oakman29 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 The guy definitely found a loophole in the system,just means there are less unmolested books out there for the true collectors who believe this type of stuff(pressing) is restoration. Link to post Share on other sites
DrWatson Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 The guy definitely found a loophole in the system,just means there are less unmolested books out there for the true collectors who believe this type of stuff(pressing) is restoration. Don't start this "true collector" BS. Just because I have some books pressed, doesn't mean I'm any less of a collector than you are. I'm not exactly getting rich off of Godzilla:Kingdom of Monsters #1 Retailer Editions, Astonishing X-Men, and sketch covers. Link to post Share on other sites
DrWatson Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. Link to post Share on other sites
Gotham Kid Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. Absolutely. Link to post Share on other sites
oakman29 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 The guy definitely found a loophole in the system,just means there are less unmolested books out there for the true collectors who believe this type of stuff(pressing) is restoration. Don't start this "true collector" BS. Just because I have some books pressed, doesn't mean I'm any less of a collector than you are. I'm not exactly getting rich off of Godzilla:Kingdom of Monsters #1 Retailer Editions, Astonishing X-Men, and sketch covers. Who loves ya baby! Link to post Share on other sites
oakman29 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. I disagree! I think all the label chasers look at is that number in the upper left corner,sadly. Link to post Share on other sites
Mike's Rack Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 I was reading that last night and looking at the photos over too much Jack Daniels to start posting. You have to have a steel pair to pull a 10k plus book and then start tugging and pulling on it. My question is, is this the same book. Most say yes. Here are my problems: CGC doesn't grade on wrap. That's CVA's new job. This 8.5 (which people are even questioning that grade), especially since CGC's new tightening may have got it an 8.0. Spine ticks are very obvious and will dump a grade, but CGC is supposed to grade the front AND back. I've bought some nice 9.2's that should have been 9.6 and the back is where the points were lost. Great front eye appeal; low grade. HOW DID the person grading this book not note the back defects that were pushed from the front cover? I think CGC was not expecting this. Maybe they grade on front eye appeal over back covers? Either way, we now know what to look for when buying high end books. If the cover wrap is wrong and we see too many interior pages showing, we can assume that this book was realigned with a press. You do have to give the guy some credit. It took a huge pair to buy, crack, and to come up with the idea no matter how distasteful it is to collectors that prefer books as they are. Personally, the book is worth less to me than its 8.5 price now that I know it's been tampered with. I wondered this as well. I don't doubt it is the same book but why is the grade any higher now that the defects have been moved? Also, I thought CGC graded down for mis-wraps as well? Link to post Share on other sites
DrWatson Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 I have had two Northlands pressed. One stayed the same (but definitely presented better) and the other went from an 8.0 to a 9.0. I am having a third Northland pressed and graded this weekend. It's mainly for aesthetic reasons, but I would be lying if I said an unexpected grade bump wouldn't tickle me. Link to post Share on other sites
namisgr Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. I agree with you, Jim. It's CGC's responsibility to punish bad pressing with inferior numerical grades. Link to post Share on other sites
DrWatson Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. I disagree! I think all the label chasers look at is that number in the upper left corner,sadly. I doubt very seriously there would be many label chasers willing to drop the dough required to purchase an Avengers #1 9.2 on the book in question. And no, the focus isn't always on the number in the upper left corner. Sometimes it's on signature placement and whether or not the artist wrote "For eBay" on the front cover. Link to post Share on other sites
oakman29 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. I disagree! I think all the label chasers look at is that number in the upper left corner,sadly. I doubt very seriously there would be many label chases willing to drop the dough required to purchase an Avengers 9.2 on the book in question. And no, the focus isn't always on the number in the upper left corner. Sometimes it's on signature placement and whether or not the artist wrote "For eBay" on the front cover. You da man! Link to post Share on other sites
MagnusX Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 [font:Book Antiqua]I was reading this thread in the Silver Forum Thanks for bring the subject to Comic General Great idea...[/font] Link to post Share on other sites
lizards2 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Nods Mortified Link to post Share on other sites
DrWatson Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. I disagree! I think all the label chasers look at is that number in the upper left corner,sadly. I doubt very seriously there would be many label chases willing to drop the dough required to purchase an Avengers 9.2 on the book in question. And no, the focus isn't always on the number in the upper left corner. Sometimes it's on signature placement and whether or not the artist wrote "For eBay" on the front cover. You da man! I blame myself for falling prey to your obfuscation. Link to post Share on other sites
DrWatson Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. I agree with you, Jim. It's CGC's responsibility to punish bad pressing with inferior numerical grades. The only thing that has changed about that book is the fact that it is uglier and sits in a 9.2 holder. The same defects that made that book an 8.5 are still there. They were simply shifted away from the spine. If this is how the CGC is going to grade, then I have about three or four Silver age 9.0s that deserve to be 9.4s (Hell, maybe even 9.6s) as the governing defects are all on the back cover and not related to the spine. Link to post Share on other sites
Old Fashion PB and J Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 What an ugly book. And beautiful manipulation of the CGC market. That POS couldnt be sold raw as a 9.2, but thanks to CGC and horrible standards... NM-! Link to post Share on other sites
comicwiz Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. I'm not disagreeing with you in whole, but part of me has to ask if the majority of collectors don't get caught up in label chasing was 100% true, there would be no financial incentive for people to engage in the pressing play. Link to post Share on other sites
oakman29 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Plus, let's not lose sight of the real problem. There's pressing and then there's stupidity. Stupidity is what CGC is encouraging, fostering, and displaying in allowing something like that in a blue label. The CGC is the one creating a marketplace where that type of creative manipulation is acceptable. I don't see these type of books jumping off the shelves with that level of eye appeal. I disagree! I think all the label chasers look at is that number in the upper left corner,sadly. I doubt very seriously there would be many label chases willing to drop the dough required to purchase an Avengers 9.2 on the book in question. And no, the focus isn't always on the number in the upper left corner. Sometimes it's on signature placement and whether or not the artist wrote "For eBay" on the front cover. You da man! I blame myself for falling prey to your obfuscation. You are pretty smart for a hick.Do you know your guzintas too? Link to post Share on other sites
comicwiz Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 I need to step away from this because I am absolutely incensed with what I'm seeing going on with this realignment play. Link to post Share on other sites
oakman29 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 I need to step away from this because I am absolutely incensed with what I'm seeing going on with this realignment play. It's a shame really. Link to post Share on other sites
