Questions for CGC and the Liason Committee

[Foolkiller]

Jim,

 

I'm only going to disagree with you insofar as stating that "comicdom" disagrees with the CGC position. This forum represents a small minority of the feelings and attitudes of the vast majority of collectors. A lot of the big collectors who I've met look at the forums with interest, but don't regard the opinions with seriousness for a variety of reasons.

 

The smaller collectors aren't even aware (and really don't care) about a lot of the issues which bother some of the forum members. The problem is that many people who send a ton of books to be graded, don't like the boards here and think of some of the members as just a fringe contigent, of, putting it bluntly, lunatics. That has nothing to do with the specific position they hold, but the constant bickering, juvenile presentation of opinions, and blatant misinformation posted.

 

To me, it isn't an excuse, so much as it is their business model. You may not like it -- but I really don't think there's enough evidence to say, they are out of touch with "comicdom".

 

Maybe...but it not just the "fringe" posters objecting to this situation. If it were I'd probably agree with you. The fact there are others questioning this decision should signals alarms.

 

Jim

 

I'm not saying your points aren't very valid, and this subpoint of having concern over the numbers on the boards who are voicing displeasure with this decision shouldn't be looked at -- CGC obviously comes at it from a different position -- but I do respect what you are saying.

[Davenport]

We as a corporation need to make responsible recommendations. That's why we have charter dealers and member dealers who we know and support and can say, this person is a CGC member dealer. We don't allow the Daniel Dupcaks of the world to advertise on our site or to promote their products. Likewise, as was evident from Jason Ewert, when CGC needs to take action against even a charter member, CGC will pull their support. If they continued to try and fool our fellow hobbyists, CGC would single that dealer out as untrustworthy.

 

I have the hardest time following the reasoning here...

 

At it's core isn't the whole point of the Game to "try and fool fellow hobbyists"? Altering a book in a very precise way so it's Certified as Universal graded and indistinguishable from the unaltered Certified books in the marketplace?

 

Alterations + Universal certification + non-disclosure = fooling consumers (at the point-of-purchase). Shoppers can't tell there's any difference, aren't told about any rework (unless the specifically ask), and aren't allowed to decide for themselves if it should impact what they pay. That's the $$$ game, isn't it?

[Straw-Man]

[

 

You're completely misrepresenting NOD. But again, take it to the proper thread.

 

no.

[ciorac]

Jim,

 

I'm only going to disagree with you insofar as stating that "comicdom" disagrees with the CGC position. This forum represents a small minority of the feelings and attitudes of the vast majority of collectors. A lot of the big collectors who I've met look at the forums with interest, but don't regard the opinions with seriousness for a variety of reasons.

 

The smaller collectors aren't even aware (and really don't care) about a lot of the issues which bother some of the forum members. The problem is that many people who send a ton of books to be graded, don't like the boards here and think of some of the members as just a fringe contigent, of, putting it bluntly, lunatics. That has nothing to do with the specific position they hold, but the constant bickering, juvenile presentation of opinions, and blatant misinformation posted.

 

To me, it isn't an excuse, so much as it is their business model. You may not like it -- but I really don't think there's enough evidence to say, they are out of touch with "comicdom".

 

Maybe...but it not just the "fringe" posters objecting to this situation. If it were I'd probably agree with you. The fact there are others questioning this decision should signals alarms.

 

Jim

 

I'm not saying your points aren't very valid, and this subpoint of having concern over the numbers on the boards who are voicing displeasure with this decision shouldn't be looked at -- CGC obviously comes at it from a different position -- but I do respect what you are saying.

 

Foolkiller is right. If comicdom as a whole felt the way some of the forum members here do, Matt wouldn't be getting as rich as he is pressing books for the multitudes of comicdom who enjoy "potentializing" their books for a profit.

 

He is taking advantage of a loophole in the system, and to continue to berate him about it smacks of jealousy. I can assign no other emotion to it.

 

Again, I feel like I have to add this disclaimer everytime to avoid the ton of bricks, I think pressing is restoration. But the masses don't. So, it is what it is.

 

I'm happy for Matt. He is very talented and using that talent to provide a wonderful living for his family. Good for him.

[Aman619]

Im happy for Matt too. But jealous? Are you jealous of a friend who cheats on his taxes, ending up with more cash than you? Or are you happy to play within the rules (as YOU see them) rather than work under the table for extra scraps of cash? Im not jealous. Im continually scratching my head how in 5 years a quiet practice done by a few dealers and collectors exploded under CGCs protection into a full-blown epidemic. I know that a little exaggerated in scale perhaps, but. The tax cheating analogy is an apt one IMO because those who DONT cheat pay for those who do.

 

 

chees - - - I swore I wouldnt write about this craappola anymore.... whats the use?

[Foolkiller]

Im happy for Matt too. But jealous? Are you jealous of a friend who cheats on his taxes, ending up with more cash than you? Or are you happy to play within the rules (as YOU see them) rather than work under the table for extra scraps of cash? Im not jealous. Im continually scratching my head how in 5 years a quiet practice done by a few dealers and collectors exploded under CGCs protection into a full-blown epidemic. I know that a little exaggerated in scale perhaps, but. The tax cheating analogy is an apt one IMO because those who DONT cheat pay for those who do.

 

 

chees - - - I swore I wouldnt write about this craappola anymore.... whats the use?

 

Well the difference is that, by law, cheating on your taxes is illegal. Pressing a book, even in the confines of the "comic book universe" is at best considered "controversial".

[OldGuy]

let's see, do i have it right?---

 

nelson--bad

nelson/cgc connection--bad

halperin/cgs stock/nelson move to dallas--bad

NOD--GOOOOOOOOOD [but tiresome]

Hi Billy, for a relatively new guy, you've picked up on the board vibe pretty quickly. There is definitely a very vocal faction on these boards that has identified an Axis of Evil of the comic collecting hobby, which in no particular order would be comprised of:

 

1. Heritage/Jim Halperin

2. Matt Nelson

3. CGC/Steve Borock/Chris Friesen

4. ComicLink/Josh Nathanson

5. Steve Lauterbach

6. Bill Hughes

7. Jason Ewert/ComicKeys/Danny Dupcak (admittedly, I think there's pretty much universal agreement that they should be in the AoE)

8. Tom Brulato

9. Doug Schmell

 

Have I forgotten anyone?

 

PGX/Daniel Patterson, Terrance Leder

[Aman619]

yeah. I never can come up with a perfect analogy. I was gonna go with your neighbor cheating on his wife, or a sinner in some other way, but its always too easy to poke holes in analogies. And al lthe sinning area lead to moral piety...The bottom line is seeing others prosper by crossing a line you (and others) will not.

 

the question then becomes, is where I draw my "line" far too conservative? If so, then in essence Im being foolish for not exploiting the situation more to my advantage. Or are those who feel fine doing so a small minority of avaricious risk-takers? I feel like starting a poll, to try to determine exactly who feels what... but nahhhhh.

[Flaming_Telepath]

He is taking advantage of a loophole in the system, and to continue to berate him about it smacks of jealousy. I can assign no other emotion to it.

 

Somewhat harsh, I feel.

 

From my own point of view, my objection is that, having survived some 40-odd years in almost pristine condition, these books are now being 'enhanced' purely for profit. I think it's a crying shame that such unnecessary work...its sole motivation the almighty $...renders such beautiful, previously virgin material, unnatural.

 

It's a 'geek-thing', not a 'jealous-thing'.

 

And my sole objection to Matt's work isn't what he offers, but what he doesn't offer. He offers 'maximisation' but doesn't offer details of that 'maximisation'. He says he is convinced that the market doesn't care...but he won't proactively disclose for fear that the market will respond negatively.

 

There is demand for his services, so he makes a comfortable living from his skills. Fair play.

 

But when he works on his own items, maximises his profits from the bumps, but doesn't proactively disclose what he's done, he is being underhand.

 

It's not what you do, it's the way that you do it.

[burntboy]

I appreciated Steve's answer. Whether I agree with all the points or not is less important than the fact that he took the bull by the horns and with a little prod from Brian, directly answered the concerns that had been raised. At least it's clear what CGC's position is, and it was laid out in a timely manner. And it won't fester for weeks and weeks.

 

Brad

 

EXACTLY.................

 

i can think of untold instances where an issue was suitably difused simply due to the fact that the main character came on here and stated their position.............

[Scheradon]

From my conversation with Steve on Friday:

 

Q: I'm sure by now you've seen some of the outcry and complaints on the CGC boards regarding the fact that Matt Nelson is not only a paid advertiser on the boards, but also specifically mentioned by CGC as the recommended person for pressing needs. Why did CGC specifically single out Matt Nelson and seemingly promote him above any and all others?

 

 

 

A: For quite some time now, I and CGC as a whole, receive calls from both dealers and an increasing number of collectors asking about where they can get books pressed for their own personal reasons or for resale. If we answer that question privately, and say to people, We fee the person to use is Matt Nelson, it will look, especially to the boards even more devious than disclosing it outright.

 

 

 

The fact of the matter is, we do not recommend Matt simply because we like Matt, or we have some sort of personal relationship that demands we show favoritism and promote his business. CGC has an obligation to promote the services where customers will receive the best product, and in this case, that means pressing without damaging the book. Without singling out names, in our experience, currently there are no other people who are trustworthy enough and/or provide very competent service that CGC feels confident in recommending. Throughout my conversations with dealers and collectors, I have constant feedback heard at conventions about how pleased they are with Matt's work and the customer service. Not only that, I am able to see the quality of work as many times dealers and collectors will show me a book that they have had graded that was pressed -- and the quality of the work is simply outstanding. Matt is honest and straightforward in his dealings with CGC. He is not trying to hide anything or destroy books. I believe if he screws up on a book and ends up damaging it, he will make good and would make an appropriate refund or compensate the owner for the book. I don't know if others would do that and can't tell my clients they would.

 

New collectors come to our forums, read about pressing and think to themselves, "I'd like to take that small bend that has been really bugging me out of my book; I think I will get it pressed. CGC wants them to go to a place that will not damage the comic book.

 

Hypothetically, if Susan Cicconi was promoting CGC certification and were still doing pressing or dry cleaning and we could verify she was doing high quality work, CGC would be MORE than happy to add her name to Matt's as someone CGC could point collectors to.

 

Q: But why the need to single any one dealer/person out? Isn't CGC's job to remain impartial and not promote one dealer? It seems to have the strong appearance of favoritism.

 

A: I disagree with the basic idea you are implying in the question. CGC's job is to remain impartial in the grading, and not to show favoritism. The book in front of us is what it is. That's it. I never care about whose comic I am grading. We hold ourselves to a very high standard in the grading room and I am damn proud of this fact. Never once has a principal of the Certified Collectibles Group ever even alluded to one of the finalizers changing a grade for a big client or a friend of theirs.

 

But from a corporate standpoint, it would be foolish for CGC to take the position that we do not promote certain dealers who we view as positive for the community. In fact, it's part of the obligation of CGC. For better or worse, many collectors now look to CGC for advice. We as a corporation need to make responsible recommendations. That's why we have charter dealers and member dealers who we know and support and can say, this person is a CGC member dealer. We don't allow the Daniel Dupcaks of the world to advertise on our site or to promote their products. Likewise, as was evident from Jason Ewert, when CGC needs to take action against even a charter member, CGC will pull their support. If they continued to try and fool ouor fellow hobbyists, CGC would single that dealer out as untrustworthy.

 

Likewise, when it comes to practices such as pressing and dry cleaning, it is important that CGC make responsible recommendations. We simply do not have anyone but Matt who we have confidence in to make a recommendation or sufficient feedback to be able to observe the quality of their work with consistency. Q:

 

First, I appreciate both Foolkiller and Steve for taking the tme to go over this issue.

 

I still disagree with the decision and think it would be best for them not to recommend anyone at all in their FAQ.

 

Will specific dealers be next?

 

Q: Does CGC sell certified books?

 

A: No, but (insert privilaged dealer's info here) does and they can be reached at...

 

Just starts a slippery slope and I see no responsible need for CGC to address anything beyond what they as a company perform or offer.

[Ze-man]

...

 

Just starts a slippery slope and I see no responsible need for CGC to address anything beyond what they as a company perform or offer.

 

To what end though?

 

Steve said that they still grade the book in front of them like they always have. That they hold themselves to their own high standards in the grading room. We can either believe them or not regarding impartiality. Not to mention the fact there have always been gumblings about "in deals", and collusion.. Just because now all of a sudden there are addvertisemts or FAQ's does not mean CGC has turned to the dark side.

 

If they choose to single out a few businesses to recommend because they feel them to be the best .. so be it. As Steve said.. people are now looking to them for advice not only with what CGC does, but the hobby in general. So I do not see what is wrong with CGC pointing out to those seeking advice who CGC would recommend without reservation. If it came to light that these business were getting preferential treatment when others were not.. the *spoon* storm would be so deep it could bury them.

 

If anything perhaps it will make dealers up their game to get on CGC's "A" list if they really care about it, or buy more adds.. or whatever. CGC may or may not recommend those who place adds.. but they will most likely never recommend anyone who they feel is not up to par.. even if they took out an add or not.

 

My initial reaction to the banner adds was knee jerk..I did not like them.. it invaded a place I have grown used to being add free, but after hearing all the reasons of how and why it came to be I realized I just had to get over it because it was all part of them evolving and growing as a business. CGC's product has not changed, nor have their standards. They are not doing anything any other business would do to get ahead. Again, if people think CGC is doing this so a chosen few can gain from it, then you are missing the big picture. This hobby is a big chess game, a racket and CGC is playing their part well.

 

So should it be a matter of us rethinking the role that CGC play's in our hobby? Or them constantly catering to what WE think they should be doing as a business?

 

I think it is more the former.

 

Ze-

 

 

[Red Hook]

Either recuse yourself or fess up! You're killing me here!

[Ze-man]

It isn't a secret Brad, but you are correct, my opinions might seems biased to those unaware.

 

For those who do not know I went down and stayed with Matt Nelson a few weeks ago to train under him in restoration. What this will lead to I have no idea yet. It has been talked about in various threads recently but I guess I was just waiting to see if I was actually proficient at it before I opened my mouth about it officially.

 

But I guess I do have a dog in the fight, even if it is a very tiny, young puppy right now. And my comments pro or con should be viewed with this in mind.

 

So..there it is.

 

 

Kenny

[OldGuy]

It isn't a secret Brad, but you are correct, my opinions might seems biased to those unaware.

 

For those who do not know I went down and stayed with Matt Nelson a few weeks ago to train under him in restoration. Where this leads I have no idea, it has been talked about in various threads recently but I guess I was just waiting to see if I was actually proficient at it before I opened my mouth about it officially.

 

But I guess I do have a dog in the fight, even if it is a very tiny, young puppy right now. And my comments pro or con should be viewed with this in mind.

 

So..there it is.

 

 

Kenny

 

ARCH! New custom title needed here. I propose:

 

Restored

Nip/Tuck

Shaken, not stirred

[Red Hook]

It isn't a secret Brad, but you are correct, my opinions might seems biased to those unaware.

 

For those who do not know I went down and stayed with Matt Nelson a few weeks ago to train under him in restoration. What this will lead to I have no idea yet. It has been talked about in various threads recently but I guess I was just waiting to see if I was actually proficient at it before I opened my mouth about it officially.

 

But I guess I do have a dog in the fight, even if it is a very tiny, young puppy right now. And my comments pro or con should be viewed with this in mind.

 

So..there it is.

 

 

Kenny

 

Thanks. I know you had mentioned it in a short post a couple of weeks ago in one of the forums but I believe it went generally overlooked.

[drice6900]

Interesting how opinions have changed now that CGC has explained their position:

 

Now that you know what CGCs reasons are for endorsing Matt Nelson in the FAQ, what is your opinion?

 

Users may choose only one (38 total votes)

 

I agree with CGC and their stance. 39%

 

I really don't care one way or another. 29%

 

I disagree with CGC and their reasons. 26%

 

I really need some 'crack' right now... 05%

[comicdonna]

let's see, do i have it right?---

 

nelson--bad

nelson/cgc connection--bad

halperin/cgs stock/nelson move to dallas--bad

NOD--GOOOOOOOOOD [but tiresome]

Hi Billy, for a relatively new guy, you've picked up on the board vibe pretty quickly. There is definitely a very vocal faction on these boards that has identified an Axis of Evil of the comic collecting hobby, which in no particular order would be comprised of:

 

1. Heritage/Jim Halperin

2. Matt Nelson

3. CGC/Steve Borock/Chris Friesen

4. ComicLink/Josh Nathanson

5. Steve Lauterbach

6. Bill Hughes

7. Jason Ewert/ComicKeys/Danny Dupcak (admittedly, I think there's pretty much universal agreement that they should be in the AoE)

8. Tom Brulato

9. Doug Schmell

 

Have I forgotten anyone?

 

PGX/Daniel Patterson, Terrance Leder

[Aman619]

Interesting how opinions have changed now that CGC has explained their position:

 

Now that you know what CGCs reasons are for endorsing Matt Nelson in the FAQ, what is your opinion?

 

Users may choose only one (38 total votes)

 

I agree with CGC and their stance. 39%

 

I really don't care one way or another. 29%

 

I disagree with CGC and their reasons. 26%

 

I really need some 'crack' right now... 05%

 

Just proves once again that if someone finds themselves on the hotseat around here, just come on here and splain your case, and the majority will give you a thumbs up!

[ciorac]

Interesting how opinions have changed now that CGC has explained their position:

 

Now that you know what CGCs reasons are for endorsing Matt Nelson in the FAQ, what is your opinion?

 

Users may choose only one (38 total votes)

 

I agree with CGC and their stance. 39%

 

I really don't care one way or another. 29%

 

I disagree with CGC and their reasons. 26%

 

I really need some 'crack' right now... 05%

 

The voice of reason?