. If anything, CGC should be paying us for convening and (at least in part) pontificating on their product and business practices. But of course, that would only make sense if they actually WANTED our opinion.

 

I don't know what to say, Garth. You seem to have a completely different view of what forum dinners are all about. As far as I'm aware (and I've been to a half dozen of them), they're just a great excuse for people in the hobby to get together, eat some food, drink some booze, and spend some time together talking about comics (or other stuff). I have yet to sense any kind of sinister corporate purpose at any of them. And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price. If you want to find some ulterior motive in that, I suppose that's your right. But it's a crappy thing to do.

[Sid]

Where did I say anyone was beholden to CGC or that anyone "owes" CGC anything if they attend a forum dinner? I know you guys can read. Go back and try to find my point amid what you're projecting onto my post.

 

You seemed to be holding up Steve's attendance of, and monetary contribution to, CGC dinners as a sign of personal altruism and love for the industry. This may be true. I simply pointed out that

- then again, it may not be true

- I'd actually prefer that Steve NOT pay for any part of the dinner beyond his own share

 

Frankly, a real company would hold focus groups with its 'end users' (not just the aggregators, distributors, and retailers) to glean information about how they perceive the product or service in question. If anything, CGC should be paying us for convening and (at least in part) pontificating on their product and business practices. But of course, that would only make sense if they actually WANTED our opinion.

 

I don't know what to say, Garth. You seem to have a completely different view of what forum dinners are all about. As far as I'm aware (and I've been to a half dozen of them), they're just a great excuse for people in the hobby to get together, eat some food, drink some booze, and spend some time together talking about comics (or other stuff). I have yet to sense any kind of sinister corporate purpose at any of them. And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price. If you want to find some ulterior motive in that, I suppose that's your right. But it's a crappy thing to do.

 

That's what I was thinking. I hope to attend one of these outings someday. Some people only assume the worst and that kind of attitude puts the entire thing on a different perspective for a lot of people who might get influenced. Ah well.

[awe4one]

And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price.

 

How do you know this? Who's to say he's not claiiming it as a business expense to CCG or the IRS? Are you doing his accounting?

 

If true though it is an extremely nice gesture...

 

Jim

[garthgantu]

I don't know what to say, Garth. You seem to have a completely different view of what forum dinners are all about. As far as I'm aware (and I've been to a half dozen of them), they're just a great excuse for people in the hobby to get together, eat some food, drink some booze, and spend some time together talking about comics (or other stuff). I have yet to sense any kind of sinister corporate purpose at any of them. And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price. If you want to find some ulterior motive in that, I suppose that's your right. But it's a crappy thing to do.

 

Thank you for upholding my right to do crappy things.

 

I've only been to one forum dinner, but that's enough to get the picture. And as you know, I'll be attending another one in a month, so clearly I find some appeal to them.

 

My view of the dinner I went to was that it was indeed a good time had by all, for the most part. It would have been an equally good time without Steve's presence, IMHO. That's not to say that having him there wasn't a positive, but to my previous point, there SHOULD be a "sinister purpose" (as you put it) to their attending: gleaning feedback from their ultimate customers. Then it would make sense for Steve or CGC to pay part of the dinner costs.

 

To suggest that there are Forum members who can't afford $60 for a dinner is disingenuous. What, they collect comics, but don't have $60 for a once-a-year dinner? C'mon. Are you telling me that some attendees of past dinners did not pay their own way, and Steve specifically covered their portion of the tab? Or that he contributed money that in turn brought each person's share down to some 'manageable level' for the destitute, minimum-wage workers among the board members? I would humbly suggest that "board members" who don't collect slabbed books and can't afford $60 for a 1-time event are not on these boards, and if they were I'd have to wonder what they were getting out of their time spent here.

 

Every time you expand on this description of Steve's generosity it gets more heart-rending and hard to believe.

 

Look, having spoken to Steve on multiple occasions, including sitting across from him and chatting for several hours at a previous forum dinner, I don't doubt he's a nice, generous, friendly fellow. From what I can tell he's probably a great father as well. But I have to set all that aside when I consider both CGC's decision- and policy-making processes and customer relations practices, which as I understand it are still ultimately Steve's responsibility.

 

I don't think there's any way to argue that pressing, and the acceptance of pressing by CGC, are done for reasons other than a love of comic books. A love of money, sure. A desire to squeeze every drop of potential value/profit out of each comic, yes. Likewise, the arbitrary designation of "The Dallas Stephens Collection" in the pedigree area of the label. Likewise the "9.5 Wizard fiasco." So as a company undermines its credibility time after time, my cynicism tends to increase correspondingly.

[awe4one]

I don't think there's any way to argue that pressing, and the acceptance of pressing by CGC, are done for reasons other than a love of comic books. A love of money, sure. A desire to squeeze every drop of potential value/profit out of each comic, yes. Likewise, the arbitrary designation of "The Dallas Stephens Collection" in the pedigree area of the label. Likewise the "9.5 Wizard fiasco." So as a company undermines its credibility time after time, my cynicism tends to increase correspondingly.

 

Don't forget "Disassembly Isn't Restoration"...

 

Jim

[comicdonna]

 

So let me get this straight. Now you are telling me that the right hand side of the slab is not just an area designated for Pedigree's. Its also an area set aside for "1 time things" like the MH2 missing pallet.

 

Maybe this and an inclusin or exclusion of the Circle 8 books should be added to the Pedigree's books & collections section of CGC web page.

Reading the list and trying to figure out pedigrees IS confusing...

 

There's the "Don Rosa Collection", "Don/Maggie Thompson Collection", but no "Joe and Nadia Mannarino Collection"...

 

http://www.allstarauc.com/mannarinocollection.htm

"The books were not graded at the time of sale, the buyer submitted the books to CGC (Comics Guaranty LLC). When the collection was reviewed, the suggestion of creating a pedigree arose. We were approached and politely asked if our name could be applied, while reticent at first, eventually, we agreed. The rest as they say is history!"

 

And you can google-up older auction-hype of CGC'd "Don/Maggie Thompson Collection" books without any pedigree notation printed on the old CGC labels.

http://www.comiccollectors.net/auction_sale.php

http://scoop.diamondgalleries.com/scoop_article.asp?ai=6305&si=121

There is a "Joe and Nadia Mannarino collection noted on the CGC label.

[FFB]

And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price.

 

How do you know this? Who's to say he's not claiiming it as a business expense to CCG or the IRS? Are you doing his accounting?

 

If true though it is an extremely nice gesture...

 

Jim

 

Because he has said so. Do you think I'm making that up out of thin air?

[adamstrange]

While the lack of breadth would militate against CGC recognizing the collection as a pedigree if CGC were to follow its own criteria with iron-like rigidity, clearly the other factors outweighed the lack of breadth as a single factor...

 

What's the sense in creating and implementing acceptance criteria if it's not going to be adhered to?

 

If a criterion standard is in place, it must be followed to the letter. There can be no exception. If there are, whether the exception(s) exceed or fall short of the acceptance level, then the process is invalid.

 

If you guys have the time, I'm curious to know:

 

(1) Have the four criteria areas been weighted. If so, what are the assigned values.

(2) How is the original owner criteria validated.

 

I will continue to refer people back to CBM 32, written more than 10 years, with a whole series of viewpoints from a variety of collectors and dealers who couldn't agree on the definition of a pedigree. If we were able to form a committee and produce some compromise guidelines (with weights) you'd then have people arguing over what weight to assign or the certainty of the evidence used to assign the weight (do we have Davis Crippen on film buying each and every book?).

 

I will always encourage collectors to form their own opinions on issues like this and NEVER rely only on a single group or a definition created at a point in time. This is a hobby, not the emergency ward at hospital. Ultimately I hope that people will collect what they like, and it makes no sense to me to rely on someone else to tell you what that is.

 

Just because CGC puts pedigree on the label it doesn't mean it will fit your definition or that it is 100% certain to be that pedigree -- there's been more than one post on the boards regarding errors. Also, just becausa CGC didn't put pedigree on the label doesn't mean it's not a pedigree.

 

I asked West why they gave Central Valley a pedigree designation and he said what FFB surmised: superb preservation, high quality, single original owner, a number of super-tough books that were highest graded and "enough" books are highly sought after like the Actions/Tecs/Supermans. He said for this collection they'd rather put pedigree on the label to preserve chain of ownership so that the market can decide whether to pay a premium but they don't really care whether that happens. Regardless of whether I agree with the reasoning or not, I believe that was an honest and open answer on his part.

[adamstrange]

And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price.

 

How do you know this? Who's to say he's not claiiming it as a business expense to CCG or the IRS? Are you doing his accounting?

 

If true though it is an extremely nice gesture...

 

Jim

 

Because he has said so. Do you think I'm making that up out of thin air?

 

I knew Steve years before he was with CGC and his personal thoughtfulness and generosity have not changed, so far as I've noticed.

[FFB]

I don't know what to say, Garth. You seem to have a completely different view of what forum dinners are all about. As far as I'm aware (and I've been to a half dozen of them), they're just a great excuse for people in the hobby to get together, eat some food, drink some booze, and spend some time together talking about comics (or other stuff). I have yet to sense any kind of sinister corporate purpose at any of them. And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price. If you want to find some ulterior motive in that, I suppose that's your right. But it's a crappy thing to do.

 

Thank you for upholding my right to do crappy things.

 

I've only been to one forum dinner, but that's enough to get the picture. And as you know, I'll be attending another one in a month, so clearly I find some appeal to them.

 

My view of the dinner I went to was that it was indeed a good time had by all, for the most part. It would have been an equally good time without Steve's presence, IMHO. That's not to say that having him there wasn't a positive, but to my previous point, there SHOULD be a "sinister purpose" (as you put it) to their attending: gleaning feedback from their ultimate customers. Then it would make sense for Steve or CGC to pay part of the dinner costs.

 

To suggest that there are Forum members who can't afford $60 for a dinner is disingenuous. What, they collect comics, but don't have $60 for a once-a-year dinner? C'mon. Are you telling me that some attendees of past dinners did not pay their own way, and Steve specifically covered their portion of the tab? Or that he contributed money that in turn brought each person's share down to some 'manageable level' for the destitute, minimum-wage workers among the board members? I would humbly suggest that "board members" who don't collect slabbed books and can't afford $60 for a 1-time event are not on these boards, and if they were I'd have to wonder what they were getting out of their time spent here.

 

Every time you expand on this description of Steve's generosity it gets more heart-rending and hard to believe.

 

Look, having spoken to Steve on multiple occasions, including sitting across from him and chatting for several hours at a previous forum dinner, I don't doubt he's a nice, generous, friendly fellow. From what I can tell he's probably a great father as well. But I have to set all that aside when I consider both CGC's decision- and policy-making processes and customer relations practices, which as I understand it are still ultimately Steve's responsibility.

 

I don't think there's any way to argue that pressing, and the acceptance of pressing by CGC, are done for reasons other than a love of comic books. A love of money, sure. A desire to squeeze every drop of potential value/profit out of each comic, yes. Likewise, the arbitrary designation of "The Dallas Stephens Collection" in the pedigree area of the label. Likewise the "9.5 Wizard fiasco." So as a company undermines its credibility time after time, my cynicism tends to increase correspondingly.

 

Look, what I said was fact. Not me guessing, not me making something up, but actual fact. If you want to quibble with it or doubt that there are forumites for whom a $60 dinner tab might not be so easy to pay, whatever. I'm certainly not going to call anyone out because they don't have as much money as you or I do.

[garthgantu]

I don't know what to say, Garth. You seem to have a completely different view of what forum dinners are all about. As far as I'm aware (and I've been to a half dozen of them), they're just a great excuse for people in the hobby to get together, eat some food, drink some booze, and spend some time together talking about comics (or other stuff). I have yet to sense any kind of sinister corporate purpose at any of them. And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price. If you want to find some ulterior motive in that, I suppose that's your right. But it's a crappy thing to do.

 

That's what I was thinking. I hope to attend one of these outings someday. Some people only assume the worst and that kind of attitude puts the entire thing on a different perspective for a lot of people who might get influenced. Ah well.

 

Look, I'm' generally a reasonably trusting person who tries to see the glass as half full at all times. I believe Steve is a nice, generous person. I don't necessarily believe every facet of the story about destitute board members, but let's say it's true. I don't really care. It's immaterial. I would still argue that at the point that Steve opens his wallet and pays for more than his share of the dinner, he's affecting people's perceptions of him AND CGC by association. So ultimately, it benefits CGC when Steve does this.

 

And if his motives were completely, 100% selfless and altruistic, he'd give you that money on the QT and swear you to secrecy about it, rather than stating multiple times on the boards and at the dinner itself that he's paying for the appetizers or whatever.

[Straw-Man]

And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price.

 

How do you know this? Who's to say he's not claiiming it as a business expense to CCG or the IRS? Are you doing his accounting?

 

If true though it is an extremely nice gesture...

 

Jim

 

the "who picks up the check debate." i've gotta see if i can cancel my depositions tomorrow so i can monitor this live all day. could i ever forgive myself if something earthshattering comes out on this and it was stale by the time i found out. NO is the answer; i hope my client understands. oooh, wait, will the funny-book depo cancelling be ethical? let me call the a.g., he'll know [he'll be sympathetic too, i understand he collects d.c. x'mas and gorilla covers--his taste is for *spoon*, but we elected him, what can i say?] i'll report back as soon as i get the a.g. opinion--PLEASE hold off on any really mind-numbing scoops on the "dinner check caper" 'til y'all see my name back on "who's online." thanks for understanding.

[ciorac]

And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price.

 

How do you know this? Who's to say he's not claiiming it as a business expense to CCG or the IRS? Are you doing his accounting?

 

If true though it is an extremely nice gesture...

 

Jim

 

the "who picks up the check debate." i've gotta see if i can cancel my depositions tomorrow so i can monitor this live all day. could i ever forgive myself if something earthshattering comes out on this and it was stale by the time i found out. NO is the answer; i hope my client understands. oooh, wait, will the funny-book depo cancelling be ethical? let me call the a.g., he'll know [he'll be sympathetic too, i understand he collects d.c. x'mas and gorilla covers--his taste is for *spoon*, but we elected him, what can i say?] i'll report back as soon as i get the a.g. opinion--PLEASE hold off on any really mind-numbing scoops on the "dinner check caper" 'til y'all see my name back on "who's online." thanks for understanding.

 

[garthgantu]

Look, what I said was fact. Not me guessing, not me making something up, but actual fact. If you want to quibble with it or doubt that there are forumites for whom a $60 dinner tab might not be so easy to pay, whatever. I'm certainly not going to call anyone out because they don't have as much money as you or I do.

 

To be clear, I didn't mean to suggest that you were making this anecdote up...only noting that you kept bringing up more heart-tugging aspects of the story as it suited the purpose of your posts. I believe that Steve is generous. I believe that he's ponied up significant cash to help defray the costs of the dinners. I believe that you believe the story about destitute board members....who can afford to collect comics, own a computer and hang out on these boards but can't afford a moderately pricey dinner for one. I know people can run into financial straits, too, so it's quite possible the story IS true.

 

I still don't see how this story relates. Andrew Carnegie and Henry Ford gave away hundreds of millions of dollars. Both hired armed guards and police to crack the skulls of ordinary working men who went on strike, and Ford was a well-known anti-semite. Munificence does not equate to godliness.

[FFB]

I don't know what to say, Garth. You seem to have a completely different view of what forum dinners are all about. As far as I'm aware (and I've been to a half dozen of them), they're just a great excuse for people in the hobby to get together, eat some food, drink some booze, and spend some time together talking about comics (or other stuff). I have yet to sense any kind of sinister corporate purpose at any of them. And I know for a fact that Steve has dug into his own pocket (unreimbursed) to help defray costs for forum members (and these are forum members who don't even submit books) who couldn't afford to attend the dinner if they had to pay full price. If you want to find some ulterior motive in that, I suppose that's your right. But it's a crappy thing to do.

 

That's what I was thinking. I hope to attend one of these outings someday. Some people only assume the worst and that kind of attitude puts the entire thing on a different perspective for a lot of people who might get influenced. Ah well.

 

Look, I'm' generally a reasonably trusting person who tries to see the glass as half full at all times. I believe Steve is a nice, generous person. I don't necessarily believe every facet of the story about destitute board members, but let's say it's true. I don't really care. It's immaterial. I would still argue that at the point that Steve opens his wallet and pays for more than his share of the dinner, he's affecting people's perceptions of him AND CGC by association. So ultimately, it benefits CGC when Steve does this.

 

And if his motives were completely, 100% selfless and altruistic, he'd give you that money on the QT and swear you to secrecy about it, rather than stating multiple times on the boards and at the dinner itself that he's paying for the appetizers or whatever.

 

He didn't say it on the boards, *spoon*. I was in charge of the tab at the last four wondercon dinners and he told ME to charge extra to his card (AFTER CGC paid separately for the appetizers) so that the tab would be less overall, and told ME that I didn't need to collect from forumites X, Y, and Z because he was covering their entire charge in some cases, and parts of their charges in others. He also mentioned in the context of a different discussion on a different occasion (and you know, I probably shouldn't have shared it with you) that he does not get reimbursed for stuff like that and that it bothers him to have people question his ethics or love for the hobby.

 

I have to leave this discussion now because I am getting infuriated by it.

[DeeDee-migration]

Discussing who volunteers to pick up the check at forum dinners and whether or not Steve gets reimbursed is utterly classless. I have never been to one of these dinners but i certainly wouldn't feel like i was being bought off just because Steve or anyone else wants to buy me a drink.

 

(this isn't directed at you, Scott.)

[jimm94]

i certainly wouldn't feel like i was being bought off just because Steve or anyone else wants to buy me a drink.

 

Well said. Thank you!