Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
CBCS Comics
Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
CBCS Signature ASPComics Bronze AgeComics Copper AgeComics Golden Age

Beckett / BGS4657

Collector* Towmater private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrewbeer
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs
In all seriousness, how can the census -- even a majority of it -- be accurate when anyone has the ability to crack open a slab and resubmit the book for grading (a practice we all know occurs, especially since pressing has become so prevalent)? So while it's a useful tool (because there's nothing else like it), I'm not sure I'd qualify it as an accurate one.


It's definitely useful in certain analysis, but you're correct;not accurate. To Bob's point, deceptive enough to novices that are led on to "trust" it and be taken advantage of.

To the extreme, this reminds me of the guy on ebay selling a .5 GI joe #1 for crazzzy money with the logic (and selling point) of "RARE! ONLY ONE IN CENSUS!) 😂


As long as there are novices that can be turned into victims; by dealers that believe they get what they deserve because those novices didn't educate themselves, then those deceptive practices will continue. We live in such sad times.
Post 201 IP   flag post
Collector comic_book_man private msg quote post Address this user
This is cool. I love when big mergers happen like this.

So is CBCS being absolved into BGS? or is the plan to keep their identities under one roof?

I think as far as prices/standards go PSA & CGC are #1, even if just for their registry/length of existence...

so CBCS + BGS could help solidify that one-stop-shop mentality where as PSA/CGC don't have that.

Grats CBCS!
Post 202 IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs
In all seriousness, how can the census -- even a majority of it -- be accurate when anyone has the ability to crack open a slab and resubmit the book for grading (a practice we all know occurs, especially since pressing has become so prevalent)? So while it's a useful tool (because there's nothing else like it), I'm not sure I'd qualify it as an accurate one.


That's a fair question, and the answer is this:

1. The vast majority of books are "unimprovable" to begin with. CPR isn't as big a business as some think it is. (By "unimprovable", I don't mean pressing won't make them look better...simply that they have technical defects which prevent them from attaining a higher grade.)

2. A good chunk (this didn't use to be true!) of the books that ARE improvable, are being improved PRIOR TO being slabbed.

3. The vast, vast majority of the books represented on the census are "first time" and a lot of those are "only time", because they are subbed and/or bought by collectors who have no interest in CPR. While no one can ever know completely accurately, the truth is, for the vast majority of books, people are NOT cracking them out, resubbing them, and then not turning in the labels (thus skewing the census.)

How do we know that? CGC keeps a photographic database of "the rare books", which they can compare if another copy comes in, so they know if it's a resubmission, or a new book to the service. Also, auction houses like Heritage keep photograpic records of these books, so the market has a really good idea if a particular book was resubbed, or is a new copy in a new slab.

If a book like All American #16 comes up for sale, many, many people compare that copy to photos of previous copies sold, to see if this is a resub, or a new book in a new slab. And, for the most part, the majority of new slabs have NOT been resubmitted books.

And, the more copies of a particular issue that get submitted, the more the census tends to (that's the key phrase, there) be accurate. For example: there are 104 Hulk #181 9.8s, and 10 SS 9.8s. Now, the odds are fair that some of those 9.8 Universals ended up becoming some of those 9.8 SS. But clearly not the majority. And, since 9.8s are not going to be cracked out to be CPR'd, it's probably a good bet to say that there are 90-95% of those copies still slabbed, so the census for that book is very close to being accurate.

Now, there are 258 9.6s. Now, certainly, some of those 9.6s (and we have no way of knowing how many) ended up in "not 9.6" slabs...whether higher or lower...and those 9.6s labels didn't get turned in. Also, there's a small percentage that stayed the same, and a few that turned into SS copies.

However...again, we're looking at...and keep in mind, this is a guess, still...probably 80-90% of the 9.6 copies still existing in those 9.6 slabs.

That said, however, the lower you get on the grading scale, the more you run into "unfixable" defects, and the less likely books are to be CPRd in the first place. Less LIKELY, not that it doesn't happen.

In other words, it's not 10%, or 25%, and the rest are resubmissions. You see that on VERY, VERY rare items...census numbers represented in single digits, for example...but not over time, with common or low value items.

4. CGC used to give a credit for people who turned in old labels. This tended to keep the census more accurate than not.

5. Even though CGC doesn't give credit anymore, there are still quite a few people who, in the interest of keeping the census accurate, turn their labels in. The motive for the census being inaccurate...that is, the census cannot be artificially LOWERED (well, theoretically, people can make counterfeit labels to turn in, but that's getting REALLY out there), it can only be artificially RAISED...is weaker than the motive for the census to BE accurate. After all...if you're using the census as a selling point, you want it to be as close to accurate as possible...that is, LOW...rather than higher. There's no "upside" to having a HIGHER census number as a seller. It gives the appearance that a book might be less rare than it actually is (unless you get really conspiratorial and argue that a seller might want to hurt competition...if so, that's quite an elaborate scheme to pull off!)

Because of all these factors, the tendency is that the census is more accurate than not.

"But how do you KNOW that? No one REALLY knows, so how can you say?"

It's true, no one knows for sure, unless you have a book with a census population of, say, 3, and you own all 3 slabs. But, because we can see patterns of behavior over a long period of time...15+ years now...we can predict reasonable outcomes based on what has been observed. And since A. the majority of books cannot be "improved"; either from not having pressable defects at all, or because they were pressed prior to certification, B. the majority of buyers aren't looking to "improve" them, and C. those books that ARE CPR'd have tended to have their labels turned in, then we can say, with reasonable certainty, that the census is pretty accurate.

Yes, there's a LOT of conjecture, here...no doubt. But we can know what tends to happen, so we can make reliable predictions about how accurate the census really is, even if we can never know with absolute certainty beyond a few specific cases.

100% accurate? No, not at all. But accurate enough to be of statistical value? Absolutely.

Here is data on the census over the years, by Valiantman, aka Greg Holland:

http://www.cgcdata.com/cgc/totals/

There, you can see census numbers go DOWN, as labels got turned in.
Post 203 IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonestar
@DocBrown I'm sure it's not the same, but your comments made me laugh the same way as that scene. All good!


I'm glad my serious comments made you laugh. I think.
Post 204 IP   flag post
Captain Corrector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
@DocBrown

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs
In all seriousness, how can the census -- even a majority of it -- be accurate when anyone has the ability to crack open a slab and resubmit the book for grading (a practice we all know occurs, especially since pressing has become so prevalent)? So while it's a useful tool (because there's nothing else like it), I'm not sure I'd qualify it as an accurate one.


That's a fair question, and the answer is this:

1. The vast majority of books are "unimprovable" to begin with. CPR isn't as big a business as some think it is. (By "unimprovable", I don't mean pressing won't make them look better...simply that they have technical defects which prevent them from attaining a higher grade.)

2. A good chunk (this didn't use to be true!) of the books that ARE improvable, are being improved PRIOR TO being slabbed.

3. The vast, vast majority of the books represented on the census are "first time" and a lot of those are "only time", because they are subbed and/or bought by collectors who have no interest in CPR. While no one can ever know completely accurately, the truth is, for the vast majority of books, people are NOT cracking them out, resubbing them, and then not turning in the labels (thus skewing the census.)

How do we know that? CGC keeps a photographic database of "the rare books", which they can compare if another copy comes in, so they know if it's a resubmission, or a new book to the service. Also, auction houses like Heritage keep photograpic records of these books, so the market has a really good idea if a particular book was resubbed, or is a new copy in a new slab.

If a book like All American #16 comes up for sale, many, many people compare that copy to photos of previous copies sold, to see if this is a resub, or a new book in a new slab. And, for the most part, the majority of new slabs have NOT been resubmitted books.

And, the more copies of a particular issue that get submitted, the more the census tends to (that's the key phrase, there) be accurate. For example: there are 104 Hulk #181 9.8s, and 10 SS 9.8s. Now, the odds are fair that some of those 9.8 Universals ended up becoming some of those 9.8 SS. But clearly not the majority. And, since 9.8s are not going to be cracked out to be CPR'd, it's probably a good bet to say that there are 90-95% of those copies still slabbed, so the census for that book is very close to being accurate.

Now, there are 258 9.6s. Now, certainly, some of those 9.6s (and we have no way of knowing how many) ended up in "not 9.6" slabs...whether higher or lower...and those 9.6s labels didn't get turned in. Also, there's a small percentage that stayed the same, and a few that turned into SS copies.

However...again, we're looking at...and keep in mind, this is a guess, still...probably 80-90% of the 9.6 copies still existing in those 9.6 slabs.

That said, however, the lower you get on the grading scale, the more you run into "unfixable" defects, and the less likely books are to be CPRd in the first place. Less LIKELY, not that it doesn't happen.

In other words, it's not 10%, or 25%, and the rest are resubmissions. You see that on VERY, VERY rare items...census numbers represented in single digits, for example...but not over time, with common or low value items.

4. CGC used to give a credit for people who turned in old labels. This tended to keep the census more accurate than not.

5. Even though CGC doesn't give credit anymore, there are still quite a few people who, in the interest of keeping the census accurate, turn their labels in. The motive for the census being inaccurate...that is, the census cannot be artificially LOWERED (well, theoretically, people can make counterfeit labels to turn in, but that's getting REALLY out there), it can only be artificially RAISED...is weaker than the motive for the census to BE accurate. After all...if you're using the census as a selling point, you want it to be as close to accurate as possible...that is, LOW...rather than higher. There's no "upside" to having a HIGHER census number as a seller. It gives the appearance that a book might be less rare than it actually is (unless you get really conspiratorial and argue that a seller might want to hurt competition...if so, that's quite an elaborate scheme to pull off!)

Because of all these factors, the tendency is that the census is more accurate than not.

"But how do you KNOW that? No one REALLY knows, so how can you say?"

It's true, no one knows for sure, unless you have a book with a census population of, say, 3, and you own all 3 slabs. But, because we can see patterns of behavior over a long period of time...15+ years now...we can predict reasonable outcomes based on what has been observed. And since A. the majority of books cannot be "improved"; either from not having pressable defects at all, or because they were pressed prior to certification, B. the majority of buyers aren't looking to "improve" them, and C. those books that ARE CPR'd have tended to have their labels turned in, then we can say, with reasonable certainty, that the census is pretty accurate.

Yes, there's a LOT of conjecture, here...no doubt. But we can know what tends to happen, so we can make reliable predictions about how accurate the census really is, even if we can never know with absolute certainty beyond a few specific cases.

100% accurate? No, not at all. But accurate enough to be of statistical value? Absolutely.

Here is data on the census over the years, by Valiantman, aka Greg Holland:

http://www.cgcdata.com/cgc/totals/

There, you can see census numbers go DOWN, as labels got turned in.


Could you be a bit more detailed in your answer?
Post 205 IP   flag post


Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
The idea of "protecting people from themselves" is an elitist one. It masquerades as "compassion", but it really comes from a place of "these people are too stupid to think for themselves."

The best way to not be taken advantage of is education. Where does responsibility from the "novice" enter into the picture? If you're a novice, you have no business spending money you can't afford to lose on things about which you know little.

This is the age of the internet. The information is out there.

And while...again, because critical thinking is lacking...that does NOT mean that it's perfectly acceptable to take advantage of someone, sometimes being taken advantage of is good and necessary, so one learns how to protect oneself.

You can only tell someone "don't touch the stove; you'll get burned" so many times before they have to touch the stove and find out it's hot. Then they'll never do it again.

Usually.
Post 206 IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
@DocBrown

Could you be a bit more detailed in your answer?


Well, now that you mention it....

















I kid, I kid!
Post 207 IP   flag post
Collector* Towmater private msg quote post Address this user
A long time ago in my academy ethics class the instructor stated that within days of being on the job we would be faced with an ethical dilemma. He stated that reputations are built from the first minute on the job. How we reacted would reflect upon our parents and ourselves as individuals, and would be viewed by the public as an indicator of the people the our Agencies hired. I never forgot that.

Taking advantage of someone isn't OK under any circumstance. Attempting to justify taking advantage of someone really shows one's true colors. Again, we live in sad times.
Post 208 IP   flag post
Collector X51 private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLBcomics
Query remains the same which remains unanswered which is why having a "registry" makes otherwise "worthless" comics certified in to 9.8 worth money?


The value of otherwise "worthless" comics in 9.8 condition has almost nothing to do with the content within that comic. Once you start isolating comics that are statistical anomalies in the standard printing/distribution/handling processes you are collecting just that... publishing anomalies.

As you approach 100% perfection, the cost to achieve that spikes upwards towards infinity. The cost (value?) of any product approaches infinity as you start approaching perfection. Essentially, collectors are collecting the grade.. the number on the slab... not the story within the comic.




I will assure people that those string tied bundles of periodicals I saw as a child are not going to produce 9.8's anywhere near where that string pinched the spines. That's how periodicals came off the magazine distributor's truck. Those spinner racks where comics were displayed didn't help either.

Now you have comics that didn't get mishandled at the printer... they were in the middle of the bundle... they didn't get damage by the delivery man on the route, they didn't get damaged by the spinner rack or customer careless flipping through the stack... the opportunities for damage go on. For many comics to achieve 9.8, it has to be either sheer luck or the thing was pampered like a baby through every step of the process.
Post 209 IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Towmater
A long time ago in my academy ethics class the instructor stated that within days of being on the job we would be faced with an ethical dilemma. He stated that reputations are built from the first minute on the job. How we reacted would reflect upon our parents and ourselves as individuals, and would be viewed by the public as an indicator of the people the our Agencies hired. I never forgot that.

Taking advantage of someone isn't OK under any circumstance. Attempting to justify taking advantage of someone really shows one's true colors. Again, we live in sad times.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DB
And while...again, because critical thinking is lacking...that does NOT mean that it's perfectly acceptable to take advantage of someone...


Let me say it one more time: it is not at all acceptable to take advantage of others, ever, under any circumstances. Defrauding someone based on their ignorance is FRAUD and always wrong, every time.

Trying to mischaracterize someone else's comments as "attempting to justify taking advantage of someone" as "showing one's true colors" is irresponsible and malicious. We do, indeed, live in sad times.

I would ask you to cut it out. Thanks.
Post 210 IP   flag post
Collector X51 private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLBcomics
CGC "census" BS much less GPA supposed sales of CGC cert products are also subject to manipulations which makes for novice investor collectors to be taken advantage of.


Bingo! There is a reason the stock market has laws to protect investors. Unfortunately, there are no similar laws out there to protect those who invest in collectibles.
Post 211 IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by X51
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLBcomics
CGC "census" BS much less GPA supposed sales of CGC cert products are also subject to manipulations which makes for novice investor collectors to be taken advantage of.


Bingo! There is a reason the stock market has laws to protect investors. Unfortunately, there are no similar laws out there to protect those who invest in collectibles.


The census...quotes or not...is not BS, and GPA doesn't consist of supposed sales.

The point may be valid, but using invalid arguments to support it tends to invalidate it.

No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Post 212 IP   flag post
Collector* Towmater private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
Quote:
Originally Posted by Towmater
A long time ago in my academy ethics class the instructor stated that within days of being on the job we would be faced with an ethical dilemma. He stated that reputations are built from the first minute on the job. How we reacted would reflect upon our parents and ourselves as individuals, and would be viewed by the public as an indicator of the people the our Agencies hired. I never forgot that.

Taking advantage of someone isn't OK under any circumstance. Attempting to justify taking advantage of someone really shows one's true colors. Again, we live in sad times.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DB
And while...again, because critical thinking is lacking...that does NOT mean that it's perfectly acceptable to take advantage of someone...


Let me say it one more time: it is not at all acceptable to take advantage of others, ever, under any circumstances. Defrauding someone based on their ignorance is FRAUD and always wrong, every time.

Trying to mischaracterize someone else's comments as "attempting to justify taking advantage of someone" as "showing one's true colors" is irresponsible and malicious. We do, indeed, live in sad times.

I would ask you to cut it out. Thanks.


How you interpret and then relayed back in your post what you believe is stated is interesting and telling. I would elaborate further but it might be twisted into something that it isn't in a reply in the thread, or someone hitting the report button and then typing their views about it in an attempt to state I broke some rule. Thus, I'll pump the brakes here.

Enlightening as always.
Post 213 IP   flag post
I bought a meat grinder on amazon for $60 and it's changed my life. kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.



Post 214 IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Towmater
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
Quote:
Originally Posted by Towmater
A long time ago in my academy ethics class the instructor stated that within days of being on the job we would be faced with an ethical dilemma. He stated that reputations are built from the first minute on the job. How we reacted would reflect upon our parents and ourselves as individuals, and would be viewed by the public as an indicator of the people the our Agencies hired. I never forgot that.

Taking advantage of someone isn't OK under any circumstance. Attempting to justify taking advantage of someone really shows one's true colors. Again, we live in sad times.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DB
And while...again, because critical thinking is lacking...that does NOT mean that it's perfectly acceptable to take advantage of someone...


Let me say it one more time: it is not at all acceptable to take advantage of others, ever, under any circumstances. Defrauding someone based on their ignorance is FRAUD and always wrong, every time.

Trying to mischaracterize someone else's comments as "attempting to justify taking advantage of someone" as "showing one's true colors" is irresponsible and malicious. We do, indeed, live in sad times.

I would ask you to cut it out. Thanks.


How you interpret and then relayed back in your post what you believe stated is interesting and telling. I would elaborate further but it might be twisted into something that it isn't in a reply in the thread, or someone hitting the report button and then typing their views about it in an attempt to state I broke some rule. Thus, I'll pump the brakes here.

Enlightening as always.


Indeed it is.

It's fascinating how people use language to paint others in certain perspectives, is it not...? One need not so obvious and transparent to say "so and so is a jerk!" if one can subtly malign someone by just casually misrepresenting what they've said. It's always interesting to me how language is shaded one way or the other, twisted this way or that, to tell a narrative...a narrative that may, or may not, have any resemblance to the truth...with the added bonus of plausible deniability with regard to one's motives. No one's the wiser!

For example, even though nobody said it was ever ok to take advantage of someone, here, not a few posts later, is someone saying that someone else is "attempting to justify taking advantage of someone" and that "really shows one's true colors." Isn't that interesting? That someone would say something, and someone else would claim they said the exact opposite thing, and then malign them for it...?

It's almost as if it's a dance, La Danse Macabre, to see who can be the most oblique but remain perfectly clear, all at the same time.
Post 215 IP   flag post
Collector X51 private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
Quote:
Originally Posted by X51
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLBcomics
CGC "census" BS much less GPA supposed sales of CGC cert products are also subject to manipulations which makes for novice investor collectors to be taken advantage of.


Bingo! There is a reason the stock market has laws to protect investors. Unfortunately, there are no similar laws out there to protect those who invest in collectibles.


The census...quotes or not...is not BS, and GPA doesn't consist of supposed sales.

The point may be valid, but using invalid arguments to support it tends to invalidate it.

No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.


The sales numbers can be manipulated with shell companies that sell between themselves to boost the values of collectibles. It would be VERY easy to do.
Post 216 IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by X51
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
Quote:
Originally Posted by X51
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLBcomics
CGC "census" BS much less GPA supposed sales of CGC cert products are also subject to manipulations which makes for novice investor collectors to be taken advantage of.


Bingo! There is a reason the stock market has laws to protect investors. Unfortunately, there are no similar laws out there to protect those who invest in collectibles.


The census...quotes or not...is not BS, and GPA doesn't consist of supposed sales.

The point may be valid, but using invalid arguments to support it tends to invalidate it.

No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.


The sales numbers can be manipulated with shell companies that sell between themselves to boost the values of collectibles. It would be VERY easy to do.


Couple of things...

While, yes, it is VERY easy to do with one, or two, or a handful of items, it would be very difficult to do with all of the items that GPA reports. There are 42,667 listings with GPA as of right now, and they have literally millions of data points over the last 15 years.

It is the very scope and breadth of GPA that prevents it from being used as a tool for fraud on any widespread basis.

Also...the tendency of people is to manipulate a few things, or a handful of things, over a short period of time. While yes, a "long con" is possible, there's a reason why "long cons" aren't very effective: people get bored, and they get lazy, which makes them sloppy, which leads to them getting caught.

GPA has a very effective methodology for weeding out bogus sales, and while it's not foolproof, it is pretty effective. That, and the massive number of legitimate sales reported every day tends to overwhelm the manipulation of the system on a broad basis.
Post 217 IP   flag post
Collector* Towmater private msg quote post Address this user
Conjecture of what other's state within their post, one's depiction of it, and shaping it into what one wants to believe is the meaning, and then putting that down within a post as a reply is generally interesting. It sure keeps this place jumping. I wonder if any of the conjecture about the Beckett/CBCS news will come to pass?
Post 218 IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
True. It's too bad that man is such an inherently dishonest creature, willing to weave all manner of untruth to tell the story he wants told.

I guess that's why humanity has such a fondness for fiction: it's what we practice, with others and ourselves, with such frightening regularity.

I think, though, that we can treat the Beckett/CBCS news as real, and see where it goes from here.
Post 219 IP   flag post
Captain Corrector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
@Towmater

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
I wonder if there will be a name change?


👆🏻 I did post this a while back, but it got trampled in the melee.
Post 220 IP   flag post
COLLECTOR Foghorn_Sam private msg quote post Address this user
I can't take it anymore...
Post 221 IP   flag post
Collector* Towmater private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
@Townater

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck
I wonder if there will be a name change?


👆🏻 I did post this a while back, but it got trampled in the melee.


What/Who is a Townater?
Post 222 IP   flag post
Captain Corrector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
@Towmater

No worries, my time machine fixed it.
Post 223 IP   flag post
I'm a #2. BigRedOne1944 private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLS_Comics
For those buying / selling cards how does the personalization affect resale, if at all?


I would not wish to purchase a book with somebody else's personalized name on it.
Post 224 IP   flag post
COLLECTOR conditionfreak private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedOne1944
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLS_Comics
For those buying / selling cards how does the personalization affect resale, if at all?


I would not wish to purchase a book with somebody else's personalized name on it.


This is interesting, in that many/most collectors here already do purchase books with names on them.

Signature Series

Pedigrees

From the collection of

etc.

I personally would not care for it, unless the name was someone I admired or wanted to remember fondly. I would want a book from the collection of Marty Mann, but I would not want a book from the collection of Leonardo Dicaprio. (you get the idea)

But of course. This would entail some resubmitting books to get their own names on them, or to get rid of someone else's name. Which is a revenue builder for the grading and slabbing company.

So I see it as a distinct possibility by Beckett and CBCS.

Always, always, always, follow the money.

I have laughed in the past when someone here would post that CBCS et al, does what they do, for the love of comic books. It is about the MONEY. Then, now, and in the future. Which is okay. We ALL do the same thing. Even if you love what you do for a living, you don't do it for free. I loved being a cop and I often said I enjoyed it so much, that I would have done it for free. But not 10 hours a day. Maybe 10 hours per week. Because I have to feed the kids, the bank, and the electric company. And my doctor has a Cadillac Escalade that I help him feed.

So does Borock.
Post 225 IP   flag post
COLLECTOR Foghorn_Sam private msg quote post Address this user
Isn't that one of the goals in life to be able to make money doing something you love and enjoy.
Post 226 IP   flag post
Collector* Towmater private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedOne1944
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLS_Comics
For those buying / selling cards how does the personalization affect resale, if at all?


I would not wish to purchase a book with somebody else's personalized name on it.


Yet, people like purchasing the books that are from famous pedigree collections, and pay for certain creator's yellow labels. Different likes for different types and some collectors PAY EXTRA for those books/pedigrees/labels.
Post 227 IP   flag post
Collector jrs private msg quote post Address this user
Purchasing books with names on them -- from the signature series or the like -- is not the same thing as purchasing a book with some unknown knucklehead's name on it, courtesy of customization. Just sayin.
Post 228 IP   flag post
Collector* Towmater private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs
Purchasing books with names on them -- from the signature series or the like -- is not the same thing as purchasing a book with some unknown knucklehead's name on it, courtesy of customization. Just sayin.


The knucklehead (as you put it) paid for the custom label. After that it is an aftermarket item. Wanna change it? You send it back in to have it relabeled. Win win for the company.
Post 229 IP   flag post
Collector jrs private msg quote post Address this user
@Towmater, yes, but it's totally different from sig series. Apples and oranges.
Post 230 IP   flag post
600440 327 30
Thread locked. No more posts permitted. Return home.