Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
CBCS Comics
Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »

Good Morty Thead Redux- PLEASE Be Civil4650

Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
@DocBrown Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown

I'm saying it's not good to CALL them "fake" until and unless they are proven so.

This really is Bizzaro world.

How about "I'm saying it's not good to CALL them "real" until and unless they are proven so".


Exactly! Exactly the point! We shouldn't be calling them ANYTHING until we know for sure! You have correctly identified both sides of the same erroneous coin!

It's not good to call them FAKE...and it's not good to call them REAL...until and unless they are proven so.

Why would you assume ANYTHING until we have all the facts...?

I trust my point is made.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CC

Shouldn't we assume they're "fake" until proven real, not the other way around?

Isn't that the purpose of CGC and CBCS, to verify something as "real"?

Like I said, Bizzaroworld.


Verifying that something is genuine IS NOT the same thing as "calling it fake" until it is proven otherwise.

We should assume that we don't know. We should assume that there is a question of legitimacy. Anything beyond that is speculation, REAL OR FAKE, and does potential damage to others.
Post 501 • IP   flag post
Collector IntoAnother private msg quote post Address this user
If anyone is curious, that was the only copy Justin signed for me and I’m very happy to add it to my collection.

It really doesn’t really matter to me if they grade them or not.
Post 502 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
I guess some of you haven't thought through the implications of labeling something "fake" when it's not been proven, especially if it turns out they never were fake to begin with.

What if someone bought a "two-stapled" copy for, say, $200...then saw allllll these people saying "FAKE! FAKE!!!!" over and over again...people who have presented themselves as R&M experts...and, in disgust, they throw it away...?

And then what happens if it's discovered they weren't fake, but just reprints after all...?

You will have contributed to someone's decision in a way that harmed them.

Here's an especially egregious eBay title and listing:

"ALL 2-STAPLE TGMs ARE FAKE!!! Look In Description for Details - The Good Morty"

https://www.ebay.com/itm/ALL-2-STAPLE-TGMs-ARE-FAKE-Look-In-Description-for-Details-The-Good-Morty/302510494912?hash=item466f07d4c0:g:tqUAAOSws6ZZ-koy
Post 503 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnett21k
Quote:
Originally Posted by IntoAnother
@DocBrown

I’m not too sure what to say Doc. You know I’m not going to argue any of the unknowns. I’m just relaying some information/statements I’ve been told by Justin.

Determining which is which and if they can be reproduced so easily that it’s not wise to grade them isn’t for me to determine but I’m happy to help if/when one can.


Great info! It definitely helps! No sense arguing semantics anyway! Glad you enjoyed meeting Justin! I missed my chance when he came to town a few months back! Won't ever make that mistake again!


Determining whether these things are fake or real is "arguing semantics"...?

Ok.
Post 504 • IP   flag post
Collector IntoAnother private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
I guess some of you haven't thought through the implications of labeling something "fake" when it's not been proven, especially if it turns out they never were fake to begin with.

What if someone bought a "two-stapled" copy for, say, $200...then saw allllll these people saying "FAKE! FAKE!!!!" over and over again...people who have presented themselves as R&M experts...and, in disgust, they throw it away...?

And then what happens if it's discovered they weren't fake, but just reprints after all...?

You will have contributed to someone's decision in a way that harmed them.

Here's an especially egregious eBay title and listing:

"ALL 2-STAPLE TGMs ARE FAKE!!! Look In Description for Details - The Good Morty"

https://www.ebay.com/itm/ALL-2-STAPLE-TGMs-ARE-FAKE-Look-In-Description-for-Details-The-Good-Morty/302510494912?hash=item466f07d4c0:g:tqUAAOSws6ZZ-koy


You are right Doc. I’ll personally make sure to make my statements more accurate on the subject. It isn’t right to lead anyone one way at this time as matter if the fact until all the legwork has been done.
Post 505 • IP   flag post


Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
@DocBrown Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown

Determining whether these things are fake or real is "arguing semantics"...?

Ok.

Haha, I was thinking the same thing. Since when are things that are exact opposites just "semantics anyway".
Post 506 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
I guess some of you haven't thought through the implications of labeling something "fake" when it's not been proven, especially if it turns out they never were fake to begin with.

What if someone bought a "two-stapled" copy for, say, $200...then saw allllll these people saying "FAKE! FAKE!!!!" over and over again...people who have presented themselves as R&M experts...and, in disgust, they throw it away...?

And then what happens if it's discovered they weren't fake, but just reprints after all...?

You will have contributed to someone's decision in a way that harmed them.

Here's an especially egregious eBay title and listing:

"ALL 2-STAPLE TGMs ARE FAKE!!! Look In Description for Details - The Good Morty"

https://www.ebay.com/itm/ALL-2-STAPLE-TGMs-ARE-FAKE-Look-In-Description-for-Details-The-Good-Morty/302510494912?hash=item466f07d4c0:g:tqUAAOSws6ZZ-koy


You know that's shrewbeer's ebay listing, right? lulz
Post 507 • IP   flag post
Collector Scorpion private msg quote post Address this user
I like to thank steve, for that great write up. also like to thank shrewbeer for sending in his copy to me so that they could both be seen at the same time.

Steve you said
3) Is one real and one counterfeit, or were they both produced by legitimate sources and included with real DVD/Blu-ray sets?
This question is impossible to answer. I can tell you that booklet A was produced from the raw image files, and that booklet B was produced by scanning booklet A and rescreening the file when it was printed. Is one of them counterfeit? It’s absolutely possible that the company producing legitimate DVD/Blu-ray's ran out of booklets, lost the original digital files, scanned the first booklet and created more. I worked in the printing industry for 25 years and I can say, as farfetched as that sounds, it is entirely possible. That said, booklet A is more likely genuine. Booklet B is a “second printing” at best, and counterfeit at worst, but there is no way to tell for certain.

Booklet B was produced by scanning booklet A and rescreening the file when it was printed. Is one of them counterfeit?
but there was a video posted about the B book coming out of a re burnt DVD, so would that not make it fake, I use to think book B was the real thing till this video came out.
clickable text

how to tell a real DVD from a fake one, all real DVD have a barcode on the inside wall and all are sliver,
clickable text

just my 2 cents, once more time i like to thank everyone that been trying to solve this.
Post 508 • IP   flag post
Collector Scorpion private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrewbeer
Btw for the record, not encapsulating the ones that CAN be authenticated as original copy from the original data file is ridiculous.


I have to agree on that, Key word * original data file "

also you sure you don't want me to ship it back to you if it come back my way, ill ask you in 12 weeks the same thing if it show up at my end.
Post 509 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaptainmyke
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
I guess some of you haven't thought through the implications of labeling something "fake" when it's not been proven, especially if it turns out they never were fake to begin with.

What if someone bought a "two-stapled" copy for, say, $200...then saw allllll these people saying "FAKE! FAKE!!!!" over and over again...people who have presented themselves as R&M experts...and, in disgust, they throw it away...?

And then what happens if it's discovered they weren't fake, but just reprints after all...?

You will have contributed to someone's decision in a way that harmed them.

Here's an especially egregious eBay title and listing:

"ALL 2-STAPLE TGMs ARE FAKE!!! Look In Description for Details - The Good Morty"

https://www.ebay.com/itm/ALL-2-STAPLE-TGMs-ARE-FAKE-Look-In-Description-for-Details-The-Good-Morty/302510494912?hash=item466f07d4c0:g:tqUAAOSws6ZZ-koy


You know that's shrewbeer's ebay listing, right? lulz


I do indeed.

Still an egregious listing.
Post 510 • IP   flag post
Collector 50AE_DE private msg quote post Address this user
This thread is too funny. If these books are actually being counterfeited, what if those counterfeiting this book decide on just use one staple per book? If they can print a book to nearly look like the real thing, I'm sure putting one staple in the book will be a breeze to do.
Post 511 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by 50AE_DE
This thread is too funny. If these books are actually being counterfeited, what if those counterfeiting this book decide on just use one staple per book? If they can print a book to nearly look like the real thing, I'm sure putting one staple in the book will be a breeze to do.


I've got my secret printing press in the basement. I'll be running off a couple hundred more copies later tonight.

Don't tell nobody!
Post 512 • IP   flag post
Collector Redshade private msg quote post Address this user
@DocBrown

You're not this chap are you

clickable text
Post 513 • IP   flag post
Collector 50AE_DE private msg quote post Address this user
Since I don't have a copy of this book I looked to see if there were hi-res pictures of the book.

http://rickandmorty.wikia.com/wiki/The_Good_Morty
Post 514 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR shrewbeer private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpion
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrewbeer
Btw for the record, not encapsulating the ones that CAN be authenticated as original copy from the original data file is ridiculous.


I have to agree on that, Key word * original data file "

also you sure you don't want me to ship it back to you if it come back my way, ill ask you in 12 weeks the same thing if it show up at my end.


Its a fake, and it seems cbcs will be sending them back if they arent to be encapsulated. If it comes your way keep it as a novelty on me. Or toss it in the garbage as Doc suggested not to do 😁

@DocBrown here is my updated listing
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F302513126282

I'm not out to screw anyone, so I list all three variants as one real and two fake. Because thats what they are. Not original. Not first printing. Fake.

Maybe you can call them real second prints. But you should stop trying to persuade people to consider them legit. Steve has clearly shown these are not first prints, they are copies of the first print; and it doesnt matter by whom or for what purpose, a COPY marketed as an original first print is FAKE and false.

If Justin the creator himself cannot persuade those in the "all real" department, I really have nothing more to say in the argument lol, certainly nothing I say will matter to you.
Post 515 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshade
@DocBrown

You're not this chap are you

clickable text


No.
Post 516 • IP   flag post
Collector CopperAgeKids private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
I guess some of you haven't thought through the implications of labeling something "fake" when it's not been proven, especially if it turns out they never were fake to begin with.

What if someone bought a "two-stapled" copy for, say, $200...then saw allllll these people saying "FAKE! FAKE!!!!" over and over again...people who have presented themselves as R&M experts...and, in disgust, they throw it away...?

And then what happens if it's discovered they weren't fake, but just reprints after all...?

You will have contributed to someone's decision in a way that harmed them.

Here's an especially egregious eBay title and listing:

"ALL 2-STAPLE TGMs ARE FAKE!!! Look In Description for Details - The Good Morty"

https://www.ebay.com/itm/ALL-2-STAPLE-TGMs-ARE-FAKE-Look-In-Description-for-Details-The-Good-Morty/302510494912?hash=item466f07d4c0:g:tqUAAOSws6ZZ-koy


If you think thst is bad and generally disingenuous , which I am inclined to think it is....well, click on the relistings of the 2 "fake Good Morty" listings, sold at $2 each....


for a real doozy.

The third time around, the seller sold a set of two "fakes" , with one "real", for $350

eBay item # 302510902595

Pretty questionable sales approach.
Post 517 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR shrewbeer private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CopperAgeKids
The third time around, the seller sold a set of two "fakes" , with one "real", for $350


Seems my asking price is a bit high then.

Im not very motivated to move the triple sets of these I have, hopefully one of the grading companies decides to grade and label accordingly once Justin goes public, I'd much prefer to have them encapsulated as sets first 👌🏻
Post 518 • IP   flag post
Collector CopperAgeKids private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrewbeer
Quote:
Originally Posted by CopperAgeKids
The third time around, the seller sold a set of two "fakes" , with one "real", for $350


Seems my asking price is a bit high then.

Im not very motivated to move the triple sets of these I have, hopefully one of the grading companies decides to grade and label accordingly once Justin goes public, I'd much prefer to have them encapsulated as sets first 👌🏻


Qouted for posterity.
Post 519 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrewbeer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpion
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrewbeer
Btw for the record, not encapsulating the ones that CAN be authenticated as original copy from the original data file is ridiculous.


I have to agree on that, Key word * original data file "

also you sure you don't want me to ship it back to you if it come back my way, ill ask you in 12 weeks the same thing if it show up at my end.


Its a fake, and it seems cbcs will be sending them back if they arent to be encapsulated. If it comes your way keep it as a novelty on me. Or toss it in the garbage as Doc suggested not to do 😁

@DocBrown here is my updated listing
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F302513126282

I'm not out to screw anyone, so I list all three variants as one real and two fake. Because thats what they are. Not original. Not first printing. Fake.


Something can be "not original" and "not first printing" and still be authentic.

Or do you think that this book:




...is fake?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sb

Maybe you can call them real second prints. But you should stop trying to persuade people to consider them legit.


You should stop inventing things that other people didn't say and then arguing against that as if they did.

I have not "tried to persuade people to consider them legit." Not once.

Let me say that one more time, so you have no confusion in the matter: I have not...in any way, for any reason, by explicit or implicit means, attempted to persuade ANYONE, at ANY TIME, that these are "legit."

I have said to NOT call them "fake" or "FAKE!!!!!!" until and unless they are proven to be so. I have said don't jump to conclusions.

Hopefully that clears up the confusion on your part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sb

Steve has clearly shown these are not first prints, they are copies of the first print; and it doesnt matter by whom or for what purpose, a COPY marketed as an original first print is FAKE and false.


You are incorrect. Steve Ricketts has clearly shown that one of the books was printed from an original data file, and the other was not. He has NOT "shown these are not first prints", clearly or otherwise. He has made no claim on them being first prints, clearly or otherwise. He has only said that ONE example he was sent was printed from an original data file and the other was printed from an existing copy. He made no representations about any of the samples he was sent being a "first print."

Being printed from an original data file DOES NOT (necessarily) mean they are first prints. DC prints all sorts of printings from original data files, and they are second printings, third printings, fourth printings, etc.

A REPRINT being offered as a FIRST print is a problem IF THE SELLER KNOWS ABOUT IT. If the seller doesn't know, then they're not committing fraud. They just don't know any better. But a REPRINT that is officially made is NOT "FAKE."

Quote:
Originally Posted by sb
If Justin the creator himself cannot persuade those in the "all real" department, I really have nothing more to say in the argument lol, certainly nothing I say will matter to you.


Justin did not print these, nor does he have any say in who does. R&M are owned by CARTOON NETWORK...NOT Justin Roiland. CARTOON NETWORK is who decides who, what, where, when, and how these things are printed, NOT Justin Roiland.

http://www.adultswim.com/footer/legal/trademarks.html

Jim Lee is the creator of Wildcats. Do you think he was involved in ANY of the printing decisions that Image/Malibu made at the time those books were printed...?
Post 520 • IP   flag post
Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
So are we saying that the ones printed from an original data file, could still be "fake"?

Must be the case, otherwise those version would be gradeable, no?
Post 521 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR conditionfreak private msg quote post Address this user
Don't want to cause a stir. But the fact is, each and every one of these booklets is "real". None are "fake".

By the sheer fact that they exist, they are real.

The question is "real what?". Original printing by a certain company, or counterfeit/forgery printing by anyone else?

Why doesn't a company go after these people selling these items, for trademark or copyright infringement, ever? DVD's, cases, booklets, comic books, etc.

And I want to also address is this notion that there would be no good reason for someone to counterfeit a comic booklet. Are you kidding me? People counterfeit one dollar bills and quarters. Ten bucks to some, is a lot of money when you pile ten on top of ten on top of ten on top of ten, and so forth. Plus, some people just like to smile from getting one over on other people. Ever hear of O P P? Other Peoples Property. (it can also mean something ELSE, that means "kitty"

I remember years ago, arresting a guy that went around for weeks. Cutting off the spray nozzles from peoples garden hoses they left attached to their outside faucets. He didn't even unscrew them. Just cut them off, and sold them for .25 cents each to a used item store. Probably made one or two dollars a day doing this, if he was lucky.
Post 522 • IP   flag post
Collector 50AE_DE private msg quote post Address this user
@conditionfreak

If it can be printed and has value then it's a no Brainer for scammers. I've seen fraudulent coupons for free baby formula and free cartons of Marlboro. Some of the fake coupons even had hologram stickers on them too. They looked very authentic.

I'm glad cbcs is taking their stance on this because this book can be easily reproduced and difficult to determine if it's a different print or a counterfeit copy. Not encapsulating the books is a good move since it'll probably hold the price down for the book which will prevent people from getting scammed on the bootleg copies.
Post 523 • IP   flag post
Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
@50AE_DE

Quote:
Originally Posted by 50AE_DE

I'm glad cbcs is taking their stance on this because this book can be easily reproduced and difficult to determine if it's a different print

How do we know that a real one can be easily reproduced, if we're not even absolutely certain what a real one looks like?
Post 524 • IP   flag post
Collector CopperAgeKids private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrewbeer
Quote:
Originally Posted by CopperAgeKids
The third time around, the seller sold a set of two "fakes" , with one "real", for $350


Seems my asking price is a bit high then.

Im not very motivated to move the triple sets of these I have, hopefully one of the grading companies decides to grade and label accordingly once Justin goes public, I'd much prefer to have them encapsulated as sets first 👌🏻


Your asking price is too high?

What I see is thst you sold 3 Good Morty booklets, in one lor, at $350.

You stated in thst $350 sold BIN listing description that one of the 3 Good Morty "variants" is "real", while the othee two "variants" included in that $350 sold BIN lot , were described as "fake".

Before you listed these 3 Good Morty variants, you listed 2 or 3 individual double staple Good Morty books as "fakes", with a $2 BIN.

In each eBay listing title of those $2 BIN listings, you overtly announced that all double staple copies of Good Morty books are "fake", while noting in the descriptions that singke staple copies are not "fake".

You overtly proclaimed noted in the title of those 2 individual $2 "fake" Goos Morty BIN's that all double staple Good Morty booklets are "fake".

You than offered up a "real" single staple Good Morty book, along with 2 "fake" booklets at $350.

That is the textbook definition of market manipulation,

You have no proof that the single stapy Good Morty book included in that $350 sold listing of yours, is the real deal Holyfield, yet you cashed in at $350, anyway.

Now, you profess to not wanting to sell your other Good Morty "3 booklet variant sets" because you want to see what grading companies have to say.

I call that deflection.
Post 525 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR conditionfreak private msg quote post Address this user
HOLD and WAIT until you get more and better confirmation, is my recommendation. Or, at the very least. Include a statement that CBCS and CGC at this time, WILL NOT certify or grade these booklets until they get more knowledge about their authenticity or lack thereof.

If you are going to list them for sale at this time. Legitimate booklets will not lose value over time, and actually will most likely increase a LOT, IF the major grading companies finally come to a conclusion which are which.

Just sayin'
Post 526 • IP   flag post
Collector CopperAgeKids private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by conditionfreak
HOLD and WAIT until you get more and better confirmation, is my recommendation. Or, at the very least. Include a statement that CBCS and CGC at this time, WILL NOT certify or grade these booklets until they get more knowledge about their authenticity or lack thereof.

If you are going to list them for sale at this time.

Just sayin'


Spot on assessment, I could not agree with you more.
Post 527 • IP   flag post
CBCS Pressing SteveRicketts private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by conditionfreak
HOLD and WAIT until you get more and better confirmation, is my recommendation. Or, at the very least. Include a statement that CBCS and CGC at this time, WILL NOT certify or grade these booklets until they get more knowledge about their authenticity or lack thereof.

If you are going to list them for sale at this time. Legitimate booklets will not lose value over time, and actually will most likely increase a LOT, IF the major grading companies finally come to a conclusion which are which.

Just sayin'


Or you could more accurately say that CBCS will not certify these booklets.
In the conversation I had with Borock on it last week, there was never a qualifier used in reference to this statement by either of us.
Post 528 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR conditionfreak private msg quote post Address this user
Yes, even more accurate for CBCS. Don't know about CGC. My educated guess is that CGC will eventually grade and encapsulate these items.
Post 529 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user

Post 530 • IP   flag post
139145 571 30
Thread locked. No more posts permitted. Return home.
destitute