• 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.

So, Why Has AF #15 Continued to Drop In Value?
8 8

1,031 posts in this topic

 

1 hour ago, peewee22 said:

I found this "unrestored, then restored, and finally unrestored again" book on the net. A classic Frankenbook for sure. 

hhh.jpeg

Looks like natural scrapple from stacking under a exacto blade

 

:jokealert:

Edited by blazingbob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

There will come a day when there is a substantial difference in price paid between a book that earned its wear, and one that has been scraped and gouged that just happens to have the same number on the label.

It may be substantial enough that even decently restored copies sell for more. 

It is beyond absurd that the butchery of books is currently rewarded by the market. We shall see how long this is tolerated.

I vote for the Butcher scale

From a 1 chop meat to a 10 Filet mignon

We can vote for the Best butcher of books,  I have some in mind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2019 at 1:39 PM, lou_fine said:

If you are talking about collectors as being active board members here, I suspect the percentage would be in the very low single digits and not even approaching 5%.

If you are talking about collectors who are also quasi dealers and sets up at the local cons, I suspect that percentage might be slightly higher, but probably not by a large margin.

After all, board members are generally all about slabbed books and the graded comic book market, although a significant part of the comic book market from a dollars point of view, is still a very small portion of the overall comic book market from the pont of view of actual number of collectors.  hm

Truth!

(thumbsu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought the PLOD should be RLOD, a bright red label. Purple and blue can be confusing (at a quick glance). A restored book should be a bright contrasting color like a Stop sign or Red light. Although "Restored" is indicated on the label, colors mean more than words to me. Maybe there is a reason why CGC used purple as the restored grade label. (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jaydogrules said:

CBCS tried playing hide the ball with restoration disclosure with its labels and all that did was make ALL their slabs sell for cut rate prices and brought that company to the edge of bankruptcy and virtual irrelevance.  

So I would say that the market has spoken with regards to easy to see and understand colour coded labeling and restoration disclosure.

You're exaggerating and misleading people again.

CBCS's success probably has nothing to do with putting restored books in a blue label with a restored notation.

If anything, as Bob said, it has to do with their grading (and in my opinion) their appearance.

They tightened up their grading, but again as Bob said, it's tough to gain ground once you lose it, and they have modified their label.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2019 at 10:40 AM, Spiderturtle said:
On 11/18/2019 at 10:15 AM, VintageComics said:

This is only because CGC initially started with multi-colored labels. If they had started with a blue label for restored and unrestored books, you'd have been programmed to read the label first.

When you go to buy Bick's Dill Pickles, do you just walk up and pick a bottle by the color of the label? They all look the same. Of course not. You choose the brand by the color of the label but you READ the label and choose the specific type you want. Why? Because you expect the writing to be different on the labels even though all the labels are the same color.

Baby Dill with Garlic for me, please.

A good model for any business marketing is to have a different color labeling.  M & M's yellow = nut inside M & M's black - plain inside.  It's best when the masses do not have to read the label.  I don't want to eat the wrong M & M's because I didn't read the unicolor M & Ms therefore I love myself the yellow colored  M & M over the black colored M & M. 

So, from your line of thinking here, did CGC make a big mistake by going with the same uni-blue color label for all unrestored books across the entire condition spectrum, whether they were entry level low grade copies or whether they were uber HG copies?  hm  

Would it not have been a better business marketing model for them to have different color labels so that buyers could much more easily recognize the true high grade copies of books relative to their publishing time period, as opposed to having the masses read the various label grades and from there then try to independenty determine if the book had true collectible value or not?  Especially when the uni-color unrestored label could have resulted in you mistakenly over paying for a book by thinking on your own (perish the thought (tsk)) that it was in uber HG condition, when in fact it is actually below the collectively acceptable HG threshold level for that particular time period.  A multi-color label system for unrestored books based upon condition threshold levels would certainly help to prevent collectors from making this same mistake.   doh!  :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2019 at 4:47 PM, blazingbob said:

I don't think the Restored blue labels were a driving factor.  More like overgrading doesn't translate into higher retail prices and once you ruin your reputation it is very hard to get it back

bingo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2019 at 11:37 AM, VintageComics said:

CGC did a disservice to the hobby as a whole in the long run by using a purple label from the gate. It seemed like a good idea but it had the negative effect of stigmatizing restored books in purple holders and creating such a large gap in the market that unrestoring books has become a secondary industry (something people disapprove of).

And there are many people who feel this way. Borock did 15 years ago but CGC wouldn't make the change. It's why they went with it at CBCS. Other long time collectors feel the same way.

I have no doubt that if CGC had started with a blue label for both restored and unrestored books, that nobody would feel they need to be separated but we are looking back after 20 years of having it this way and it's hard to separate ourselves from 20 years of habits.

Wow, this is very definitely a nosiy blast from the past as I still very clearly remember how the boards blew up over this whole discussion on this issue about 15 years ago.  :ph34r:

Yes indeed, the entire purpose of the multi-color labels for restored and unrestored books was actually viewed as something positive when CGC first started up.  Unfortunately for the hobby place and as Borock had mentioned in the past, it had the unintended consequences of making the restored books so easy to stand out and to stigmatize, and as a result, literally "destroyed" the value of all restored books overnight.  It didn't matter whether they were just slightly and professionally restored or extensively and amateurishly restored, they were all simply lumped into the one same bucket because of the PLOD label.  :frown:

Although Borock made an attempt to correct this situation 5 years after the fact, board members simply could not buy onto this change at that late stage in the game.  Similar to right now, one of the biggest arguments was that buyers would end up buying restored books by mistake thinking they were unrestored just because they had the same color label.  Even though a formal Restoration Rating System was to be implemented at the same time, it was still argued by some boardies that it would still be far too difficult to expect them to be able to differentiate a R-0 Unrestored Rated book from a R-10 Extensively Restored book, even if clearly denoted as such on the label.  I personally found that argument totally ludicrous as it is tantamount to saying that a buyer would be unable to differentiate a CGC 0.5 graded Poor condition book from a CGC 9.8 graded NM/M condition book unless they were had different color labels.  :screwy: :screwy:

Personally, I thought the reason why this attempt by Borock failed was because they decided to get the feedback from the board members before implementing this significant change.  Especially when we all know how people hate change.  Even more so, when this change was attempted right after the whole hidden manipulation of pressing books first came to light along with the whole Jason Ewert micro-trimming fiasco which was uncovered on the boards here.  Definitely the wrong time to try to make a change like that as nobody was trusting of what CGC was saying at the time.  Interesting that the revamp of the whole restoration gading sytem and introduction of the category for Conserved books was successfully implemented by CGC as they simply "forced" it in this time, without any consultation or request for feedback at all from board members on this go round.  hm

I agree with Roy that the uni-color label with a both a 10-point condition grading system in combination with a 10-point restoration rating system would have worked without much problem if it had been implemented by CGC right from the get go.  It sadly did not work 5 years after the fact and definitely would not work now 20 years later as it's pretty much impossible to break old habits, as clearly evident by the other company's disastrous attempt to introduce an uni-color label.  :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, lou_fine said:

So, from your line of thinking here, did CGC make a big mistake by going with the same uni-blue color label for all unrestored books across the entire condition spectrum, whether they were entry level low grade copies or whether they were uber HG copies?  hm  

Would it not have been a better business marketing model for them to have different color labels so that buyers could much more easily recognize the true high grade copies of books relative to their publishing time period, as opposed to having the masses read the various label grades and from there then try to independenty determine if the book had true collectible value or not?  Especially when the uni-color unrestored label could have resulted in you mistakenly over paying for a book by thinking on your own (perish the thought (tsk)) that it was in uber HG condition, when in fact it is actually below the collectively acceptable HG threshold level for that particular time period.  A multi-color label system for unrestored books based upon condition threshold levels would certainly help to prevent collectors from making this same mistake.   doh!  :devil:

Nope blue unrestored was perfect.  If you need to know the condition the number is nice and clear on the upper corner of the slab.

0.5 to 10.0.  A new collector can distinguish a 0.5 unrestored blue vs a 9.2 unrestored blue.  The number on the label is a giveaway.  Thus no need

I thought this topic was more on the unrestored,restored, qualified and the color of the label that corresponds to it.  not time period/rarity (shrug)

Edited by Spiderturtle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, lou_fine said:

Wow, this is very definitely a nosiy blast from the past as I still very clearly remember how the boards blew up over this whole discussion on this issue about 15 years ago.  :ph34r:

Yes indeed, the entire purpose of the multi-color labels for restored and unrestored books was actually viewed as something positive when CGC first started up.  Unfortunately for the hobby place and as Borock had mentioned in the past, it had the unintended consequences of making the restored books so easy to stand out and to stigmatize, and as a result, literally "destroyed" the value of all restored books overnight.  It didn't matter whether they were just slightly and professionally restored or extensively and amateurishly restored, they were all simply lumped into the one same bucket because of the PLOD label.  :frown:

Although Borock made an attempt to correct this situation 5 years after the fact, board members simply could not buy onto this change at that late stage in the game.  Similar to right now, one of the biggest arguments was that buyers would end up buying restored books by mistake thinking they were unrestored just because they had the same color label.  Even though a formal Restoration Rating System was to be implemented at the same time, it was still argued by some boardies that it would still be far too difficult to expect them to be able to differentiate a R-0 Unrestored Rated book from a R-10 Extensively Restored book, even if clearly denoted as such on the label.  I personally found that argument totally ludicrous as it is tantamount to saying that a buyer would be unable to differentiate a CGC 0.5 graded Poor condition book from a CGC 9.8 graded NM/M condition book unless they were had different color labels.  :screwy: :screwy:

Personally, I thought the reason why this attempt by Borock failed was because they decided to get the feedback from the board members before implementing this significant change.  Especially when we all know how people hate change.  Even more so, when this change was attempted right after the whole hidden manipulation of pressing books first came to light along with the whole Jason Ewert micro-trimming fiasco which was uncovered on the boards here.  Definitely the wrong time to try to make a change like that as nobody was trusting of what CGC was saying at the time.  Interesting that the revamp of the whole restoration gading sytem and introduction of the category for Conserved books was successfully implemented by CGC as they simply "forced" it in this time, without any consultation or request for feedback at all from board members on this go round.  hm

I agree with Roy that the uni-color label with a both a 10-point condition grading system in combination with a 10-point restoration rating system would have worked without much problem if it had been implemented by CGC right from the get go.  It sadly did not work 5 years after the fact and definitely would not work now 20 years later as it's pretty much impossible to break old habits, as clearly evident by the other company's disastrous attempt to introduce an uni-color label.  :facepalm:

Forgive me if I don't remember Steve's proposal but I'm guessing you wanted to see

8.0

R - 0 Blue label as an example for a unrestored book?

8.0

R - 1 professional slight

Label states what work was done.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That seems a high grade for a truly fatal tape wrap from front to back. The rest of the comic looks very nice but that's a serious flaw. One has to wonder whether there was any damage to the inner pages. I certainly don't think it would ever upgrade but well could go down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Glassman10 said:

That seems a high grade for a truly fatal tape wrap from front to back. The rest of the comic looks very nice but that's a serious flaw. One has to wonder whether there was any damage to the inner pages. I certainly don't think it would ever upgrade but well could go down. 

Where there is an AF15 there is always a  buyer..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
8 8