Questions for CGC and the Liason Committee

[FFB]

I'll just say this: I've known and dealt with bluechips for several years now, and have always found him to be very upstanding and honest.

 

Seems like the original statement that Steve B. was motivated to facilitate the devaluation of restored books due to a conflict with someone in the industry got lumped in with inferences from other of bluechip's posts...? Even that seems like a tenuous motive for the purple 'restored' label that CGC ended up using.

 

I always assume that all material decisions from CGC are driven by money. Any other motive or rationale seems less likely.

 

Maybe the real point to consider here is that by putting restored books in purple labels, CGC elevated the status of unrestored books in blue labels...that in fact the idea of 'stigmatizing' restored books was simply designed to further set unrestored books apart as better. Can't argue that this has happened... and it has happened to CGC's benefit, if indirectly. Higher values of slabbed books in general will attract more submitters with more books.

 

I do think that having a different colored label is not helping restored books, but the alternative seems dangerous, at least for newcomers to our hobby... If you're a relatively new collector and you see a Daredevil 1 in 6.0 in a blue label selling for $600 and a Daredevil 1 in 6.0 in a blue label selling for $250 (because it's restored), wouldn't you buy the lower-priced book? How much homework should someone have to do in order to safely enter the hobby?

 

Anyone who is spending more than $100 on a comic book owes it to himself to get a copy of the Overstreet guide and read it -- and in doing so, learn about restoration and know to watch out for it. If a blue "restored" label were to have an appropriately placed, separate restoration score clearly visible on the label, a buyer would be in no worse position buying that book (and indeed, would probably be in a better position) than he would if he were buying a raw restored book sold with disclosure.

 

Let me repeat that so that I make sure you get it this time: If a blue "restored" label were to have an appropriately placed, separate restoration score clearly visible on the label, a buyer would be in no worse position buying that book (and indeed, would probably be in a better position) than he would if he were buying a raw restored book sold with disclosure. THIS (raw) is how the vast majority of restored books are sold anyway.

 

Assuming your last question isn't a rhetorical one, I'll answer it. And the answer is: A LOT. I have no sympathy for people who come flying into this hobby with more money than common sense and then yell and scream if they lose money.

 

This is not to say that I am in favor of people who rip others off, but the free-spending neophyte has to accept responsibility just as he would if he jumped headfirst into the stock market without educating himself first. There is no free lunch, and those who go through life expecting others to hold their hands and keep them safe will ultimately be disappointed.

 

It is unrealistic to expect everyone else in the hobby to be paternalistically protective toward those who have not bothered to put the same effort into learning the things they should. You don't cover for the slackers like that in your everyday job, and nor do most other people. Don't be so surprised that this idealistically altruistic pipe dream hasn't completely taken over the comic book business.

 

I've seen the types in both cards and comics who foolishly dive in and blow big bucks on stuff because a friend of a friend told them it will make them money. These people are lost causes no matter what you tell them.

 

But there needs to be some degree of protection of the neophyte from the egregious, tough-to-identify frauds that are plentiful in this hobby, otherwise we'd lose a lot of potential long term players who'd bolster the hobby. Need we protect everyone by warning them upfront about NDP and Mile High 2 books? no. heritage crack and reslab game? we might but prob no. About comic-keys and Ewert? yes.

 

The way I see it is if we don't make some effort very few newbies will stick with this hobby. For many, it takes just one bad experience and they're done. Without the benefit of some paternalistic protection, my advice to most who are looking to get into the hobby and spend more than lunch money would be "spend 2 years reading the CGC before you spend a dime" or "don't get started unless you can accept getting reamed several times". Not attractive options.

 

What does this have to do with my point, which is that blue-label-with-clear-restoration-disclosure is sufficient protection, and at least the equal of "sold raw with disclosure," which is how the great majority of restored books are sold in this hobby?

 

Think about that for a minute. Walk around to Harley Yee's booth, or anyone else's booth where there are restored, raw books being sold. What disclosure is typically present? In Harley's case, it is usually a grade, a "Harley" code, and an ® to denote that the book is restored. Harley is pretty good about spotting restoration and denoting that a book was restored, but the ® is all the disclosure that you get. Metro does it a little differently - you may get "sl restoration" or "mod. r.," and occasionally a notation like "sl CT." The number of CGC PLODs that are sold in the marketplace is a drop in the bucket compared to the swarms and swarms of raw books sold with these notations.

 

These two dealers go as far as anyone in disclosing restoration, and yet their notations are quite a bit less than what CGC would be disclosing if they had a separate restoration score and the same detailed text descriptions that the label contains now. So even on a blue "restored" label, CGC would be greatly exceeding the level of restoration disclosure (if by "restoration disclosure" we mean specific information that informs the buyer about what restoration is actually present on the book) that is the industry standard among dealers, and would be exceeding even its own, prior level of disclosure by adding a formal restoration score. The only thing that would go away is the stupid purple color on the label.

[adamstrange]

Even though the dealers disclose less with the ®, slight ® etc. they allow you to easily examine the book to determine the state of restoration. It's much harder to do that with a slab, which is why the request for more info seems reasonable to me. It's not much different than asking CGC to provide notes like they do regarding interior defects like "writing on page" or "chunk out of p.25".

[FFB]

Even though the dealers disclose less with the ®, slight ® etc. they allow you to easily examine the book to determine the state of restoration. It's much harder to do that with a slab, which is why the request for more info seems reasonable to me. It's not much different than asking CGC to provide notes like they do regarding interior defects like "writing on page" or "chunk out of p.25".

 

Not if you're buying the books off their website. Also, there is no shortage of collectors who don't know what restoration looks like even when they have a book in their hands, because they have never had the opportunity to learn how to spot it.

 

And I think the request for more information is appropriate regardless of whether a book is in a slab or not.

[esquirecomics]

I am very surprised that those engaged in restoration as a business have also done little to nothing either.

 

One clarifying point for better accuracy.

 

Tracey Heft is now being proactive in the education realm of restoration as evidenced by his new e-book. I wholeheartedly applaud his efforts!!!

 

Information on Tracey Heft's New Restoration Book

 

I also want to add something I forgot to note initially about the purple label. I think a sliding scale to denote how extensive or minimal the restoration might be is a good idea, but I was not very enthusiastic about the proposed CGC scale. I would have proposed it differently.

 

Matt Nelson has lobbied CGC for a restoration scale and has provided supporting detail for it as well. I can't blame the resto experts for there not being a change in how CGC labels restored books.

 

I have repeatedly indicated a willingness to work with anyone to establish a 10 point system for restoration. I think it is a critical component of the hobby going forward.

 

My comment was not with respect to persuading CGC to take a different position but to the community as a whole. My comments are completely distinct from one another. I am talking about restoration experts working to destigmatize restoration. It doesn't help that some of the restoration work, as that term is perceived by some of the community, is done in the shadows.

 

In any event, as you know CGC was poised to implement a restoration scale but then it backed away after receiving flack. At least thats how I understand it.

 

But your last point is a good one. Why CGC doesn't try again I do not know. More than enough of us have noted our willingness to contribute to the process.

[FFB]

I am very surprised that those engaged in restoration as a business have also done little to nothing either.

 

One clarifying point for better accuracy.

 

Tracey Heft is now being proactive in the education realm of restoration as evidenced by his new e-book. I wholeheartedly applaud his efforts!!!

 

Information on Tracey Heft's New Restoration Book

 

I also want to add something I forgot to note initially about the purple label. I think a sliding scale to denote how extensive or minimal the restoration might be is a good idea, but I was not very enthusiastic about the proposed CGC scale. I would have proposed it differently.

 

Matt Nelson has lobbied CGC for a restoration scale and has provided supporting detail for it as well. I can't blame the resto experts for there not being a change in how CGC labels restored books.

 

I have repeatedly indicated a willingness to work with anyone to establish a 10 point system for restoration. I think it is a critical component of the hobby going forward.

 

My comment was not with respect to persuading CGC to take a different position but to the community as a whole. My comments are completely distinct from one another. I am talking about restoration experts working to destigmatize restoration. It doesn't help that some of the restoration work, as that term is perceived by some of the community, is done in the shadows.

 

In any event, as you know CGC was poised to implement a restoration scale but then it backed away after receiving flack. At least thats how I understand it.

 

But your last point is a good one. Why CGC doesn't try again I do not know. More than enough of us have noted our willingness to contribute to the process.

 

The restoration scale is still coming. They are working out the programming bugs because the new scale requires reprogramming of all of their systems and printers. I spoke to Steve about this (and also the online grader's notes, which has similar issues) last week and will be putting together an official "liaison committee" message for his review. After he has a look at it, I'll post it here.

[esquirecomics]

This is not to say that I am in favor of people who rip others off, but the free-spending neophyte has to accept responsibility just as he would if he jumped headfirst into the stock market without educating himself first. There is no free lunch, and those who go through life expecting others to hold their hands and keep them safe will ultimately be disappointed.

 

It is unrealistic to expect everyone else in the hobby to be paternalistically protective toward those who have not bothered to put the same effort into learning the things they should. You don't cover for the slackers like that in your everyday job, and nor do most other people. Don't be so surprised that this idealistically altruistic pipe dream hasn't completely taken over the comic book business.

 

In general I agree with your comments Scott. It should be everyone's responsibility to make an effort to educate themselves about the particulars of the community they are entering.

 

But there many pitfalls in every community - including this one - where the problems or concerns on the minimalistic side to the outright fraud on the extreme side are hidden from plain view.

 

Therefore, it is incumbent upon "someone" to ensure the necessary educational information is available so that those who do decide to enter can find the information when they make their reasonable effort.

 

Some of us prefer to identify the placement of the trip wire, if not remove it completely, before the person actually detonates the bomb and then say, "well, you should have been more careful and watched your step."

 

But,obviously, that is a personal choice for people to make. Personally, I prefer to try and help people, pipe dream or not.

 

Could we keep this sub-discussion focused on the purple label issue, which is what I was addressing with my comments? Vague platitudes and cliched analogies do nothing to advance your position, which is unclear to me in this post in any event.

 

Oh yea, I can definitely tell from your comments above that it was strickly the purple label you were addressing and not advancing any other sutble negative pretext that was otherwise underlying your comments. Shame, shame on me.

 

In any event, I have no problem with a purple label and I support it. It could be improved with the implementation of a scale system (but not the one CGC initially proposed).

[Flaming_Telepath]

I've seen the types in both cards and comics who foolishly dive in and blow big bucks on stuff because a friend of a friend told them it will make them money. These people are lost causes no matter what you tell them.

 

But there needs to be some degree of protection of the neophyte from the egregious, tough-to-identify frauds that are plentiful in this hobby, otherwise we'd lose a lot of potential long term players who'd bolster the hobby. Need we protect everyone by warning them upfront about NDP and Mile High 2 books? no. heritage crack and reslab game? we might but prob no. About comic-keys and Ewert? yes.

 

The way I see it is if we don't make some effort very few newbies will stick with this hobby. For many, it takes just one bad experience and they're done. Without the benefit of some paternalistic protection, my advice to most who are looking to get into the hobby and spend more than lunch money would be "spend 2 years reading the CGC before you spend a dime" or "don't get started unless you can accept getting reamed several times". Not attractive options.

 

 

At last, somebody gets it.

 

If we do not make this hobby as transparent & simplistic as possible, we will have little in the way of new blood entering and then the whole thing will stagnate. Certain things need to be made simple for these people to gain a degree of confidence and be prepared to join us in long-term involvement.

 

Without them, we're all ed, and whilst I don't think we should be holding their hands through ever single transaction, we need to at least give them some sort of vague road-map.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Could we keep this sub-discussion focused on the purple label issue, which is what I was addressing with my comments? Vague platitudes and cliched analogies do nothing to advance your position, which is unclear to me in this post in any event.

 

 

You know what, you have so much to say that is incisive, so much information that is invaluable and informative...

 

But nobody listens to you because you're such a in how you say it that, quite honestly, few people would p1ss on you if you were on fire.

 

And that's actually, genuinely, a waste and a shame.

[whomerjay]

I'll just say this: I've known and dealt with bluechips for several years now, and have always found him to be very upstanding and honest.

 

Seems like the original statement that Steve B. was motivated to facilitate the devaluation of restored books due to a conflict with someone in the industry got lumped in with inferences from other of bluechip's posts...? Even that seems like a tenuous motive for the purple 'restored' label that CGC ended up using.

 

I always assume that all material decisions from CGC are driven by money. Any other motive or rationale seems less likely.

 

Maybe the real point to consider here is that by putting restored books in purple labels, CGC elevated the status of unrestored books in blue labels...that in fact the idea of 'stigmatizing' restored books was simply designed to further set unrestored books apart as better. Can't argue that this has happened... and it has happened to CGC's benefit, if indirectly. Higher values of slabbed books in general will attract more submitters with more books.

 

I do think that having a different colored label is not helping restored books, but the alternative seems dangerous, at least for newcomers to our hobby... If you're a relatively new collector and you see a Daredevil 1 in 6.0 in a blue label selling for $600 and a Daredevil 1 in 6.0 in a blue label selling for $250 (because it's restored), wouldn't you buy the lower-priced book? How much homework should someone have to do in order to safely enter the hobby?

 

Anyone who is spending more than $100 on a comic book owes it to himself to get a copy of the Overstreet guide and read it -- and in doing so, learn about restoration and know to watch out for it. If a blue "restored" label were to have an appropriately placed, separate restoration score clearly visible on the label, a buyer would be in no worse position buying that book (and indeed, would probably be in a better position) than he would if he were buying a raw restored book sold with disclosure.

 

Let me repeat that so that I make sure you get it this time: If a blue "restored" label were to have an appropriately placed, separate restoration score clearly visible on the label, a buyer would be in no worse position buying that book (and indeed, would probably be in a better position) than he would if he were buying a raw restored book sold with disclosure. THIS (raw) is how the vast majority of restored books are sold anyway.

 

Assuming your last question isn't a rhetorical one, I'll answer it. And the answer is: A LOT. I have no sympathy for people who come flying into this hobby with more money than common sense and then yell and scream if they lose money.

 

This is not to say that I am in favor of people who rip others off, but the free-spending neophyte has to accept responsibility just as he would if he jumped headfirst into the stock market without educating himself first. There is no free lunch, and those who go through life expecting others to hold their hands and keep them safe will ultimately be disappointed.

 

It is unrealistic to expect everyone else in the hobby to be paternalistically protective toward those who have not bothered to put the same effort into learning the things they should. You don't cover for the slackers like that in your everyday job, and nor do most other people. Don't be so surprised that this idealistically altruistic pipe dream hasn't completely taken over the comic book business.

 

I've seen the types in both cards and comics who foolishly dive in and blow big bucks on stuff because a friend of a friend told them it will make them money. These people are lost causes no matter what you tell them.

 

But there needs to be some degree of protection of the neophyte from the egregious, tough-to-identify frauds that are plentiful in this hobby, otherwise we'd lose a lot of potential long term players who'd bolster the hobby. Need we protect everyone by warning them upfront about NDP and Mile High 2 books? no. heritage crack and reslab game? we might but prob no. About comic-keys and Ewert? yes.

 

The way I see it is if we don't make some effort very few newbies will stick with this hobby. For many, it takes just one bad experience and they're done. Without the benefit of some paternalistic protection, my advice to most who are looking to get into the hobby and spend more than lunch money would be "spend 2 years reading the CGC before you spend a dime" or "don't get started unless you can accept getting reamed several times". Not attractive options.

 

What does this have to do with my point, which is that blue-label-with-clear-restoration-disclosure is sufficient protection, and at least the equal of "sold raw with disclosure," which is how the great majority of restored books are sold in this hobby?

 

Think about that for a minute. Walk around to Harley Yee's booth, or anyone else's booth where there are restored, raw books being sold. What disclosure is typically present? In Harley's case, it is usually a grade, a "Harley" code, and an ® to denote that the book is restored. Harley is pretty good about spotting restoration and denoting that a book was restored, but the ® is all the disclosure that you get. Metro does it a little differently - you may get "sl restoration" or "mod. r.," and occasionally a notation like "sl CT." The number of CGC PLODs that are sold in the marketplace is a drop in the bucket compared to the swarms and swarms of raw books sold with these notations.

 

These two dealers go as far as anyone in disclosing restoration, and yet their notations are quite a bit less than what CGC would be disclosing if they had a separate restoration score and the same detailed text descriptions that the label contains now. So even on a blue "restored" label, CGC would be greatly exceeding the level of restoration disclosure (if by "restoration disclosure" we mean specific information that informs the buyer about what restoration is actually present on the book) that is the industry standard among dealers, and would be exceeding even its own, prior level of disclosure by adding a formal restoration score. The only thing that would go away is the stupid purple color on the label.

 

I was commenting on the two general statements made by both you and esquire (didn't scroll back far enough to see specific context).

 

FWIW, I agree with your idea of and reasoning for a blue label with disclosure. Purple labels have created too negative a perception of restored books.

[FFB]

Could we keep this sub-discussion focused on the purple label issue, which is what I was addressing with my comments? Vague platitudes and cliched analogies do nothing to advance your position, which is unclear to me in this post in any event.

 

 

You know what, you have so much to say that is incisive, so much information that is invaluable and informative...

 

But nobody listens to you because you're such a in how you say it that, quite honestly, few people would p1ss on you if you were on fire.

 

And that's actually, genuinely, a waste and a shame.

 

Whatever. Don't assume that everyone thinks like you.

[DeeDee-migration]

Could we keep this sub-discussion focused on the purple label issue, which is what I was addressing with my comments? Vague platitudes and cliched analogies do nothing to advance your position, which is unclear to me in this post in any event.

 

 

You know what, you have so much to say that is incisive, so much information that is invaluable and informative...

 

But nobody listens to you because you're such a in how you say it that, quite honestly, few people would p1ss on you if you were on fire.

 

And that's actually, genuinely, a waste and a shame.

 

 

FYI... i would gladly donate my urine to save a fellow boardee's life... just sayin'

[MutantKeys]

Could we keep this sub-discussion focused on the purple label issue, which is what I was addressing with my comments? Vague platitudes and cliched analogies do nothing to advance your position, which is unclear to me in this post in any event.

 

 

You know what, you have so much to say that is incisive, so much information that is invaluable and informative...

 

But nobody listens to you because you're such a in how you say it that, quite honestly, few people would p1ss on you if you were on fire.

 

And that's actually, genuinely, a waste and a shame.

 

 

FYI... i would gladly donate my urine to save a fellow boardee's life... just sayin'

Let me burn Diana

[Foolkiller]

Could we keep this sub-discussion focused on the purple label issue, which is what I was addressing with my comments? Vague platitudes and cliched analogies do nothing to advance your position, which is unclear to me in this post in any event.

 

 

You know what, you have so much to say that is incisive, so much information that is invaluable and informative...

 

But nobody listens to you because you're such a in how you say it that, quite honestly, few people would p1ss on you if you were on fire.

 

And that's actually, genuinely, a waste and a shame.

 

Nick, this is a bit harsh. On more than one occasion, I've mentioned directly to Scott that I think the text demeanor is over the top. But I think a lot of people listen to him. He's got a lot of really insightful information on restoration especially.

 

I've gotta say, having met Scott in person, he's one of the most helpful and genuine people I've met, and I generally don't like fellow lawyers. Frankly, most of the people I've met in person from the boards have been very nice in person. Some, less than spectacular personalities, but most, I've really liked.

 

Sometimes, the personality that comes through from typing away at a computer really doesn't tell the story of who the person really is. Look, the reality is with so many different personalities, people are going to rub each other the wrong way from time to time, and in the course of strong disagreements, people will say things that others don't like: And I think a lot of times lawyers are harsher using words than others.

 

I guess the bottom line is, the reason the board dinners are great is that you meet people and get a much better sense of who they really are. I tune out a lot of what is said on the boards b/c we're all guilty of getting way too worked up (especially me) from time to time.

[FFB]

Could we keep this sub-discussion focused on the purple label issue, which is what I was addressing with my comments? Vague platitudes and cliched analogies do nothing to advance your position, which is unclear to me in this post in any event.

 

 

You know what, you have so much to say that is incisive, so much information that is invaluable and informative...

 

But nobody listens to you because you're such a in how you say it that, quite honestly, few people would p1ss on you if you were on fire.

 

And that's actually, genuinely, a waste and a shame.

 

Nick, this is a bit harsh. On more than one occasion, I've mentioned directly to Scott that I think the text demeanor is over the top. But I think a lot of people listen to him. He's got a lot of really insightful information on restoration especially.

 

I've gotta say, having met Scott in person, he's one of the most helpful and genuine people I've met, and I generally don't like fellow lawyers. Frankly, most of the people I've met in person from the boards have been very nice in person. Some, less than spectacular personalities, but most, I've really liked.

 

Sometimes, the personality that comes through from typing away at a computer really doesn't tell the story of who the person really is. Look, the reality is with so many different personalities, people are going to rub each other the wrong way from time to time, and in the course of strong disagreements, people will say things that others don't like: And I think a lot of times lawyers are harsher using words than others.

 

I guess the bottom line is, the reason the board dinners are great is that you meet people and get a much better sense of who they really are. I tune out a lot of what is said on the boards b/c we're all guilty of getting way too worked up (especially me) from time to time.

 

See Nick? You're wrong. That's two people who would pee on me if I were on fire, and it hasn't been fifteen minutes since you claimed otherwise.

[FlyingDonut]

I'd pee on you even if you weren't on fire, but that's just me.

[DeeDee-migration]

[FlyingDonut]

 

[Aman619]

I marvel at ideas based on the concept that its the purple label's COLOR that has caused a problem for restored books. I also agree that a parallel restoration grade with far more detail and information will be great and worth waiting for. But I caution the purple haters to prepare for restored books to receive the sale treatment they do now once they are ensconced in their easy to read blue Restored labels. The reality is that it's the presence of restoration that is the SOLE cause of their status, NOT the manner in which CGC labels them, whether it's with a purple color or a grade that says "this book is restored."

 

As a collector who has no interest in restored books, I will react to the new labels in the same way I do now with purple labeled books. Except I will have to look closer online, and ask Harley et al to read me the label when I cant read it from across his booth. And, ionce the new labels are designed, if I WILL be able to see clearly that a book is restored from a distance, how will that lead to a different result than the purple lable does now?

 

But Im open to the change if it happens..... just dont expect the outcome to be as different as some predict, or hope, or insist..

[MutantKeys]

[DeeDee-migration]