Another re-sub up again on CLINK

[agro23]

However, the only way to prevent this from happening in the future is to make sure one does not and cannot profit from this. If there's no money to be made, hopefully it will stop. And the only way to do that is to inform the marketplace. It's a minefield out there for buyers, caveat emptor.

No, no it's not. Let's first ignore the possible legal ramifications of harming someone's sale(s) on comic(s) that by industry standard (CGC) are not "restored."

 

Your argument is the same as advocating the arrest of drug users to dry up the market for drugs and therefore end the drug "problem" instead of getting the suppliers or even dealing with the the source of the need in the first place. It's inside out.

 

The way to prevent press/clean/resub sales from happening in the future is to get CGC to reexamine what is and isn't restoration. Until that time, if you don't agree with CGC's determination what right do you or anyone else have to be the hobby police? This just astounds me.

 

You don't want to buy them and you won't sell them, fine. If a seller lies to you about what's been done when you ask, you deal with that seller. Pointing out what you believe is resubbed, also fine.

 

But people are making statements with a misleading amount of certainty (and forming societies to do so). Someone is going to get burned in the process. It crosses a line when you make statements you can't prove. Not you in particular of course but "you" in general.

 

What's next? Cyber-picketing eBay sellers?

 

Funny thing is, I have no stake in this discussion because if I had a book pressed for resale I'd disclose it.

[Harvey Dude]

if you don't agree with CGC's determination what right do you or anyone else have to be the hobby police? This just astounds me.

 

... It crosses a line when you make statements you can't prove. Not you in particular of course but "you" in general.

 

What's next? Cyber-picketing eBay sellers?

 

Factual statement: The Adventure went from a CGC 7.5 to CGC 8.5 and the arrival date was removed. What astounds me is that there are people that would want to keep this information from prospective buyers. And for what purpose? How would you feel if you purchased the book that was previously a grade lower and this information was not made known to you at the time of purchase?

[stagedoorjohnny]

The way to prevent press/clean/resub sales from happening in the future is to get CGC to reexamine what is and isn't restoration. Until that time, if you don't agree with CGC's determination what right do you or anyone else have to be the hobby police? This just astounds me.

 

Some people genuinely don't believe pressing and certain methods of cleaning are restoration (at least that's what they say), so that's probably not possible. Now if CGC would maintain a record and history on individual books that were resubbed, that would make sense.

 

Not trying to be Officer Krupke at all. All I'm saying is buyers need and should be informed. And I may be wrong on this, but I believe if the marketplace was properly informed, people who may "alter" books will not be rewarded for it and eventually will stop doing it or at least doing it less and less.

 

Now, if all the information is out there and none of it affects what the market bears for these books, so be it. The marketplace has spoken.

[agro23]

Factual statement: The Adventure went from a CGC 7.5 to CGC 8.5 and the arrival date was removed.

And you know it's the exact same comic because...?

 

What astounds me is that there are people that would want to keep this information from prospective buyers.

Who? Who wants to keep these suppositions from anyone? All I want is for people to call a supposition a supposition when they don't know for certain. Be objective.

 

People's beliefs are clouding their judgment. Just because you hate pressing & cleaning doesn't mean anyone else does, so don't impose your personal standards on others until they become the hobby standard.

 

How would you feel if you purchased the book that was previously a grade lower and this information was not made known to you at the time of purchase?

I'd be pissed and get a refund if I bought a restored book that was called unrestored. It's already happened to me although that was with additive restoration like color touch and such.

 

But that's not the issue here. The issue is people outing books when they don't know for certain what they're saying. The issue centers on what the accepted definition of "restored" is and what people are doing to force their standards on others.

 

Disclosure is one thing, being forced to disclose is another altogether. You're trying to legislate morality and it's not going to work.

 

The clock is ticking until the first lawsuit.

[agro23]

Now, if all the information is out there and none of it affects what the market bears for these books, so be it. The marketplace has spoken.

Putting the info out there is awesome. I applaud it with a thousand and more. But I take issue when people state suppositions as facts. That's all. There needs to be a few more "I believe"s and "I think"s than are currently being posted. The issue for me is the presentation of the information not the information itself.

 

EDIT: And really, if the CGC label just added: "RESUB: dd/mm/yy" or "REHOLDER: dd/mm/yy" that would help more than anything.

[Ze-man]

Factual statement: The Adventure went from a CGC 7.5 to CGC 8.5 and the arrival date was removed.

And you know it's the exact same comic because...?

 

.

 

Just to be clear.

 

It is the same book. 100% certainty. Too many landmarks on that book that identify it as one and the same.

 

You can belabor any other point you want. But arguing whether or not the book is the same should not be one of them.

 

Ze-

 

[agro23]

Factual statement: The Adventure went from a CGC 7.5 to CGC 8.5 and the arrival date was removed.

And you know it's the exact same comic because...?

 

.

 

Just to be clear.

 

It is the same book. 100% certainty. Too many landmarks on that book that identify it as one and the same.

 

You can belabor any other point you want. But arguing whether or not the book is the same should not be one of them.

 

Ze-

 

It is most likely the same book. More likely than the Comic Cavalcade 13 on ebay that looks exactly like the one I used to own but cracked from the slab and 'graded' higher. There is surely no way to know unless it was your book. In this case I would lean with the person holding it in their hand and then seeing it show up later, but it's still never 100%.

 

Of course I'd argue against the accuracy of fingerprinting off a partial print also, but you know...

[MasterChief]

And you know it's the exact same comic because...?

 

Perhaps something was missed in identifying these books as being one and the same.

 

Can you please point out why they are not?

[Harvey Dude]

And you know it's the exact same comic because...?

 

 

Blow up the Heritage scan and scrutinize the photo. You will see that the imperfections that remain are in the exact same spots on both books. The cut is exactly the same.

[agro23]

Can you please point out why they are not?

Prove angels don't exist. The burden of proof is not on my shoulders because I'm not making the claim.

 

All I'm trying to say is state these assertions as assertions not facts.

[agro23]

Blow up the Heritage scan and scrutinize the photo. You will see that the imperfections that remain are in the exact same spots on both books. The cut is exactly the same.

I agree 100%.

 

Yes, it does look an awful lot like the original book, doesn't it?

 

^-- Much different than saying it IS the same book.

[MasterChief]

Just to be clear.

 

It is the same book. 100% certainty. Too many landmarks on that book that identify it as one and the same.

 

You can belabor any other point you want. But arguing whether or not the book is the same should not be one of them.

 

Ze-

 

 

Are the flowers really necessary, Kenny?

 

With so many Daisies being dropped on the boards lately, I've got that Scott McKenzie song (Are you going to San Fransicko) stuck in my head.

 

Hey, maybe we can all drop some acid and forget about reality in totality...

 

[action1kid]

Has a book ever been resubbed more than Twice?

[Harvey Dude]

" People's beliefs are clouding their judgment. Just because you hate pressing & cleaning doesn't mean anyone else does, so don't impose your personal standards on others until they become the hobby standard. "

 

 

Actually, if this statement is directed towards me, I am all for cleaning and pressing and restorative work performed on comics. I own quite a few restored books. I am against not disclosing this information to buyers. I have been burned numerous times by sellers who did not disclose work performed on books and it almost drove me from the hobby.

 

Can you give an example of someone imposing standards on anyone else? You note the issue "centers on what the accepted definition of "restored" is and what people are doing to force their standards on others."

 

I don't believe there is a standard and I certainly do not believe that anyone is trying to force their standards on others. Everyone is free to make their own decisions based on information provided. The key is to get the information out there.

[Straw-Man]

Do you want to educate people and engage collectors in a dialogue to ultimately change what CGC calls restoration? Or do you simply want to punish the comic's current owner (whether or not they themselves did or didn't do the "manipulation") because they seem to have gamed the system?

 

 

no dis to any of the avid anti-pressing zealots intended, but the fact seems clear, from reading the interminable threads on pressing and pressed resubs, that some people just love the dramatic potential of this phenomenon. we're on these boards to talk and have fun, and to alot of these people the sherlock holmesian investigation necesssary to come up with the 'before and after' of 'manipulated' books is just a kick--the glowing props from other zealots on the remarkable sleuthing once it's on the net for all to see further fan the flames, and the intoxication of the idolatry drives the amaterur p.i. to ever greater, dizzying heights of uncovering 'tainted' books and bringing 'the word' to the followers. i'm not such a zealot, but have a morbid interest in reading the threads just to see the roiling of the water above where the feeding is going on about the evil, and greed, and ruination of the hobby, and.... i just can't help reading on.

 

proceed.

[agro23]

Actually, if this statement is directed towards me

It's the general "you".

Can you give an example of someone imposing standards on anyone else?

This thread? The one that got shut down in General? Others? Forcing disclosure of restoration that is not considered restoration at CGC by outing the books suspected of being cleaned and pressed?

The key is to get the information out there.

But how should it be done and by whom? Without a clear definition of what restoration is what should be disclosed? Do I have to join a club to prove that I know what that definition is? Since CGC is considered the leading authority in grading shouldn't a blue label be enough? I happen to think that it isn't. But I'm sure there are people to whom a blue label is a blue label and that's enough, both buyers and sellers. Forcing vendors to disclose by outing their books on suspicion of pressing/cleaning/resubbing is treading a slippery slope, even if begun with the most noble intentions.

[Ze-man]

Just to be clear.

 

It is the same book. 100% certainty. Too many landmarks on that book that identify it as one and the same.

 

You can belabor any other point you want. But arguing whether or not the book is the same should not be one of them.

 

Ze-

 

 

Are the flowers really necessary, Kenny?

 

With so many Daisies being dropped on the boards lately, I've got that Scott McKenzie song (Are you going to San Fransicko) stuck in my head.

 

Hey, maybe we can all drop some acid and forget about reality in totality...

 

 

Umm.. no more necessary then your post was!

 

Here are some flowers for you too. Smoke them, wear them in your hair. Or both!

 

 

Ze-

 

And thnx for planting that song in my head.

[batman_fan]

Actually, if this statement is directed towards me

It's the general "you".

Can you give an example of someone imposing standards on anyone else?

This thread? The one that got shut down in General? Others? Forcing disclosure of restoration that is not considered restoration at CGC by outing the books suspected of being cleaned and pressed?

The key is to get the information out there.

But how should it be done and by whom? Without a clear definition of what restoration is what should be disclosed? Do I have to join a club to prove that I know what that definition is? Since CGC is considered the leading authority in grading shouldn't a blue label be enough? I happen to think that it isn't. But I'm sure there are people to whom a blue label is a blue label and that's enough, both buyers and sellers. Forcing vendors to disclose by outing their books on suspicion of pressing/cleaning/resubbing is treading a slippery slope, even if begun with the most noble intentions.

 

Since I am the person that started the thread, I can best address my reason for posting what I observed. Please note in my post I made NO mention of restoration, etc. I simply posted the different links and asked if I was missing something. Looking at the large sized scans, it was conclusive enough for myself to decide they were one and the same books on three seperate submissions but I hoped one of the experts (REDHOOK where are ya when I need ya) could do some photoshop magic to fully verify. Through some means, the arrival date dissappeared between the 7.5 grade and the 8.5 grade, and then a bump in paper from ow/w to w. This I believe (my opinion which has no value) is from CGCs inconsistency in page notation which some people dispute. My reaon for looking at the book was a Sandman cover with white pages would be nice to have in my collection so I did a search on Heritage to see what the prices have been in the past to get an idea what one could expect and that is when I discovered the re-subs. So what am I going to do? I will pass on it. If someone else wants, great, enjoy, nice looking copy. I will wait until I find a copy in line with what I want to put down on a book. The reason is if I decide to sell it later, the book may have a smaller group of people willing to lay down that amount of cash and I wouldn't want to loss money on the deal. Again, if someone want to buy it, I would no discourage it at all. To each their own.

[Crowzilla]

Blow up the Heritage scan and scrutinize the photo.

Yes, it does look an awful lot like the original book, doesn't it?

 

Amazingly so, in fact the large scan of the 8.5 copy even reveals the remains of an identical pencil mark in the white logo area.

[stagedoorjohnny]

no dis to any of the avid anti-pressing zealots intended, but the fact seems clear, from reading the interminable threads on pressing and pressed resubs, that some people just love the dramatic potential of this phenomenon. we're on these boards to talk and have fun, and to alot of these people the sherlock holmesian investigation necesssary to come up with the 'before and after' of 'manipulated' books is just a kick--the glowing props from other zealots on the remarkable sleuthing once it's on the net for all to see further fan the flames, and the intoxication of the idolatry drives the amaterur p.i. to ever greater, dizzying heights of uncovering 'tainted' books and bringing 'the word' to the followers. i'm not such a zealot, but have a morbid interest in reading the threads just to see the roiling of the water above where the feeding is going on about the evil, and greed, and ruination of the hobby, and.... i just can't help reading on.

 

proceed.

 

Do I own any pressed books in my collection? Don't know for sure, but most probably the answer is ... "YES". Do I regret paying what I paid for them, even though they may have been pressed? In hindsight, the answer is... HELL NO!!! I would do it again ten out of ten times because I would rather own that particular book than not own it at all. Do I wish I would have known about its history prior to purchasing the book? Ummmm. ..YEAH.