Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ghost Town

14 posts in this topic

Wow, check out Ghost Town's X-Men and Daredevil collections...sweet! I wonder how long it took him to accumulate these books...mighty nice collections there. I think he had some other entries as well, but those are the two that stood out in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm beginning to think it's too good to be true. I don't have any info that says he doesn't own all these books. But it seems odd that one of the guys with what appears to be one of the nicest sets of Marvel out there, is one of the early people to use the registry.. 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's the real deal. I figure he picked most of it up before CGC because I really haven't seen him buying anywhere near the VOLUME of books on ebay listed in the registry, but he's definitely one of the guys who shells out the big bucks publicly when a 9.6 or 9.8 pops up he doesn't already own.

 

When I was doing pedigree research before I found out Matt Nelson was writing a book on the topic, Brulato wouldn't talk to me about Curator because he didn't want people to specifically know what he owned because he thought it would give his top-end competitors too much information. I guess "ghost town" doesn't really see that as a disadvantage!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. Strange that he was able to find THAT much high grade stuff before. Must've been very active in the community. Definately a very nice collection then.

Kinda kills the desire to use the registry though. As then everyone is "competing" with this guy for the best set.

 

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all knew these guys were out there...SOMEBODY had to own those high-graders at the top of the census. I suspected maybe they wouldn't have any motivation to put their collections in there, but for some reason "ghost town" did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I obviously underestimated the breadth of some people's collection. I originally assumed (before I started collecting other runs than just ASM/Cap) that most people limited themselves to just 1-2 titles. Obviously this assumption was very wrong.

Thankfully I managed to pick up a fair amount of books in the 90's before CGC. Just thinking about the amount of collections that must've just shot up like a rocket after these multiples became more abundant is amazing.

 

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can anyone take numbers from the heritage scans and just enter them as their own? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I think when they first started the registry, Arch said that someone could steal serial numbers, but that if disputed they would investigate. If I remember correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can anyone take numbers from the heritage scans and just enter them as their own? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

I think when they first started the registry, Arch said that someone could steal serial numbers, but that if disputed they would investigate. If I remember correctly.

 

Found It, COI asked this question, and Dena aswered it.

 

Dena or Arch, I have a hypothetical scenario:

 

Let's say someone decides to go through a database like Heritage, and takes down bar-code #'s of high end books they don't own and inputs them into their registry.(It's stupid, but I wouldn't put it past a lot of people). Then let's say I'm looking through the registry, and see a book I own in someone else's collection. I asume I could contact you guys to get it removed as long as I provide proof of ownership? And what kind of proof would you need to verify I CURRENTLY own the book? What I could also see happening is people keeping books they once owned on the registry inorder to boost their rating. In that scenario, 2 people could be claiming ownership and could provide proof, so what would be done? And would there be some sort of dicipline(Like banning) to as individual who is found to be falsly boosting their status?

 

Has this kind of thing happen with the coin registry? And if so, how was it handled? I know that for some collectors(particularly high grade collectors), the ego appeal is the main reason they collect(whether they admit it or not), and as the registry grows in size, I could see this kind of thing happening.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Good questions.

 

If you submit a cert number that is already registered to someone else, the entry is flagged and put aside for special handling by the system managers. The system managers will contact both parties to determine ownership. If there is a dispute over ownership that we couldn't resolve through the submission of scans as proof, we would require that the parties send the book in to us as proof of ownership.

 

It has never gotten that far on the coin side. There was one instance where two users claimed they had the same coin but after one user went to his safety deposit box to look at the coin, he realized he entered the wrong cert number.

 

Regarding the ability for someone to copy cert numbers from the internet, that really becomes an issue of the "honor system" because it would be nearly impossible for us to police this practice 100% of the time. However, on the coin side I found that the users really help me police this sort of thing. If they see entries that look suspicious, they report them to me and I check them out. Collectors who are really in tune with the industry know who owns what, and what is up for sale, so anyone copying numbers from the net would get caught pretty quickly. And yes, anyone caught cheating will be banned

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as certifying ownership, it seems that CGC could just request a high rez image of the book with a current newspaper. That would show the book and the label, and the newspaper would verify that the book is presently owned by that person. Of course, you might have some Photoshop wizards out there that could even make this difficult to verify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites