How do you feel about blue labels with "minor color touch" ??

[Sid]

Restoration in my definition doesn't always have to improve the book, but the attempt to improve it. You screw with the book to try to make it not original ( wether it did the book good or bad ), it should be disclosed with a bright purple label.

 

This is the type of emotional response to which I referred.

 

You are treating a PLOD as a punitive device, when in fact it should be an emotionally neutral tool used to identify books that have been enhanced. If the book is the same technical grade with or without the drop of glue or pinhead sized color touch, why issue it a PLOD "apparent grade?" To lash out at the practice and "teach someone a lesson?"

 

Bear in mind, I'm not suggesting ignoring the technique... as I stated, it should be factored in as a flaw accordingly.

 

 

If the book has been messed with even a tiny bit I'd like to know about it. My only concern is when I look at a cgc'ed book if it's in a universal label, I just look at the grade + PQ and not notes. PLOD, I look closely to see what's up. I can certainly see where you are coming from but I just believe any bit of 'screwing' done with the book should be upfront and center, IF it was intentional.

 

If there is a blotch of red droplet on the green car on the cover of Action #1, I would expect that in a Universal Label counted as a defect, since that is obviously not intentional. But if there is even a chance of enhancement to be intentional, such as slightly different shades of green on the car where color lifts had happened, it should get a PLOD. It hurt the grade, sure, was it intentional attempt at a horrible restore job, Yep.

 

No offense, but whenever I see someone use a term like "messed with" or "manipulated" to lump all restoration methods under the same umbrella, all it tells me is that (a) they don't really know much about restoration and (b) they have spent too much time reading posts written by people for whom (a) is also true.

 

too literal

[Sid]

Restoration in my definition doesn't always have to improve the book, but the attempt to improve it. You screw with the book to try to make it not original ( wether it did the book good or bad ), it should be disclosed with a bright purple label.

 

This is the type of emotional response to which I referred.

 

You are treating a PLOD as a punitive device, when in fact it should be an emotionally neutral tool used to identify books that have been enhanced. If the book is the same technical grade with or without the drop of glue or pinhead sized color touch, why issue it a PLOD "apparent grade?" To lash out at the practice and "teach someone a lesson?"

 

Bear in mind, I'm not suggesting ignoring the technique... as I stated, it should be factored in as a flaw accordingly.

 

 

If the book has been messed with even a tiny bit I'd like to know about it. My only concern is when I look at a cgc'ed book if it's in a universal label, I just look at the grade + PQ and not notes. PLOD, I look closely to see what's up. I can certainly see where you are coming from but I just believe any bit of 'screwing' done with the book should be upfront and center, IF it was intentional.

 

If there is a blotch of red droplet on the green car on the cover of Action #1, I would expect that in a Universal Label counted as a defect, since that is obviously not intentional. But if there is even a chance of enhancement to be intentional, such as slightly different shades of green on the car where color lifts had happened, it should get a PLOD. It hurt the grade, sure, was it intentional attempt at a horrible restore job, Yep.

 

How about looking at the book firstly, rather than the label? its not label collection we are all into is it?

 

Buying cgc is good for 2 things to me. (1) resale (2) resale

I wouldn't pay same price for 2 books with same grade 1 resto, 1 not and I know you wouldn't either

[Mad Dog]

Restoration in my definition doesn't always have to improve the book, but the attempt to improve it. You screw with the book to try to make it not original ( wether it did the book good or bad ), it should be disclosed with a bright purple label.

 

This is the type of emotional response to which I referred.

 

You are treating a PLOD as a punitive device, when in fact it should be an emotionally neutral tool used to identify books that have been enhanced. If the book is the same technical grade with or without the drop of glue or pinhead sized color touch, why issue it a PLOD "apparent grade?" To lash out at the practice and "teach someone a lesson?"

 

Bear in mind, I'm not suggesting ignoring the technique... as I stated, it should be factored in as a flaw accordingly.

 

 

If the book has been messed with even a tiny bit I'd like to know about it. My only concern is when I look at a cgc'ed book if it's in a universal label, I just look at the grade + PQ and not notes. PLOD, I look closely to see what's up. I can certainly see where you are coming from but I just believe any bit of 'screwing' done with the book should be upfront and center, IF it was intentional.

 

If there is a blotch of red droplet on the green car on the cover of Action #1, I would expect that in a Universal Label counted as a defect, since that is obviously not intentional. But if there is even a chance of enhancement to be intentional, such as slightly different shades of green on the car where color lifts had happened, it should get a PLOD. It hurt the grade, sure, was it intentional attempt at a horrible restore job, Yep.

 

How about looking at the book firstly, rather than the label? its not label collection we are all into is it?

 

Buying cgc is good for 2 things to me. (1) resale (2) resale

I wouldn't pay same price for 2 books with same grade 1 resto, 1 not and I know you wouldn't either

 

Sid,

 

you are right, i wouldnt, but that is besides the point. The issue is whether it should be blue or purple label and whether a random dot of colour is performed "with the intent to increase the apparent grade " or the intent to "restore book back to a previous condition". I wouldnt pay the same, but as i stated initially the blue labels with the note of glue or colour added ALWAYS sells for less than a normal blue label and for more than a purple SA/SP in the same grades. That, I think is fair as i dont see the need to doom the books with a purple label if CGC decides that the glue or colour was not added with the intent of increasing the appearance of the book.

 

What said was, that given the price is right i wouldnt mind buying a blue label book with such a note and i dont consider them restored.

[Mad Dog]

How about looking at the book firstly, rather than the label?

This sounds great in theory, but terrible in practice if 90% of the rest of the market is focused on the label. Who wants to be the sucker that paid some blue label-type price for a purple label restored book because his inspection showed it's a great book notwithstanding the restoration? When it's his turn to sell, I can guarantee that unless he can find some like-minded sucker, everyone in the market is going to tell him that a purple label is a purple label is a purple label, and they're only going to pay him a purple label price, no matter how many arguments he makes supporting why it deserves a blue label price.

 

We are not talking about paying the same price! normally blue labels with notes such as "minor colour touch" or "minor glue" goes for less than regular label. That is the pure market forces determining the value of the book. I am in favour of distinguishing between random dots of colour or ink, and specific treatment to a book with the intent of increasing the appearance/grade of the book.

[The Black Hand ®]

If it was a book I absolutely had to have and the price reduction was significant, I would have no problem with it. In fact, I'd prefer it over glue, if it were the type of glue that ate away at paper. Glue ,like old tape, is a ticking time bomb. I used to have several books, where people, probably kids, used magic markers to fill in spine scuffs etc. I'd rather have that than tape or glue. I wouldn't mind a Pep 22 vg with small color touch if it brought it within a 5 thousand dollar price range.

[whetteon]

I prefer CGC to PLOD them all so that I can continue to pay peanuts on the dollar for books with those horrendous 'small amount of color touches' and 'dot of glue' that has corrupted our hobby and eroded our culture.

 

Seriously, great deals. People see purple and run away. I see purple and look at the notes. I've bought key books for 25% of their going rate because the vast majority of this market grades with their eyes and not with their brains.

 

Keep it up

[showcase4]

I prefer CGC to PLOD them all so that I can continue to pay peanuts on the dollar for books with those horrendous 'small amount of color touches' and 'dot of glue' that has corrupted our hobby and eroded our culture.

 

Seriously, great deals. People see purple and run away. I see purple and look at the notes. I've bought key books for 25% of their going rate because the vast majority of this market grades with their eyes and not with their brains.

 

Keep it up

 

great point !

[Aman619]

seems to me this time around, I find it ironic to be on the CGC side of things and read arguments against their chosen policy in this area. Here, some of you are upset that CGC has made a ruling that condemns most restored books in a PLOD while granting a few well-connected pedigree copies a blue labeled reprieve. I think so be it! I can go along with that since the books so far have been special copies with very very minor unfortunate and misguided stabs at fixes.

 

But, in the pressing area, where I and others disagree with CGCs ruling that pressing a book into a better grade ISNT restoration, many of you dont see a problem.

 

Its just ironic to hear the same frustrations of going against the prevailing wisdom of CGC.

 

Is it therefore possible that the hobby can be harmed by decisions and policies made by CGC? In this case it seems a great many restored books values have been adversely affected, along with the value of their owners collections. Or is this loss just balanced out against the extra value created by other CGC policies....and signifoes just a new direction in life in the CGC era?

[bluechip]

I prefer CGC to PLOD them all so that I can continue to pay peanuts on the dollar for books with those horrendous 'small amount of color touches' and 'dot of glue' that has corrupted our hobby and eroded our culture.

 

Seriously, great deals. People see purple and run away. I see purple and look at the notes. I've bought key books for 25% of their going rate because the vast majority of this market grades with their eyes and not with their brains.

 

Keep it up

 

great point !

 

Interesting notions here. Can't help but point out that I've been castigated every time I've even alluded to the idea that people who want purple labels on books want them so prices will be lower. And even though the quoted text here initially says that in a joking manner, the next paragraph makes clear that he takes advantage of it.

 

No problem in taking advantage of something when it's happening and you aren't the one making it happen.

 

But it's one thing when your'e simply observing that purple labels create an irrational reaction in peiple that helps you buy cheap. It's another when you advocate for it continuing that way and shouting down anyone who suggest it's artificially skewing values.

 

At that point it would be fair to infer that you're crossing the line from being a person who takes advantage of a situation to a person who is actively working to create the situation (in future transactions).

 

And at that point I think your credibility becomes diminished somewhat whenever you complain about people selling anything you consider shady, iincluding undiscliosed restored books. If you play a hand, however small, in purposely creating a negative reaction that alters the price of something in your favor, yiou;re helping to mislead other people.

 

This is not to point any fingers, and I think many of us bought and sold things high or low knowing something about the book the other party didn/t, evem if it's as simple that we know what the demand for a book is, or we know the book appears to be more significant than it is, or that it's high grade and there's actually a huge number of high grade copies out there. All of the above, and then some, occurs naturally and falls under the heading, at least somewhat, of buyer beware.

 

But to PUSH for something you know will affect the value through with misinformation, incomplete information, or some misinterpretation, is a whole other thing.

 

For instance, with Metro's discovery of the hidden value of Bill Barnes 7, you might hope the guide doesn't note that in the upcoming edition so you can get one or more of them cheap, but I would hate to hear anyone insisting the guide deliberately leave it out.

 

That sort of thing undermines collector confidence overall and becomes especially dangerous when it becomes increasingly obvious to people.

[FFB]

No offense, but whenever I see someone use a term like "messed with" or "manipulated" to lump all restoration methods under the same umbrella, all it tells me is that (a) they don't really know much about restoration and (b) they have spent too much time reading posts written by people for whom (a) is also true.

I take exception to your comment. Some of us who know about restoration (although perhaps not as knowledgeable as others) still don't like it and reserve the right to use pejorative terms when describing it.

 

Well then you're the exception to the rule.

[FFB]

I think the purple label is stupid and that all the labels should be the same color. There are ways to indicate the restoration on a label (and even to make it obvious from a small scan) without using a different label color.

 

I disagree with the "can't be a little pregnant" comment. When you're pregnant, you're pregnant. You can't equate a book with a dot of color touch with an extensively restored book the way you can equate one pregnant woman with another.

 

I think the purple label is great, and that you can equate a dot of color touch to a pregnant woman, which I did thru this thread.....ain't America grand!

 

My apologies to all who know this has come up before thru XXXX number of threads.....must have been before I got here. But even if some hearty debates were previously hashed out, attitudes change, and the market changes with it. What was OK 1 year ago may not be OK now. What our hobby values and accepts today will certainly be different in just 3 to 5 years.

 

My point with regards to labeling is the present practice of restored blue labels AND restored purple lables, as it causes problems in the marketplace when buying/selling blue label restored books.....problems you ask....what kind of problems? OK, let's say I sold you a raw book as unrestored VF for $4,000. You say "how do I know it's unrestored?" and I say "send it to CGC....if they find it to be restored, I'll give you a full refund". We complete our transaction and the book comes back from CGC with a blue Universal label and graders notes " very minor color touch on the spine ". So you know what happens next......you ask for your $4k back due to the color touch, and I say "the book is in a blue label....it has been found to be unrestored....no refund." ( I would never do this to you guys..I would always issue a refund if you bought from me and were not happy for any reason...this is just an example )

 

If someone placed a little dot of red pigment to color in a tiny chip on a books red spine......then a blue label is issued with "very minor color touch" graders notes. If the same thing happens but the chip reaches a certain size...then a purple label is issued. This is what I have a problem with. Using the same scenerio from above, what if we were dealing with the sale of a $40,000 comic instead of $4,000?

 

This is exactly like a pregnant woman......a book has either been visually enhanced/improved upon thru any number of condition improving/changing techniques or not. My point is, it seems that the blue "except for....." label is creating a 3rd uneeded category that can and does cause problems when buying and selling....even though that is not CGC's function...they do their job great -- grade and give resto info.....it's the way the info is delivered and packaged that is the concern.

 

This is what we presently have now, and I believe it can be approved upon:

 

blue label - no graders notes - unrestored

purple label - restored

blue label with "color touch" graders notes ---well, kinda somewhat unrestored-ish in between thingy....good luck buying and selling this one guys!

 

See, the problem with your analogy is that "blue label with notes" does NOT mean "unrestored." It means "CGC Universal Grade with notes of minor restoration that doesn't affect the grade much or at all." If someone sells a book as unrestored and it comes back in a blue-with-notes label, that person deserves a refund.

[Aman619]

just to be annoying and obvious, if someone sells me a blue label book I later see on the Boards used to be a 9.0, I want my money back too. But in both cases, CGC has decided the future of both books. And sellers are apt to stand behind CGCs rulings. Why not? SOmebody fetch me a goose and a gander, please.

[bluechip]

No offense, but whenever I see someone use a term like "messed with" or "manipulated" to lump all restoration methods under the same umbrella, all it tells me is that (a) they don't really know much about restoration and (b) they have spent too much time reading posts written by people for whom (a) is also true.

I take exception to your comment. Some of us who know about restoration (although perhaps not as knowledgeable as others) still don't like it and reserve the right to use pejorative terms when describing it.

 

I think you and everybody else has the right to use pejorative terms, but it's rarely if ever constructive. And if you do so then you need to allow others to use pejorative terms for the things you value. But I bet if they did you wouldn't like it,

 

But the purple label and restoration debate seems to go beyond whethe ryou or anyone else is allowed to use pejorative terms. What I hear from some people is not that they want to use pejorative terms (and labels), but they want to force other people to use pejorative terms (and labels).

 

Big difference.

 

If the information is there and everything is disclosed, there is absolutely no need or justification for the insistence upon pejorative terms.

[bluechip]

Just a few more points and then back to work.

 

When people say things such as "I think the purple label is great" I would really like to hear them say whty.

 

The reason I have been able to glean from these posts appear to fall into several categories. Some people on the boards saying they think it's great because people panic at the sight and that lets them buy it cheaper. I also hear people who seem to want purple labels as punishment for making an "attempt" to improve a book. Like the post that says a dot of glue is okay if it's accidental but not okay if it's intentional.

 

I have issues with both those attitides as I feel that, while not necessarily intentional, they are not entirely rational or wholly ethical. And both, I feel, present the danger of undermining the hobby.

 

You just can't change the definition of a word. all due respect to Tracey Heft and he does great work but restoration is not "any attempt" to make a book appear better, it is anything that actually does make a book appear better.

 

The luddits thought they were improving statues by whacking their heads and noses off. That was definitely an attempt to "imnprove" the statues, but I can't imagine anybody saying they restored them.

 

A kid who attempts to improve his comic book by putting duct tape on the spine may be attempting to make it better -- but he has failed miserably. He has not "restored" the book by any rational definition of the word.

 

Likewise, if a person puts glue or color touch on a book that fails to imrpove the book he has not restored it -- he has damaged it. And it should be considered a defect.

[The Black Hand ®]

I'm of the opinion that most restoration is strictly for cosmentic purposes. If you tale a low grade and carefully put it in a mylar with backing board and store it properly, you will preserve and exten it's life. I don't mind slight to moderate restored books as long as the pages are nice and the price is right,

[nearmint]

I'm part of the crowd that would like to abolish the PLOD, and the GLOD as well.

 

But, since we live in a rainbow label world, here's my opinion. Any amount of color touch is restoration, period.

 

Glue, on the other hand, is a repair, not restoration. Just as CGC gives a book with tape a blue label, they should give a book with glue a blue label, and note the glue on the label. In a perfect world, they would also note where the glue is on the cover, but I suppose one could always call in for that info.

[FFB]

I'm part of the crowd that would like to abolish the PLOD, and the GLOD as well.

 

But, since we live in a rainbow label world, here's my opinion. Any amount of color touch is restoration, period.

 

Glue, on the other hand, is a repair, not restoration. Just as CGC gives a book with tape a blue label, they should give a book with glue a blue label, and note the glue on the label. In a perfect world, they would also note where the glue is on the cover, but I suppose one could always call in for that info.

 

Why can't it be both repair AND restoration? The two terms don't seem mutually exclusive to me.

[nearmint]

I'm part of the crowd that would like to abolish the PLOD, and the GLOD as well.

 

But, since we live in a rainbow label world, here's my opinion. Any amount of color touch is restoration, period.

 

Glue, on the other hand, is a repair, not restoration. Just as CGC gives a book with tape a blue label, they should give a book with glue a blue label, and note the glue on the label. In a perfect world, they would also note where the glue is on the cover, but I suppose one could always call in for that info.

 

Why can't it be both repair AND restoration? The two terms don't seem mutually exclusive to me.

 

I view a repair as an attempt to halt further damage, like sealing a tear because you're afraid it'll tear further. No attempt is made to disguise the fact that the tear is still there, it's just sealed.

 

Resto would include masking the fact that the tear was ever there at all.

[mr.schomburg]

I think the purple label is stupid and that all the labels should be the same color. There are ways to indicate the restoration on a label (and even to make it obvious from a small scan) without using a different label color.

 

I disagree with the "can't be a little pregnant" comment. When you're pregnant, you're pregnant. You can't equate a book with a dot of color touch with an extensively restored book the way you can equate one pregnant woman with another.

 

I think the purple label is great, and that you can equate a dot of color touch to a pregnant woman, which I did thru this thread.....ain't America grand!

 

My apologies to all who know this has come up before thru XXXX number of threads.....must have been before I got here. But even if some hearty debates were previously hashed out, attitudes change, and the market changes with it. What was OK 1 year ago may not be OK now. What our hobby values and accepts today will certainly be different in just 3 to 5 years.

 

My point with regards to labeling is the present practice of restored blue labels AND restored purple lables, as it causes problems in the marketplace when buying/selling blue label restored books.....problems you ask....what kind of problems? OK, let's say I sold you a raw book as unrestored VF for $4,000. You say "how do I know it's unrestored?" and I say "send it to CGC....if they find it to be restored, I'll give you a full refund". We complete our transaction and the book comes back from CGC with a blue Universal label and graders notes " very minor color touch on the spine ". So you know what happens next......you ask for your $4k back due to the color touch, and I say "the book is in a blue label....it has been found to be unrestored....no refund." ( I would never do this to you guys..I would always issue a refund if you bought from me and were not happy for any reason...this is just an example )

 

If someone placed a little dot of red pigment to color in a tiny chip on a books red spine......then a blue label is issued with "very minor color touch" graders notes. If the same thing happens but the chip reaches a certain size...then a purple label is issued. This is what I have a problem with. Using the same scenerio from above, what if we were dealing with the sale of a $40,000 comic instead of $4,000?

 

This is exactly like a pregnant woman......a book has either been visually enhanced/improved upon thru any number of condition improving/changing techniques or not. My point is, it seems that the blue "except for....." label is creating a 3rd uneeded category that can and does cause problems when buying and selling....even though that is not CGC's function...they do their job great -- grade and give resto info.....it's the way the info is delivered and packaged that is the concern.

 

This is what we presently have now, and I believe it can be approved upon:

 

blue label - no graders notes - unrestored

purple label - restored

blue label with "color touch" graders notes ---well, kinda somewhat unrestored-ish in between thingy....good luck buying and selling this one guys!

 

See, the problem with your analogy is that "blue label with notes" does NOT mean "unrestored." It means "CGC Universal Grade with notes of minor restoration that doesn't affect the grade much or at all." If someone sells a book

as unrestored and it comes back in a blue-with-notes label, that person deserves a refund.

 

Who said blue labels are unrestored? Not CGC to my knowledge or PGX! It is a Universal grade given to books, meaning without substantial resoration or to be considered universally accepted as correct. While I do see they make mention of "a small amount of color touch", or "tiny amount of glue", they in their wisdom deam it not of consideration for final grade. It is this wisdom that many of us have made good money with and have come to accept as the status quo. Not that things cant change, but for the sake of argument you can't have it both ways. If the grade CGC is giving out for the most part is accepted, why not the notations they give to corrections, like tape, or small amount of glue, light color touch. Why do we question this, but accept the rest as rule. They are 3rd party, if we decide that 3rd party grading is king, then....well we sleep in that bed.

 

So what if a book is $40K instead of 4K, if I am going to make that kind of purchase, I will want to see more than a 3inch by 2inch picture. If the label is blue and says pin drop size color touch on spine, I will take this in consideration but it may or may not change my perception of the book. Would I consider this resto? Personally, No! Would it reduce the amount I would spend?.....Maybe, but just a little, It would be wieghed out against a few things. Like, can I find a better copy for less money, or a similar copy for same money. Is it the only copy likely to come available in a time frame that I need. I guess my point is that while all of this dialogue is great, we as collectors or dealers can choose, and this above all makes a case for Blue with notes or purple or green labels. Meaning we choose how much to pay, or how little. I am just saying value is determined by market, and if market is informed, then it really doesn't matter what label it has only that it is disclosed via some kind of label, then its just choice.

 

So in the case where a dealer states no restoration of any kind, and guaranties this via CGC or PGX and it comes back with blue and description.... It would be the right thing to give options to buyer if he or she has a problem. Such as full return or partial to make both parties happy. Any dealer or seller should have no problem with this, and if they do...I wouldn't do business with them again. If Super high dollar book, then get return policy in writing and be specific to what whould be acceptable i.e. no notes blue label if that is your thing. OK! OK! I am off my box... shoot it out boys!

[bluechip]

[

I view a repair as an attempt to halt further damage, like sealing a tear because you're afraid it'll tear further. No attempt is made to disguise the fact that the tear is still there, it's just sealed.

 

Resto would include masking the fact that the tear was ever there at all.

 

See? there is always common ground when people set emotion aside and use terminology based on their knowledge of facts.

 

There is no way I could disagree with what nearmint says here. And nobody else could either unless they surrendered rationale to emotions.

 

We should stive to keep emotions in people's heads and not try to go beyond that by creating new and contradictory meanings for word like restoration or repair..

 

Emotions are supposed to be yours and yours alone. They belong in your head, or you can communicate them by words. But if you don't like the fact that others have different emotion responses than you do, I don't think you should try to insist they have that same response, or try to create in people that same response with ugly labels, or with condemnation or accusations and prognostications about the intent of the person behind, say, a dot of glue.

 

You are dead on here, nearmint.