Questions for CGC and the Liason Committee

[ciorac]

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.

 

I didn't mean for it to be harsh FT.

 

And ostensibly I agree with much of what you assert above. Particularly the paragraph under the "harsh" comment.

 

I think a book is entitled to its top place on the census if it earned it by surviving 60 years, not by being potentialized. But, it is that way, so I accept it.

[Sid]

If I asked CGC for their recommendation on restoration expert I'd like for them to name a name if not 2. I don't see how this shows any kind of impartiality, again. They grade comic books impartially, other then in that specific field I don't think they need to maintain any kind of image. As long as they grade my books the same as yours or Matt Nelson's, I welcome recommendations. If you can point out where CGC has even hinted at showing favoritism I'll withdraw my statement.

 

And I also wouldn't mind them listing dealers they recommend buying from either.

[burntboy]

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%

 

Correct, Sir - over 2/3's now in agreement or not really caring.............all it takes is to hit the confrontation head on and folks will typically cool their heels somewhat....

[bluechip]

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.

 

I didn't mean for it to be harsh FT.

 

And ostensibly I agree with much of what you assert above. Particularly the paragraph under the "harsh" comment.

 

I think a book is entitled to its top place on the census if it earned it by surviving 60 years, not by being potentialized. But, it is that way, so I accept it.

 

I would be happy toi support the notion that pressing should be mentioned on any CGC label, if it meant there were precise details about pressing and all other types of restoration, and I would especially get behind the idea if they did away with the purposely damning purple labels. That way, everybody gets what they want. All types of post-discovery work are acknowledge on the label, and the label is there for peopel to READ -- not to judge the book but it's label's color.

[ciorac]

If I asked CGC for their recommendation on restoration expert I'd like for them to name a name if not 2. I don't see how this shows any kind of impartiality, again. They grade comic books impartially, other then in that specific field I don't think they need to maintain any kind of image. As long as they grade my books the same as yours or Matt Nelson's, I welcome recommendations. If you can point out where CGC has even hinted at showing favoritism I'll withdraw my statement.

 

And I also wouldn't mind them listing dealers they recommend buying from either.

 

I'm down with that.

[PovertyRow]

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.

 

Well this is the conundrum for me. Is CGC recommending a restorer of quality or a restorer of quality that 1) promotes CGC certification and 2) will do clean/press apart from a more major restoration job (she won't now.)

 

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.

 

Does the criteria used by CGC to recommend a restorer require, ultimately, that they will do simply basic restoration (clean/press) that will not be either detected by CGC or, if it is, will still not glean a purple label?

 

Or to put it more bluntly: Is CGC really interested "promoting the best product" to the collector? If they truly have the collectors' interests at heart, why would they not recommend Susan? She has been restoring for well over 20 years (not sure how many years but easily more than 20) and is a superb artist and restorer. Her work is easily verifiable. In the old days of the Sotheby auctions her restoration was actually a selling point before the restoration knee jerk reaction became prevelant (a reaction that often, not always but often) is rooted in ignorance of the various restoration processes. Now CGC is talking about her as an unknown quantity in the field of restoration?

 

I really do not get this. What I WOULD recommend is that CGC simply state "If you want a book to be cleaned and pressed but retain the Universal Blue Label then use so and so." But restoration is a lot more than cleaning and pressing. And to recommend someone simply because they are willing to do good clean/press as separate procedures? It genuinely makes no sense.

[Foolkiller]

Pov:

 

I've heard a lot of rumblings that Susan's work is not the same quality it once was. I have no idea if true or not true. She was out of the game for awhile as she scaled back... i'm not even sure if she's all that interested in getting back involved in the whole scene again.

[PovertyRow]

Pov:

 

I've heard a lot of rumblings that Susan's work is not the same quality it once was. I have no idea if true or not true. She was out of the game for awhile as she scaled back... i'm not even sure if she's all that interested in getting back involved in the whole scene again.

 

Fool - the main point I am trying to make is that CGC will not recommend a restorer who 1) is not "promoting CGC certification " and 2) "were still doing pressing or dry cleaning". Susan will do press and clean but only as part of a more extensive restoration.

 

As far as the rumblings go - I've not heard any. Can you elaborate? You be a smart one and know "rumblings" are often more from the stomach than the brain!

 

::edit add:: But I only mentioned Susan because CGC did. Is Matt the only person on the planet capapble of quality restoration??? Or the only one that meets a rather dubious criteria? Promote CGC and provide only clean/press as a separate service?

 

 

[drice6900]

Pov:

 

I've heard a lot of rumblings that Susan's work is not the same quality it once was. I have no idea if true or not true. She was out of the game for awhile as she scaled back... i'm not even sure if she's all that interested in getting back involved in the whole scene again.

 

Fool - the main point I am trying to make is that CGC will not recommend a restorer who 1) is not "promoting CGC certification " and 2) "were still doing pressing or dry cleaning". Susan will do press and clean but only as part of a more extensive restoration.

 

As far as the rumblings go - I've not heard any. Can you elaborate? You be a smart one and know "rumblings" are often more from the stomach than the brain!

 

::edit add:: But I only mentioned Susan because CGC did. Is Matt the only person on the planet capapble of quality restoration??? Or the only one that meets a rather dubious criteria? Promote CGC and provide only clean/press as a separate service?

 

 

Tracey Heft posted earlier in this thread. Does he qualify?

[Foolkiller]

Pov:

 

I've heard a lot of rumblings that Susan's work is not the same quality it once was. I have no idea if true or not true. She was out of the game for awhile as she scaled back... i'm not even sure if she's all that interested in getting back involved in the whole scene again.

 

Fool - the main point I am trying to make is that CGC will not recommend a restorer who 1) is not "promoting CGC certification " and 2) "were still doing pressing or dry cleaning". Susan will do press and clean but only as part of a more extensive restoration.

 

As far as the rumblings go - I've not heard any. Can you elaborate? You be a smart one and know "rumblings" are often more from the stomach than the brain!

 

::edit add:: But I only mentioned Susan because CGC did. Is Matt the only person on the planet capapble of quality restoration??? Or the only one that meets a rather dubious criteria? Promote CGC and provide only clean/press as a separate service?

 

 

I kind of agree with you on that first point -- "not promoting CGC certification" is a sticky wicket as it were.

 

As for the rumblings, there are a lot of dealers who once looked at fondness on Susan's work, who now aren't as high on it. I never brought her up because I never actually used her for any work, so how would I know? But when I've brought her rep up -- I've been immediately shot down with one word: overrated. I then state all the past accolades, and I'm then told, that's in the past. I honestly have no idea, but it's a fairly common response to get these days.

 

Yes, rumblings are often 1) more fluff than fact and 2) have ulterior motives.

[PovertyRow]

Tracey Heft posted earlier in this thread. Does he qualify?

 

I have never seen Tracey's work. I have communicated with him a good deal about restoration. He has some very impressive observations.

 

But again - I stick by my 2 questions that no one has yet (after all of an hour or so! ) responded to:

 

1) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer recommend CGC?

 

2) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer offer clean/press as a separate service? And if so, then why?

[Foolkiller]

Tracey Heft posted earlier in this thread. Does he qualify?

 

I have never seen Tracey's work. I have communicated with him a good deal about restoration. He has some very impressive observations.

 

But again - I stick by my 2 questions that no one has yet (after all of an hour or so! ) responded to:

 

1) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer recommend CGC?

 

2) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer offer clean/press as a separate service? And if so, then why?

 

I'll pose these both to Steve, but I'm pretty sure the answer to #1 is yes.

[Ze-man]

 

Fool - the main point I am trying to make is that CGC will not recommend a restorer who 1) is not "promoting CGC certification " .

 

 

To be fair Pov, That is it in a nutshell isn't it?

 

Is that such a bad business move? To not support those who do not support you?

 

Call me crazy..but cmon.. you answered your own question my friend.

 

Ze-

[PovertyRow]

Tracey Heft posted earlier in this thread. Does he qualify?

 

I have never seen Tracey's work. I have communicated with him a good deal about restoration. He has some very impressive observations.

 

But again - I stick by my 2 questions that no one has yet (after all of an hour or so! ) responded to:

 

1) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer recommend CGC?

 

2) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer offer clean/press as a separate service? And if so, then why?

 

I'll pose these both to Steve, but I'm pretty sure the answer to #1 is yes.

 

Can't ask for more, FK! But do me a favor. If the answer to #1 is indeed "yes", please ask how the endorsement of CGC makes a restorer a better restorer for the collector. Hokee?

 

PS - Tell Steve I still love the guy but man!

[Foolkiller]

Tracey Heft posted earlier in this thread. Does he qualify?

 

I have never seen Tracey's work. I have communicated with him a good deal about restoration. He has some very impressive observations.

 

But again - I stick by my 2 questions that no one has yet (after all of an hour or so! ) responded to:

 

1) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer recommend CGC?

 

2) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer offer clean/press as a separate service? And if so, then why?

 

I'll pose these both to Steve, but I'm pretty sure the answer to #1 is yes.

 

Can't ask for more, FK! But do me a favor. If the answer to #1 is indeed "yes", please ask how the endorsement of CGC makes a restorer a better restorer for the collector. Hokee?

 

PS - Tell Steve I still love the guy but man!

 

I'll put it to the man sometime soon.

[Ze-man]

2) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer offer clean/press as a separate service? And if so, then why?

 

 

Because it is listed under the FAQ title.."Does CGC perform pressing or dry cleaning"

 

Not does CGC offer full restoration services.

 

 

 

 

Ze-

[PovertyRow]

 

Fool - the main point I am trying to make is that CGC will not recommend a restorer who 1) is not "promoting CGC certification " .

 

 

To be fair Pov, That is it in a nutshell isn't it?

 

Is that such a bad business move? To not support those who do not support you?

 

Call me crazy..but cmon.. you answered your own question my friend.

 

Ze-

 

No, Buckaroo,...my good friend. To quote CGC "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." I thinki THAT answers, neh? If you don't get that then I will be more than happy to go on a classic POV debate until you drop from exhaustion or boredom!

[Ze-man]

 

Fool - the main point I am trying to make is that CGC will not recommend a restorer who 1) is not "promoting CGC certification " .

 

 

To be fair Pov, That is it in a nutshell isn't it?

 

Is that such a bad business move? To not support those who do not support you?

 

Call me crazy..but cmon.. you answered your own question my friend.

 

Ze-

 

No, Buckaroo,...my good friend. To quote CGC "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." I thinki THAT answers, neh? If you don't get that then I will be more than happy to go on a classic POV debate until you drop from exhaustion or boredom!

 

So the book is being damaged during pressing is your argument then, not who CGC has actually recommended?

And there is no boredom my friend, talking with you is never , ever boring.. when you can get a word in that is.

 

 

Sadly I need to run now or else I would blather on. But Greta just called and needs me to hook up a printer at her work.(think Office Space)

 

Ze-

 

I will call you back upon my return, trying to talk to Greta and read your posts is proving too difficult.

[PovertyRow]

So the book is being damaged is your argument then, not who CGC has actually recommended?

 

K - I will not humiliate you with the details of your pre-edit. I quoted CGC when I said 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. So is CGC saying Susan cannot press a book without damaging it? Tracey Heft? Who? And why "pressing without damagingthe book"? Why push the "pressing" which folks here KNOW can glean, in some cases, a tidy profit when selling slabbed?

 

Come on, those kids at school they DID tease you, Kenney.

[Lazyboy]

But again - I stick by my 2 questions that no one has yet (after all of an hour or so! ) responded to:

 

1) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer recommend CGC?

 

2) For CGC to recommend a restorer of quality, in the interest of the collector, must that restorer offer clean/press as a separate service? And if so, then why?

 

1) Exactly what I was asking earlier since it contradicts the statement about what is best for the collector.

 

2) The FAQ is specific about pressing/dry cleaning, so they clearly cannot recommend someone who does not perform those procedures separately from any other restoration. There is nothing in the FAQ which endorses anyone for restoration in general (although it does mention that Matt performs other work as well).