• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

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

Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

4,963 posts in this topic

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

There have been more than a few books in this alone that have been scarlet-lettered that most likely didn't deserve it. Many of the books were obvious examples of the Costanza effect. Others, not so much.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

There have been more than a few books in this alone that have been scarlet-lettered that most likely didn't deserve it. Many of the books were obvious examples of the Costanza effect. Others, not so much.

 

Seems to me that would be CCS's fault, wouldn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Hopefully no board members are that stupid, but there are a lot of submitters who don't read these boards and still aren't aware of the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

There have been more than a few books in this alone that have been scarlet-lettered that most likely didn't deserve it. Many of the books were obvious examples of the Costanza effect. Others, not so much.

 

Seems to me that would be CCS's fault, wouldn't it?

Even if it is CCS's fault, why does that make it ok to publicly disparage somebody's book? If you don't like books with shrunken covers, you don't have to buy them.

 

I understand why people are unhappy about the Costanza'd books. I'm not happy about it either. But for me, publicly slamming somebody's books is a pretty uncool thing to do. And the excuse that it's CCS's fault is pretty weak to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CGC needs to adapt more quickly, even if getting ahead of scammers like Mark Wilson isn't entirely possible.

 

Back in the day, Mark Wilson was basically forced into hiding as his hobby reputation sank to new lows.

 

But now he and his spawn have figured out how to insidiously manipulate books in the slabbed market.

 

I would never touch anything that passes through their collective hands ever again, regardless of how CGC adapts (or not). The problem is in the knowing, but the visual evidence and submission codes do help.

 

In essence, CGC gives Wilson a Blue label shield to hide behind. Instead of suppressing his manipulations, it actually provides him greater opportunity for profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

There have been more than a few books in this alone that have been scarlet-lettered that most likely didn't deserve it. Many of the books were obvious examples of the Costanza effect. Others, not so much.

 

Seems to me that would be CCS's fault, wouldn't it?

Even if it is CCS's fault, why does that make it ok to publicly disparage somebody's book? If you don't like books with shrunken covers, you don't have to buy them.

 

I understand why people are unhappy about the Costanza'd books. I'm not happy about it either. But for me, publicly slamming somebody's books is a pretty uncool thing to do. And the excuse that it's CCS's fault is pretty weak to me.

 

...... (thumbs u ....exactly how I feel, Barton. A fairly common early SA production defect has now been ostracized by all this, and books to which absolutely NOTHING has been done are now shunned and worse, their owners are villified. I understand the concern with some of the examples in the thread..... but to assume all books with slight miswraps are manipulated is, at best, an example of very lazy and ignorant thinking. GOD BLESS......

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

P.S. If any of you are still on the fence about this..... next time you go to a Con, look through some boxes of earlier ('61- '65) SA Marvels and you will find many examples with "peek through"...... the books are almost always the Marvels that were printed at Eastern before Marvel switched to World Color in '66/ '67 .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

...... (thumbs u ....exactly how I feel, Barton. A fairly common early SA production defect has now been ostracized by all this, and books to which absolutely NOTHING has been done are now shunned and worse, their owners are villified. I understand the concern with some of the examples in the thread..... but to assume all books with slight miswraps are manipulated is, at best, an example of very lazy and ignorant thinking. GOD BLESS......

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

P.S. If any of you are still on the fence about this..... next time you go to a Con, look through some boxes of earlier ('61- '65) SA Marvels and you will find many examples with "peek through"...... the books are almost always the Marvels that were printed at Eastern before Marvel switched to World Color in '66/ '67 .....

 

Great post, Jimbo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

...... (thumbs u ....exactly how I feel, Barton. A fairly common early SA production defect has now been ostracized by all this, and books to which absolutely NOTHING has been done are now shunned and worse, their owners are villified. I understand the concern with some of the examples in the thread..... but to assume all books with slight miswraps are manipulated is, at best, an example of very lazy and ignorant thinking. GOD BLESS......

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

P.S. If any of you are still on the fence about this..... next time you go to a Con, look through some boxes of earlier ('61- '65) SA Marvels and you will find many examples with "peek through"...... the books are almost always the Marvels that were printed at Eastern before Marvel switched to World Color in '66/ '67 .....

 

Great post, Jimbo!

 

.....thanks, Roy. One more thing I'd like to add..... and Namisgr also mentioned this in another thread involving this subject...... Most, if not all, of the books I've ever seen with natural "peek through" have been on books with a front to back miswrap with the staples inserted on the backside of the book..... and always on books printed by Eastern pre '66. When World Color took over around '67, production defects were reduced dramatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Since this fiasco first surfaced, there have been several "special" auctions with damaged books that weren't called out in deference to the owners/sellers. Namely, some of the Thompson and Dr. Fate books. Not sure if all of them had the 1197 or 1198 serial numbers, but some did.

 

Why isn't CGC doing anything to stop this? (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Since this fiasco first surfaced, there have been several "special" auctions with damaged books that weren't called out in deference to the owners/sellers. Namely, some of the Thompson and Dr. Fate books. Not sure if all of them had the 1197 or 1198 serial numbers, but some did.

 

Why isn't CGC doing anything to stop this? (shrug)

I don't understand the idea of showing deference to the owners. What about showing deference to all the collectors who might overpay because they're not aware of the issue? I think getting the word out trumps kissing anybody's behind.

 

Here is another Thompson book that certainly looks Costanza'd to me; I'm not sure whether it was offered up at auction previously.

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2Fsearch%5Fadv%2Easp%3Fall%3Dy%26TITLE%3Dsgt%2E%2Bfury%26TITLEOPT%3DALL%26ISSUE%3D%26Condition%3D%26ConditionTo%3D%26CensusRank%3D%26SearchPageQuality%3D%26Pedigree%3D%26PRICEF%3D%26PRICET%3D%26DESCRIPTION%3D%26DESCRIPTIONOPT%3DALL%26SearchRemarks%3D%26SearchCGC%3D%26EXCLUDE%3D%26CATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26WCATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26SORT%3DCATEG%26%5Fwhere%5Fauctions%3Dy%26x%3D14%26y%3D9%26where%5Fauctions%3Dy%23Item%5F996823&id=996823

143653.jpg.7896b4ec801d44b44c357ee9e7889a5d.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I don't think this example looks Costsnza'd. Compare it to the JIM on page 1. This Sgt Fury looks to have normal alignment on the right edge (at least on my phone it does).

 

 

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Since this fiasco first surfaced, there have been several "special" auctions with damaged books that weren't called out in deference to the owners/sellers. Namely, some of the Thompson and Dr. Fate books. Not sure if all of them had the 1197 or 1198 serial numbers, but some did.

 

Why isn't CGC doing anything to stop this? (shrug)

I don't understand the idea of showing deference to the owners. What about showing deference to all the collectors who might overpay because they're not aware of the issue? I think getting the word out trumps kissing anybody's behind.

 

Here is another Thompson book that certainly looks Costanza'd to me; I'm not sure whether it was offered up at auction previously.

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2Fsearch%5Fadv%2Easp%3Fall%3Dy%26TITLE%3Dsgt%2E%2Bfury%26TITLEOPT%3DALL%26ISSUE%3D%26Condition%3D%26ConditionTo%3D%26CensusRank%3D%26SearchPageQuality%3D%26Pedigree%3D%26PRICEF%3D%26PRICET%3D%26DESCRIPTION%3D%26DESCRIPTIONOPT%3DALL%26SearchRemarks%3D%26SearchCGC%3D%26EXCLUDE%3D%26CATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26WCATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26SORT%3DCATEG%26%5Fwhere%5Fauctions%3Dy%26x%3D14%26y%3D9%26where%5Fauctions%3Dy%23Item%5F996823&id=996823

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Since this fiasco first surfaced, there have been several "special" auctions with damaged books that weren't called out in deference to the owners/sellers. Namely, some of the Thompson and Dr. Fate books. Not sure if all of them had the 1197 or 1198 serial numbers, but some did.

 

Why isn't CGC doing anything to stop this? (shrug)

I don't understand the idea of showing deference to the owners. What about showing deference to all the collectors who might overpay because they're not aware of the issue? I think getting the word out trumps kissing anybody's behind.

 

Here is another Thompson book that certainly looks Costanza'd to me; I'm not sure whether it was offered up at auction previously.

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2Fsearch%5Fadv%2Easp%3Fall%3Dy%26TITLE%3Dsgt%2E%2Bfury%26TITLEOPT%3DALL%26ISSUE%3D%26Condition%3D%26ConditionTo%3D%26CensusRank%3D%26SearchPageQuality%3D%26Pedigree%3D%26PRICEF%3D%26PRICET%3D%26DESCRIPTION%3D%26DESCRIPTIONOPT%3DALL%26SearchRemarks%3D%26SearchCGC%3D%26EXCLUDE%3D%26CATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26WCATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26SORT%3DCATEG%26%5Fwhere%5Fauctions%3Dy%26x%3D14%26y%3D9%26where%5Fauctions%3Dy%23Item%5F996823&id=996823

 

..... I'll have to disagree with you on this one..... I've seen hundreds and hundreds of original owner copies that look just like that one. GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Since this fiasco first surfaced, there have been several "special" auctions with damaged books that weren't called out in deference to the owners/sellers. Namely, some of the Thompson and Dr. Fate books. Not sure if all of them had the 1197 or 1198 serial numbers, but some did.

 

Why isn't CGC doing anything to stop this? (shrug)

 

Do all of the books have these traits or just some? Do we know what the books looked like before?

 

The problem is that it generally was accepted up until recently (the start of this thread) that the peek through look was naturally occurring in varying degrees unless someone provided before and after examples of a few books.

 

Now the hunt is out for all examples of excessive peek through regardless of their origin.

 

It's easy for guys like jimbo_707 to say:

 

I don't understand the idea of showing deference to the owners. What about showing deference to all the collectors who might overpay because they're not aware of the issue? I think getting the word out trumps kissing anybody's behind.

 

...when they are not his books.

 

I agree that it's unfair to call the books out when the origin and history of the book and what it looked like before is entirely unknown. It's purely speculation and it paints books (and their owners) that might be entirely innocent in a negative light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Since this fiasco first surfaced, there have been several "special" auctions with damaged books that weren't called out in deference to the owners/sellers. Namely, some of the Thompson and Dr. Fate books. Not sure if all of them had the 1197 or 1198 serial numbers, but some did.

 

Why isn't CGC doing anything to stop this? (shrug)

I don't understand the idea of showing deference to the owners. What about showing deference to all the collectors who might overpay because they're not aware of the issue? I think getting the word out trumps kissing anybody's behind.

 

Here is another Thompson book that certainly looks Costanza'd to me; I'm not sure whether it was offered up at auction previously.

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2Fsearch%5Fadv%2Easp%3Fall%3Dy%26TITLE%3Dsgt%2E%2Bfury%26TITLEOPT%3DALL%26ISSUE%3D%26Condition%3D%26ConditionTo%3D%26CensusRank%3D%26SearchPageQuality%3D%26Pedigree%3D%26PRICEF%3D%26PRICET%3D%26DESCRIPTION%3D%26DESCRIPTIONOPT%3DALL%26SearchRemarks%3D%26SearchCGC%3D%26EXCLUDE%3D%26CATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26WCATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26SORT%3DCATEG%26%5Fwhere%5Fauctions%3Dy%26x%3D14%26y%3D9%26where%5Fauctions%3Dy%23Item%5F996823&id=996823

 

..... I'll have to disagree with you on this one..... I've seen hundreds and hundreds of original owner copies that look just like that one. GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

I suppose it could be a common defect with that issue. Unfortunately, Thompson books now raise a red flag with me because of the previous Heritage examples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That looks okay to me. I know I have some Marvel silver with more peek-through that have never been pressed, or RSR'd, or anything. This copy just seems to be poorly aligned. It's almost even at the bottom, then gets wider toward the top. If the cover shrank, it would have done so evenly or been otherwise distorted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Since this fiasco first surfaced, there have been several "special" auctions with damaged books that weren't called out in deference to the owners/sellers. Namely, some of the Thompson and Dr. Fate books. Not sure if all of them had the 1197 or 1198 serial numbers, but some did.

 

Why isn't CGC doing anything to stop this? (shrug)

I don't understand the idea of showing deference to the owners. What about showing deference to all the collectors who might overpay because they're not aware of the issue? I think getting the word out trumps kissing anybody's behind.

 

Here is another Thompson book that certainly looks Costanza'd to me; I'm not sure whether it was offered up at auction previously.

 

http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2Fsearch%5Fadv%2Easp%3Fall%3Dy%26TITLE%3Dsgt%2E%2Bfury%26TITLEOPT%3DALL%26ISSUE%3D%26Condition%3D%26ConditionTo%3D%26CensusRank%3D%26SearchPageQuality%3D%26Pedigree%3D%26PRICEF%3D%26PRICET%3D%26DESCRIPTION%3D%26DESCRIPTIONOPT%3DALL%26SearchRemarks%3D%26SearchCGC%3D%26EXCLUDE%3D%26CATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26WCATEGORIES%3D%2D1%26SORT%3DCATEG%26%5Fwhere%5Fauctions%3Dy%26x%3D14%26y%3D9%26where%5Fauctions%3Dy%23Item%5F996823&id=996823

This post of yours is a perfect example of why people should use more discretion before they start throwing around accusations. Thousands and thousands of unpressed books from that time frame display similar characteristics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather not throw anyone's books under the proverbial bus at the moment.

Glad to see that thought in this thread.

 

The Cole-Schaved covers are something that should be addressed. But at this point, there's no reason to publicly smear every possible example.

If people are still sending books to CCS for pressing and receiving shrunken covers, after everything that's been posted in this thread, then they get what they deserve.

Since this fiasco first surfaced, there have been several "special" auctions with damaged books that weren't called out in deference to the owners/sellers. Namely, some of the Thompson and Dr. Fate books. Not sure if all of them had the 1197 or 1198 serial numbers, but some did.

 

Why isn't CGC doing anything to stop this? (shrug)

 

Do all of the books have these traits or just some? Do we know what the books looked like before?

 

The problem is that it generally was accepted up until recently (the start of this thread) that the peek through look was naturally occurring in varying degrees unless someone provided before and after examples of a few books.

 

Now the hunt is out for all examples of excessive peek through regardless of their origin.

 

It's easy for guys like jimbo_707 to say:

 

I don't understand the idea of showing deference to the owners. What about showing deference to all the collectors who might overpay because they're not aware of the issue? I think getting the word out trumps kissing anybody's behind.

 

...when they are not his books.

 

I agree that it's unfair to call the books out when the origin and history of the book and what it looked like before is entirely unknown. It's purely speculation and it paints books (and their owners) that might be entirely innocent in a negative light.

 

.... the ONLY fair way to proceed with allegations like that are to have before AND after scans done on the SAME scanner at the SAME settings..... and even then.... a static cling to the inner well could create a similar APPEARING condition. Let's not burn anyone at the stake here, now. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.