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

[action1kid]

QUOTE;If you have nothing to do with transaction, and seller has disclosed everything and buyer is okay with it -- it is not your business to tell them they have to believe otherwise or to try to make them feel otherwise.

I couldnt have said that better myself. Your 100% Correct. What you are incorrect about is that I am implying that I am insisting it get a big discount in price when I am not involved in the transaction at all. You are putting words into my mouth here.

I speak for myself only.

[tth2]

Look at this line <<<<I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be browbeaten into accepting some politically correct line that restoration is acceptable so long as it's disclosed >>>>

 

Just what does that mean? If it's not acceptable to yiou, fine. But if it's acceptable to other people it's not incumbent on you, or even acceptable, to demand they feel the way you do, or to try to punish them for feeling differently. If seller discloses the work and the buyer has no problem with it, then it's none of your business.

Of course it's my right to try to persuade people to think the way I do, if I feel that what they're doing is wrong. If people who thought something was wrong never campaigned against those wrongs, and couldn't persuade people to their way of thinking and couldn't try to enact laws against those wrongs, we would have anarchy on our hands.

 

Let's just take your words and apply them to a different concept to illustrate why I disagree with your requirement that I passively accept what others choose to do. Suppose we were talking about slavery, and it's pre-Civil War so there's nothing illegal in the slave-owning states about owning a slave, but I feel it's morally and ethically wrong. Would you still say "it's not incumbent on you, or even acceptable, to demand they feel the way you do, or to try to punish them for feeling differently"? So I should just stand aside and say that I think slavery is wrong, but not do anything to try to convince other people that slavery is wrong or to try to outlaw it?

 

*And before anyone jumps in that we're just talking about comics and restoration and you can't equate it to slavery, I'm just using an extreme example to illustrate the principle, okay?*

[mr.schomburg]

I know you put a disclaimer, but slavery! Come on, lets get real here! Just my opininion, but that extreame example is flamatory and not even remotely relavent.

[bluechip]

Look at this line <<<<I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be browbeaten into accepting some politically correct line that restoration is acceptable so long as it's disclosed >>>>

 

Just what does that mean? If it's not acceptable to yiou, fine. But if it's acceptable to other people it's not incumbent on you, or even acceptable, to demand they feel the way you do, or to try to punish them for feeling differently. If seller discloses the work and the buyer has no problem with it, then it's none of your business.

Of course it's my right to try to persuade people to think the way I do, if I feel that what they're doing is wrong. If people who thought something was wrong never campaigned against those wrongs, and couldn't persuade people to their way of thinking and couldn't try to enact laws against those wrongs, we would have anarchy on our hands.

 

Let's just take your words and apply them to a different concept to illustrate why I disagree with your requirement that I passively accept what others choose to do. Suppose we were talking about slavery, and it's pre-Civil War so there's nothing illegal in the slave-owning states about owning a slave, but I feel it's morally and ethically wrong. Would you still say "it's not incumbent on you, or even acceptable, to demand they feel the way you do, or to try to punish them for feeling differently"? So I should just stand aside and say that I think slavery is wrong, but not do anything to try to convince other people that slavery is wrong or to try to outlaw it?

 

*And before anyone jumps in that we're just talking about comics and restoration and you can't equate it to slavery, I'm just using an extreme example to illustrate the principle, okay?*

 

You have the right to say anything you like to try to persuade people.

 

And I'm sorry, your slavery analogy falls apart not because of the relative gravity of the offense but because

 

There is NOTHING morally or ethically or legally wrong with two INFORMED adults buying and selling a restored book.

 

There is no unwilling "slave" in the transaction to make your anaology work.

 

There are only two people who both want to buy or sell an item.

 

The book itself has no rights, no feelings, no desire to be restored or left unrestored. And even if it did you would have absolutely no way of knowing hat the book prefers.

 

And because of all the above, regardless of how you feel, neither you nor I nor anyone else has any right to demand they think differently or to pass any laws, or insist on any rules, designed to force them to think as you do, or coerce them into acting like they think as you do.

 

As long as there is no deception and no harm done to you there is NOTHING ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL OR IMMORAL about it. And it is not anybody's business but theirs.

 

 

 

.

[lou_fine]

we could begin by seperating books which have had NO restoration at all from books that have had ANY restoration at all. We could place the unrestored ones in a blue holder, and the restored ones in a purple holder. With this approach, there are no blue labels with graders notes about "minor color touch" or "minor glue".

 

It would be a fine place to begin indeed

 

I fail to see how "dumbing down" the process would help matters

 

I do not believe there is anything dumb about 1st seperating books into 2 categories...restored and unrestored. From that foundation, you can build a very tall information tree for both sets of books....graders notes for a summary of an assigned grade, resto description in detail.......info, info, info.

 

But without the seperation into 2 clear categories, you get a hode podge of conflicting facts and opinions.....like we have now....if you have a book with minor color touch and it can be Universal or Restored....that is a weak foundation...hard to build on that one

 

S4;

 

This separation into 2 distinct categories (blue and purple) is basically what we have in today's market and it is simply not working. As long as we have the blue and purple labels to dumb down the process, the marketplace will simply see this as a signal by CGC to avoid certain books and will not even bother to pay any attention to resto notes that might show up on the label. Notes won't matter at all because CGC has already given the book the "purple label of death".

 

This dual colour label system is exactly why so many scammers are trying to juice up their books through any methods possible and run it through CGC without disclosing the work that has been done to it. This is exactly why we see books moving up from 4.0 to 9.0 while still sitting in a blue label without any notes throughout the whole process. The current system only encourages everybody to intentionally restore without disclosing.

 

An uni-colour label system with a restoration rating will result in a marketplace where collectors will pay more attention to the book itself as opposed to the colour of the label. There will be less encouragement for people to restore without disclosing because books will be numerically rated along a scale as opposed to just simply being categorized as either good or bad with no real in between.

[lou_fine]

In the meantime, very little is accomplished simply by putting things in colored holders. The best thing to do in the meantime is to make sure there is as much information as possible on all books -- blue or purple.

 

If you have the information, colored labels are not necessary for your to know what you want to avoid. They are only useful if you want other people to avoid them,

 

If the CGC were to tell you in more detail why every book gets the designation (including the grade itself), then all books -- blue or people -- will be better served.

 

It is not label colors but information the buyers need to make the right determination about how they feel. An unbiased and fact-based grading service is supposed to provide facts so you can determine how you feel -- not to try to make you feel the way others feel

 

Bluechip;

 

Very well stated and I am in full agreement with you here!

 

Especially the part about the only purpose of colour labels is to entice the marketplace to avoid certain books.

[Aman619]

I still fail to understand why the subset of collectors who dont mind restored books have such a problem with the purple label? Any collector (like me and S4 and Tim) who just do not want to buy a restored book now find it easier to focus on unrestored books. And those of you who do not mind a restored book, or even seek them out becuase you get more visual bang for your reduced buck now have them labeled for you. My point is that we are of two DIFFERENT mindsets each seeking to collect two DIFFERENT sets of comics: restored and unrestored. The values to YOU guys should remain as high as YOU all want to pay for them, and, the rest of us were never interested in them ANYWAY, except in the old days when we paid too much for them NOT KNOWING what we were getting.

 

what has happened since WE are no longer fooled into buying them is that the prices have lowered to levels they probably should really sell for.... no longer at higher prices they used to get when they were often taken for UNrestored. We all agree do we not that they should sell for LESS than unrestored, right? Now, with the obvious PLOD we are seeing how much less.

[Shield]

Whats the confusion? Unrestored is Untouched.

 

I don't know about that. Years ago I "touched" a Pep Comics #25 that had a severe spine roll. I removed the staples, and placed in between the Gerber books and added some weights on top of it. A few months later, after flattening it out, I put the book back together carefully, sent it in to CGC and it came back an un-remarked blue label 3.5 VG-.

 

This was quite some time ago, like 3-4 years ago. Never tried it again since.

[Aman619]

In the meantime, very little is accomplished simply by putting things in colored holders. The best thing to do in the meantime is to make sure there is as much information as possible on all books -- blue or purple.

 

If you have the information, colored labels are not necessary for your to know what you want to avoid. They are only useful if you want other people to avoid them,

 

If the CGC were to tell you in more detail why every book gets the designation (including the grade itself), then all books -- blue or people -- will be better served.

 

It is not label colors but information the buyers need to make the right determination about how they feel. An unbiased and fact-based grading service is supposed to provide facts so you can determine how you feel -- not to try to make you feel the way others feel

 

Bluechip;

 

Very well stated and I am in full agreement with you here!

 

Especially the part about the only purpose of colour labels is to entice the marketplace to avoid certain books.

 

 

hey guys, why not take those lemons and make lemonade! Look on the bright side: all the restored books ar enow specifically labeled for you!

 

Restored books were in most cases a scam: sold to the uninitiated as unrestored. CGC early on saw the call to protect the unaware. And picked an obvious "scarlet letter" solution. Mission accomplished. Too bad there have been unforseen repercussions. Again, sounds pretty familiar as with CGCs radical new pronouncements that pressing and restapling are NOT restoration. Its a Brave New World, boys. I feel your pain in failing to convince CGC to change their stance or even add better restoration notations and ratings. They just dont listen, do they?

[bluechip]

I still fail to understand why the subset of collectors who dont mind restored books have such a problem with the purple label? Any collector (like me and S4 and Tim) who just do not want to buy a restored book now find it easier to focus on unrestored books. And those of you who do not mind a restored book, or even seek them out becuase you get more visual bang for your reduced buck now have them labeled for you. My point is that we are of two DIFFERENT mindsets each seeking to collect two DIFFERENT sets of comics: restored and unrestored. The values to YOU guys should remain as high as YOU all want to pay for them, and, the rest of us were never interested in them ANYWAY, except in the old days when we paid too much for them NOT KNOWING what we were getting.

 

what has happened since WE are no longer fooled into buying them is that the prices have lowered to levels they probably should really sell for.... no longer at higher prices they used to get when they were often taken for UNrestored. We all agree do we not that they should sell for LESS than unrestored, right? Now, with the obvious PLOD we are seeing how much less.

 

Actually, I see a lot of people on these boards saying they are willing to collect both. And often when I hear somebody defendingf the purple lable and I assume they would never buy a restored bookj, never ever ever under any circumstances, they usually end up saying sopmething like of sure I would. I just want it be a whole lot cheaper.

 

As for whether books are selling for what they SHOULD sell for -- well, back in the days before the PLOD there were plenty of people buying restored books knowing full well they were restored. And the prices were higher.

 

All of the evidence -- and most of the opinions on these boards -- reinforces the conclusion that the purple label exacerbates the resistance toward restoration.

 

When people push for the continuance of the purple label, I keep hearing the same refrrain -- that restored books SHOULD sell for less. (in fact the word :"should" comes up a lot). That clearly indicates a desire by some for restored books to sell for less, and it seems to be those people who keep insisting the purple label is desirable and even necessary, even as they insist it's not actually the purple label driving down the value.

[The Black Hand ®]

They rigged the game. By allowing pressing and restapling and dry erasures it allows countless resubmissions that some feel need not be disclosed. Restoration is here, you can't change that. There is a place for it. My main point is about disclosure and honesty and integrity. Surely that can't be too much to ask for in this hobby. Why does that freak some people out. As soon as one begins talking about restoration there is a certain segment of our population with an obvious financial interest who try to distract, divert or silence our discussion. This really shouldn't be all that hard. Just disclose all manipulation of a book and all resubmissions.

[mr.schomburg]

They rigged the game. By allowing pressing and restapling and dry erasures it allows countless resubmissions that some feel need not be disclosed. Restoration is here, you can't change that. There is a place for it. My main point is about disclosure and honesty and integrity. Surely that can't be too much to ask for in this hobby. Why does that freak some people out. As soon as one begins talking about restoration there is a certain segment of our population with an obvious financial interest who try to distract, divert or silence our discussion. This really shouldn't be all that hard. Just disclose all manipulation of a book and all resubmissions.

 

I can give a Amen to that! The debate aside, FULL DISCLOSURE RULES, and then buyers can make up their own mind on what to pay.

[bluechip]

Whats the confusion? Unrestored is Untouched.

 

I don't know about that. Years ago I "touched" a Pep Comics #25 that had a severe spine roll. I removed the staples, and placed in between the Gerber books and added some weights on top of it. A few months later, after flattening it out, I put the book back together carefully, sent it in to CGC and it came back an un-remarked blue label 3.5 VG-.

 

This was quite some time ago, like 3-4 years ago. Never tried it again since.

 

From the sound of some on these boards, you have virtually confessed a mortal sin. But, paradoxically, if somehow the same flattening had occured accidentally, that would be okay.

 

Once a guy sold me a book that was heavily wrinled and bent from being stored badly. You now the kind -- where the book is so wavy it doesn't even fit in a mylar unless you flatten in out first? Well, after purchasing it, and right in front of him, I flattened it out to put it in a mylar sleeve and he responded as if I had done something deceitful and wrong. It made me wonder what he thought I should do with a book like that. Put it in some special container several inches thick so the wavy winkles would stay wavy? In his mind was I "restoring" the book? Sometimes people take a principle that and run with it all the way past the vanishing point of rational thought.

[tth2]

Look at this line <<<<I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be browbeaten into accepting some politically correct line that restoration is acceptable so long as it's disclosed >>>>

 

Just what does that mean? If it's not acceptable to yiou, fine. But if it's acceptable to other people it's not incumbent on you, or even acceptable, to demand they feel the way you do, or to try to punish them for feeling differently. If seller discloses the work and the buyer has no problem with it, then it's none of your business.

Of course it's my right to try to persuade people to think the way I do, if I feel that what they're doing is wrong. If people who thought something was wrong never campaigned against those wrongs, and couldn't persuade people to their way of thinking and couldn't try to enact laws against those wrongs, we would have anarchy on our hands.

 

Let's just take your words and apply them to a different concept to illustrate why I disagree with your requirement that I passively accept what others choose to do. Suppose we were talking about slavery, and it's pre-Civil War so there's nothing illegal in the slave-owning states about owning a slave, but I feel it's morally and ethically wrong. Would you still say "it's not incumbent on you, or even acceptable, to demand they feel the way you do, or to try to punish them for feeling differently"? So I should just stand aside and say that I think slavery is wrong, but not do anything to try to convince other people that slavery is wrong or to try to outlaw it?

 

*And before anyone jumps in that we're just talking about comics and restoration and you can't equate it to slavery, I'm just using an extreme example to illustrate the principle, okay?*

 

You have the right to say anything you like to try to persuade people.

 

And I'm sorry, your slavery analogy falls apart not because of the relative gravity of the offense but because

 

There is NOTHING morally or ethically or legally wrong with two INFORMED adults buying and selling a restored book.

 

There is no unwilling "slave" in the transaction to make your anaology work.

 

There are only two people who both want to buy or sell an item.

 

The book itself has no rights, no feelings, no desire to be restored or left unrestored. And even if it did you would have absolutely no way of knowing hat the book prefers.

 

And because of all the above, regardless of how you feel, neither you nor I nor anyone else has any right to demand they think differently or to pass any laws, or insist on any rules, designed to force them to think as you do, or coerce them into acting like they think as you do.

 

As long as there is no deception and no harm done to you there is NOTHING ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL OR IMMORAL about it. And it is not anybody's business but theirs.

 

 

 

.

Fine, let me go harpoon a few whales. They have no rights, no feelings, no desire to be allowed to live, at least not any more than the cows, chickens or pigs that we kill everyday for food. And even if they did you would have absolutely no way of knowing what the whale (or cow, chicken or pig) prefers.

 

There is nothing illegal or unethical or immoral about it and if certain countries want to authorize whale hunts, it is not anybody's business but theirs. It used to be completely legal, and one great American novel was written about it.

 

WE choose what is illegal, unethical or immoral. Notwithstanding your statement that it's not currently illegal, if enough lawmakers could be convinced to pass a law outlawing restoration, then it would become illegal. The concepts of legality and morality are transient and change from generation to generate. My position that restoration of comics purely for aesthetic reasons is wrong, even if fully disclosed. You may not agree with me, but I think it's fully within my rights to advocate my position and to try to get others to adopt measures that make it more difficult to restore books.

[tth2]

From the sound of some on these boards, you have virtually confessed a mortal sin. But, paradoxically, if somehow the same flattening had occured accidentally, that would be okay.

Of course, intent is everything in this analysis! Are you saying that we shouldn't consider killing with intent to be wrong because, paradoxically, if the victim had dropped dead of a heart attack it would be okay?

[adamstrange]

This dual colour label system is exactly why so many scammers are trying to juice up their books through any methods possible and run it through CGC without disclosing the work that has been done to it. This is exactly why we see books moving up from 4.0 to 9.0 while still sitting in a blue label without any notes throughout the whole process.

 

I don't get the connection between two label system and 4.0 to 9.0 move.

 

The whole set of attempts to perform work that CGC can't/won't detect was a byproduct of the much higher multiples being paid for the much higher grades. Even if CGC were to stop the 4.0 to 9.0 potentializing they would not stop the potentializing of books prior to their submission to CGC.

 

I suspect that a proper comparison by CGC of current submission to past submissions to check for pressing etc would result in more business for pressers. There are tons of raw books out there that have never been slabbed. If people knew that CGC would catch slab upgrades, then they would submit more of the books to "Presser X" for a pre-screen and press BEFORE the book was ever seen by CGC.

[tth2]

The BFD is inherent in the fact that restored books sell for less than unrestored books. That doesn't make those books "BAD" though. Nor does it make restoration "BAD." I don't see anyone here saying that restored books should sell for as much as unrestored books. They're saying that a desirable book is not instantly transformed into a POS simply because someone added a dot of color touch on a spine stress line on an otherwise Near Mint book 20 years ago. It's just a dot of color touch. Get a grip.

Yes, but it indirectly affects collectors of unrestored books because the available pool of unrestored books shrinks every year due to the aesthetic tyranny of others. How many times have we read comments on these boards to the effect of "It is so hard to find "X book" unrestored"?

 

If it were a date stamp or grease pencil distributor mark with 100 times as much foreign matter being placed on the cover, you wouldn't care. But if there's a dot of color touch on a spine stress mark, people lose their freaking minds.

It's not about the "foreign matter", it's about the intent in altering the book. One was done in the ordinary course, or to indicate ownership. There was no intent to improve the appearance of the book. If putting any foreign matter on books, or marring their perfection, was what I was concerned with, I'd be at war with every person who ever creased or tore a page, wouldn't I?

[FFB]

The BFD is inherent in the fact that restored books sell for less than unrestored books. That doesn't make those books "BAD" though. Nor does it make restoration "BAD." I don't see anyone here saying that restored books should sell for as much as unrestored books. They're saying that a desirable book is not instantly transformed into a POS simply because someone added a dot of color touch on a spine stress line on an otherwise Near Mint book 20 years ago. It's just a dot of color touch. Get a grip.

Yes, but it indirectly affects collectors of unrestored books because the available pool of unrestored books shrinks every year due to the aesthetic tyranny of others. How many times have we read comments on these boards to the effect of "It is so hard to find "X book" unrestored"?

 

Those books tend not to be much easier to find RESTORED either.

 

 

If it were a date stamp or grease pencil distributor mark with 100 times as much foreign matter being placed on the cover, you wouldn't care. But if there's a dot of color touch on a spine stress mark, people lose their freaking minds.

It's not about the "foreign matter", it's about the intent in altering the book. One was done in the ordinary course, or to indicate ownership. There was no intent to improve the appearance of the book. If putting any foreign matter on books, or marring their perfection, was what I was concerned with, I'd be at war with every person who ever creased or tore a page, wouldn't I?

 

OK, so if you try to make a POS book in PR or FR condition into an acceptable, presentable copy by sealing a split spine, you're evil, but if you crease or tear a book, you're fine.

 

Makes perfect sense to me.

[tth2]

The BFD is inherent in the fact that restored books sell for less than unrestored books. That doesn't make those books "BAD" though. Nor does it make restoration "BAD." I don't see anyone here saying that restored books should sell for as much as unrestored books. They're saying that a desirable book is not instantly transformed into a POS simply because someone added a dot of color touch on a spine stress line on an otherwise Near Mint book 20 years ago. It's just a dot of color touch. Get a grip.

Yes, but it indirectly affects collectors of unrestored books because the available pool of unrestored books shrinks every year due to the aesthetic tyranny of others. How many times have we read comments on these boards to the effect of "It is so hard to find "X book" unrestored"?

 

Those books tend not to be much easier to find RESTORED either.

Yes, but you restoration fans aren't making it any easier.

 

OK, so if you try to make a POS book in PR or FR condition into an acceptable, presentable copy by sealing a split spine, you're evil, but if you crease or tear a book, you're fine.

 

Makes perfect sense to me.

I would say that if a split spine bugs you that much, don't buy the book in the first place.

 

Second, you seem to continue to conveniently forget about the "intent" part of the equation. How in the world could you expect me to hold every kid who folded back the cover as he read his favorite comic in the same disdain that I hold an otherwise sophisticated collector who out of some misplaced desire for perfection on the cheap decides to restore a comic to make it look better than it really is?

[lou_fine]

Restored books were in most cases a scam: sold to the uninitiated as unrestored. CGC early on saw the call to protect the unaware. And picked an obvious "scarlet letter" solution. Mission accomplished. Too bad there have been unforseen repercussions. Again, sounds pretty familiar as with CGCs radical new pronouncements that pressing and restapling are NOT restoration. Its a Brave New World, boys. I feel your pain in failing to convince CGC to change their stance or even add better restoration notations and ratings. They just dont listen, do they?

 

Yes, I guess it would depend on what you mean by mission accomplished.

 

If you are referring to the fact that restoration techniques have become more sophisicated so that scammers are now "legitimizing" their restored books by laundering them through CGC in order to get the blue label, then yes, mission accomplished. Now the marketplace has no idea what's actually sitting within these blue label slabs.

 

This so-called "scarlet letter" solution of yours has done more to encouraged undisclosed restoration in the past few years then anything that we have had in the past. An one colour label system with a restoration rating would discourage undisclosed resto since it would actually help to educate the marketplace about restoration and focus more attention on the book itself as opposed to the colour of a label.

 

I guess according to your argument, maybe we should go back to the simple 3-point condition grading system we used to have in the past. I guess in those days collectors were more educated with just the Good, Fine, and Mint grades that were in place, as opposed to the current 10-point CGC grading system we have in place. Maybe we need to do away with the CGC grading so that we can have a safer marketplace with a more simplified grading system.

 

I guess that's why you feel the current 2-category (blue & purple) and 3-level restoration system (slight, moderate, extensive) is so much more sophisicated and educational than what a formal restoration rating system would provide the marketplace with.