This thing with shrinkwrap reminds me of when the comic book companies started to "polybag" some of their comics...essentially to shrinkwrap them. There was a whole debate as to whether polybagged comics that had been opened were worth less than sealed copies. The consensus eventually was something like "screw the comic companies, this is BS, I'm not going to start buying 2 copies of every comic to preserve the value of my collection while still being able to read it", so an opened polybagged comic came to have the same value as a sealed one. The comic companies pretty much stopped doing it too.
Stuart -----Original Message----- From: BL [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 3:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SWCollect] Need advice regarding a Wasteland purchase Jim, I understand the scale, there is just the point with Mint Sealed and Near Mint implying the state of the shrink on the product while there's also a modifier for Sealed.. It just seems redundant to me. In essense MS and NM are the same thing, except for the wrap. So why not M with or without S to replace NM? If you don't want to change it, that's fine, I'm just pointing out the anomoly that it is and what makes the most sense to me. Perhaps it's because I'm one of those shrinkwrap nuts you mentioned. :) I only collect stuff still in shrinkwrap.. maybe an occasional exception. In anycase, I can't be alone, and if anything, more and more people are seeking still shrinked stuff.. they always seem to be valued high from my experiences anyway. Brad ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Leonard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [SWCollect] Need advice regarding a Wasteland purchase > BL wrote: > > Well yeah, I am aware you could do that, but it could be confusing to those > > who don't know. > > Well, if they read the grading scale, they'll know ;-) > > > Why assume or not assume any sealed quality on any of six grades if there is > > a modifier to handle the condition? > > Unless you're a shrinkwrap nut, most software collections consist > primarily of opened software. So the grading scale was created under > the assumption that: > > - Anything Mint must be sealed > - Everything else is assumed not sealed > > In order for something to be called Mint, it must be sealed. So that's > why you don't need to use the Sealed modifier with Mint items. The > Sealed modifier was created specifically to denote the infrequent > occurance of a package that is showing damage, wear, implosion, etc. yet > is somehow still sealed. > > I consider that fairly streamlined; do you disagree? > > > I would propose a 2 changes to the scale: > > (I should warn you that changes to the scale were debated heavily for > months before being finalized. If the scale is constantly changing, > nobody will use it. Therefore, in order for a change to be made to the > scale, you would have to point out a significant flaw in logic or > definition.) > > > MINT SEALED changed to MINT with the possibility of the "S" modifier. > > There is no such thing as a Mint unsealed package (if it's been opened, > it's not mint any more), so this request is moot. > > Here's a summary of the grades, as finalized in the scale: > > Mint Sealed (MS): No noticable defects, unopened > Near Mint (NM): No noticable defects > Fine (F) : Light defects (1 or 2) > Very Good (VG): Light defects (3 or more) > Good (G) : Heavy defects > Excess Defects (ED): Unacceptable defects > > (I have a small printout of this on my monitor, actually ;-) Does that > clarify things, or is there still some confusion? > -- > Jim Leonard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > World's largest electronic gaming project: http://www.MobyGames.com/ > A delicious slice of the demoscene: http://www.MindCandyDVD.com/ > Various oldskool PC rants and ramblings: http://www.oldskool.org/ > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to > the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' > Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ Information in this message reflects current market conditions and is subject to change without notice. It is believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed for accuracy or completeness. Details provided do not supersede your normal trade confirmations or statements. Any product is subject to prior sale. CIBC World Markets Corp, its affiliated companies, and their officers or employees, may have a position in or make a market in any security described above, and may act as an investment banker or advisor to such. Although CIBC World Markets Corp. is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce ("CIBC"), it is solely responsible for its contractual obligations. Any securities products recommended, purchased, or sold in any client accounts (i) will not be insured by the FDIC, (ii)will not be deposits or obligations of CIBC, (iii) will not be endorsed or guaranteed by CIBC, and (iv) will be subject to risks, including possible loss of principal invested. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
