• 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.

Moderns that are heating up on ebay!
71 71

63,730 posts in this topic

15 hours ago, the blob said:

I have literally never seen a Spawn 1 in a dollar box. That's a book dealers wanted crazy money for...like $2....even when nobody wanted it.

I picked up plenty of them in $1 boxes over the years. I remember when I worked at the LCS (this was 20 years ago or more) we'd pay ten cents a piece for them, and sell them for $10 at a steady clip. And even only paying 10 cents, we still got TONS of them. It's for that reason that I still have a mental block on paying more than $1 for them, even if they sell for $20+ now. There's just too damn many of them out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Nico Esq said:

There's 2k copies of the 682 1:25, 4k copies of the 682 2nd print and about 50K copies of the regular covers of 684 if my memory is correct.  I looked those numbers up on comicchron a while back

So, any idea on how many they actually printed...?

(Yes, this is a trick question.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, F For Fake said:

I picked up plenty of them in $1 boxes over the years. I remember when I worked at the LCS (this was 20 years ago or more) we'd pay ten cents a piece for them, and sell them for $10 at a steady clip. And even only paying 10 cents, we still got TONS of them. It's for that reason that I still have a mental block on paying more than $1 for them, even if they sell for $20+ now. There's just too damn many of them out there.

Back in the day I would literally walk out of a collection as soon as I'd see the first 10+ copies of spawn 1 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

So, any idea on how many they actually printed...?

(Yes, this is a trick question.)

I think the comicchron numbers are as good of an indicator as we have and that direct market US sales are pretty damn close.  I always divide by ratio b/c I assume that is actually how many of the variants get produced not the lesser number of x many stores qualified by ordering that many copies.  I think the more interesting inquiry is does anyone have another method or source that they rely upon that they are willing to share? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Nico Esq said:

I think the comicchron numbers are as good of an indicator as we have and that direct market US sales are pretty damn close. 

 

Yes, the Comichron numbers are, generally, a decent indicator of "what's out there"...always with the caveat that those are sales numbers, not print runs, so anyone saying "so and so only printed 23 and a half copies of Wonder X #382.4!!" is making stuff up.

39 minutes ago, Nico Esq said:

I always divide by ratio b/c I assume that is actually how many of the variants get produced not the lesser number of x many stores qualified by ordering that many copies.

That's where you're making your mistake. The ratio numbers are order numbers, and have nothing to do with anything else. We know this because of the large quantity of "1:X" variants released by Diamond/Marvel months or years after publication.

40 minutes ago, Nico Esq said:

I think the more interesting inquiry is does anyone have another method or source that they rely upon that they are willing to share? 

No. No one releases any of that information, and haven't since they were no longer required to by no longer mailing subscriptions out via USPS Second Class mail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nico Esq said:

I think the comicchron numbers are as good of an indicator as we have and that direct market US sales are pretty damn close.  I always divide by ratio b/c I assume that is actually how many of the variants get produced not the lesser number of x many stores qualified by ordering that many copies.  I think the more interesting inquiry is does anyone have another method or source that they rely upon that they are willing to share? 

And of course you are 100% reasonable with your estimates.  

It is generally accepted and common knowledge that publishers are generally printing only 1-5% over of orders actually received for at least the last several years (and probably a lot longer).  Everyone knows that the margins just aren't there for publishers to wildly over print based on actual orders received these days based solely on "spec" (which is likely why we see so many second and later printings of books pooped out so early and so often these days).

This person you have previously responded to is a notorious "print run troll" around here that you will do nothing but waste your breath on.

-J.

Edited by Jaydogrules
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Yes, the Comichron numbers are, generally, a decent indicator of "what's out there"...always with the caveat that those are sales numbers, not print runs, so anyone saying "so and so only printed 23 and a half copies of Wonder X #382.4!!" is making stuff up.

That's where you're making your mistake. The ratio numbers are order numbers, and have nothing to do with anything else. We know this because of the large quantity of "1:X" variants released by Diamond/Marvel months or years after publication.

No. No one releases any of that information, and haven't since they were no longer required to by no longer mailing subscriptions out via USPS Second Class mail.

I don't follow your logic for the ratio numbers are order numbers and have nothing to do with anything else.  I think it's reasonable to assume that "large quantities of 1:x variats released later in time" are the overage from diamond not distributing books that were printed to non-qualifying stores not that there is some secret stash of books that diamond gets from Marvel (or in rare circumstances DC).

It's important to remember as a friend reminded me (which may not be well understood) that the comicchron numbers are based upon diamond's voluntary disclose of the guaranteed allocation made pre- final order cutoff  and do not include damage replacements (they print extra for that), re-orders, etc.  I also recall that at  least at one time they were domestic numbers only, but I would have to look at that to be certain. Nevertheless, they are the best tool we have.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nico Esq said:

I don't follow your logic for the ratio numbers are order numbers and have nothing to do with anything else.  I think it's reasonable to assume that "large quantities of 1:x variats released later in time" are the overage from diamond not distributing books that were printed to non-qualifying stores not that there is some secret stash of books that diamond gets from Marvel (or in rare circumstances DC).

Your assumption is inaccurate. Publishers know exactly how many they need to print for all qualifying orders before they have to print them. Marvel, DC, and others have routinely "overprinted" ratio variants, for their own purposes. Nobody knows how many that is except the publisher and the printer. As already mentioned, publishers have released large quantities of ratio variants...far in excess of what might be called "overages"...for years now. 

For example...I own 50 copies of New Avengers #4, one of the very first "ratio" variants ever made, sold as, I believe, 1:17. #1 was 1:20, #2 was 1:19, etc. I bought all 50 copies from Wizard as overstock. Did Wizard buy 2000 copies of regular Avengers #4 to obtain those variants? No. Wizard wanted them, and Marvel sold them. 

The number... "1:X"...means one thing, and one thing only: how many copies of the regular book a retailer has to order to receive 1 copy of the variant.

Anything beyond that is unknown, and cannot be assumed...by anyone. That information is simply not made public.

9 minutes ago, Nico Esq said:

It's important to remember as a friend reminded me (which may not be well understood) that the comicchron numbers are based upon diamond's voluntary disclose of the guaranteed allocation made pre- final order cutoff  and do not include damage replacements (they print extra for that), re-orders, etc.  I also recall that at  least at one time they were domestic numbers only, but I would have to look at that to be certain. Nevertheless, they are the best tool we have. 

Of course. But "the best tool we have" isn't a very good one. It's adequate, for estimations. FYI, Comichron numbers only include sales in North America...it doesn't include any numbers of English language "standard versions" sold overseas. You are correct...the numbers don't account for re-orders, further muddying up their usefulness.

This has been discussed, in many threads, for many years. There have been some very good discussions about this very issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jaydogrules said:

And of course you are 100% reasonable with your estimates.  

It is generally accepted and common knowledge that publishers are generally printing only 1-5% over of orders actually received for at least the last several years (and probably a lot longer).  Everyone knows that the margins just aren't there for publishers to wildly over print based on actual orders received these days based solely on "spec" (which is likely why we see so many second and later printings of books pooped out so early and so often these days).

This person you have previously responded to is a notorious "print run troll" around here that you will do nothing but waste your breath on.

-J.

And this person is a notorious shill who constantly pumps up the books he owns to protect his foolish investments, and who cannot be reasoned with, by anyone, at any time, for any reason, and whom no one should waste time trying to debate.

There. Now that we've pointlessly insulted each other, let's move on to the issue at hand: No one disputes that publishers print a certain percentage...which Jaydogrules does not know...to cover damages and whatnot.

Jaydogrules has tried...many times, over many years...to make claims about things he does not know, such as "everyone (who is "everyone"?) knows that the margins just aren't there for publishers to wildly over print." Notice, the lack of any detail. What does "wildly" mean, in this context? Jaydogrules doesn't know. So, he just uses a vague term like "wildly", despite the fact that he has been completely debunked, over and over again, for years. "Ratio variants" ARE NOT regular books, and ARE NOT treated LIKE regular books...so Jaydogrules' attempt to muddy the water, talking about "second and later printings", which have nothing to do with "ratio variants", is pretty easy to see through.

The PROVEN FACT is that the publishers have, for many years, sold, through Diamond (or directly BY Diamond) so-called "ratio variants" far, far in excess of Jaydogrules supposed "1-5% overages" number...hundreds and hundreds of copies.

@Chuck Gower, a Diamond retailer, has provided countless numbers and order forms to demonstrate this and refute Jaydogrules' erroneous claims.

Jaydogrules repeats his fiction because he has heavily invested in these "ratio variants", especially books like ASM #667 1:100, and needs people to believe that those numbers are tied to sales numbers reported by Diamond, because he wants everyone to think these books are scarcer than they might actually be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, F For Fake said:

I picked up plenty of them in $1 boxes over the years. I remember when I worked at the LCS (this was 20 years ago or more) we'd pay ten cents a piece for them, and sell them for $10 at a steady clip. And even only paying 10 cents, we still got TONS of them. It's for that reason that I still have a mental block on paying more than $1 for them, even if they sell for $20+ now. There's just too damn many of them out there.

Hmm, well, maybe when I saw image books in a long box I would just jump to the next section as the only Image books I was ever looking for were late issues of Maxx, but I did look for Spawn in the 100s too if they hit me in the face. I'd see badjillions of #2, but not all these 1s you speak of. Not saying there aren't a huge quantity of 1s out there, I just personally wasn't hitting them. Of course, a lot of stuff has popped. I passed on a stack of 3 for $10 X-Men Annual 14s a couple o years ago when I asked myself "why do I need more of these?"I couldn't pass on 3 for $10 VF/NM New Teen Titans 1s at that same show though. And I fished a solid 10-15 copies of Rai 0 out of dollar boxes over the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

15 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Your assumption is inaccurate. Publishers know exactly how many they need to print for all qualifying orders before they have to print them. Marvel, DC, and others have routinely "overprinted" ratio variants, for their own purposes. Nobody knows how many that is except the publisher and the printer. As already mentioned, publishers have released large quantities of ratio variants...far in excess of what might be called "overages"...for years now. 

For example...I own 50 copies of New Avengers #4, one of the very first "ratio" variants ever made, sold as, I believe, 1:17. #1 was 1:20, #2 was 1:19, etc. I bought all 50 copies from Wizard as overstock. Did Wizard buy 2000 copies of regular Avengers #4 to obtain those variants? No. Wizard wanted them, and Marvel sold them. 

The number... "1:X"...means one thing, and one thing only: how many copies of the regular book a retailer has to order to receive 1 copy of the variant.

Anything beyond that is unknown, and cannot be assumed...by anyone. That information is simply not made public.

Of course. But "the best tool we have" isn't a very good one. It's adequate, for estimations. FYI, Comichron numbers only include sales in North America...it doesn't include any numbers of English language "standard versions" sold overseas. You are correct...the numbers don't account for re-orders, further muddying up their usefulness.

This has been discussed, in many threads, for many years. There have been some very good discussions about this very issue. 

Dude, you are basically just repeating what I said at this point.  They weren't kidding about me wasting my breath.  You should think about meditation or yoga.

In reference to your ad hoc example of "this one time I bought 50 copies of a ratio variant", that is not demonstrative evidence and I'm not really trying to go into explaining why.  Suffice to say, I would encourage you to try and approach conversations from a place where you are looking to improve your understanding an/or help someone else better understand and let go of the need to be right.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Jaydogrules repeats his fiction because he has heavily invested in these "ratio variants", especially books like ASM #667 1:100, and needs people to believe that those numbers are tied to sales numbers reported by Diamond, because he wants everyone to think these books are scarcer than they might actually be.

I agree, it sure seems like Jaydog usually has an agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nico Esq said:

Dude, you are basically just repeating what I said at this point.  They weren't kidding about me wasting my breath.  You should think about meditation or yoga.

 

Dial it down, Nico. You should take the time to consider your sources before repeating nonsense from the nonsensical.

5 minutes ago, Nico Esq said:

In reference to your ad hoc example of "this one time I bought 50 copies of a ratio variant", that is not demonstrative evidence and I'm not really trying to go into explaining why.  Suffice to say, I would encourage you to try and approach conversations from a place where you are looking to improve your understanding an/or help someone else better understand and let go of the need to be right.  

It's called an "anecdote", and anecdotes do have value in illustrating an argument. It is an example, one of many.

And I'll say the same thing to you I've said about Jaydogrules: if you can't handle being challenged without being offended and making it personal, the internet is probably not the place for you. 

Edited by RockMyAmadeus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Dial it down, Nico. You should take the time to consider your sources before repeating nonsense from the nonsensical.

It's called an "anecdote", and anecdotes do have value in illustrating an argument. It is an example, one of many.

And I'll say the same thing to you I've said about Jaydogrules: if you can't handle being challenged without making it personal, the internet is probably not the place for you. 

This is my last post regarding any of this but it appears that you are the one who has made this all very personal.  For what reason, I don't know.  

There is no reason for you to feel like you need to qualify yourself to me or anyone else.  I think you are smart about comics.  An anecdote is really bad evidence.  I think a better way to try and prove your point is to stick with the "no one knows the real numbers" angle, but I don't think there's any real disagreement about that.  There is however no need to argue and disagree just to disagree.  To suggest that I am somehow thin skinned because I am encouraging a higher level of discussion than "I'm right, you're wrong," "I'm smart, you're stupid," "you're motivated by self interest, I'm self-less" is kind of ridiculous.  Again, I would encourage you to approach conversations looking for a win-win.  To see the CGC boards or the comic business generally as a zero-sum game where "others have to lose so that I can win" is really antithetical to the hobby as a whole.  In other words, I believe that vast majority of the people who participate in the CGC boards are looking to improve their understanding of collecting and the hobby and to share their knowledge and passion for the hobby with others.  It's really that simple.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

And this person is a notorious shill who constantly pumps up the books he owns to protect his foolish investments, and who cannot be reasoned with, by anyone, at any time, for any reason, and whom no one should waste time trying to debate.

There. Now that we've pointlessly insulted each other, let's move on to the issue at hand: No one disputes that publishers print a certain percentage...which Jaydogrules does not know...to cover damages and whatnot.

Jaydogrules has tried...many times, over many years...to make claims about things he does not know, such as "everyone (who is "everyone"?) knows that the margins just aren't there for publishers to wildly over print." Notice, the lack of any detail. What does "wildly" mean, in this context? Jaydogrules doesn't know. So, he just uses a vague term like "wildly", despite the fact that he has been completely debunked, over and over again, for years. "Ratio variants" ARE NOT regular books, and ARE NOT treated LIKE regular books...so Jaydogrules' attempt to muddy the water, talking about "second and later printings", which have nothing to do with "ratio variants", is pretty easy to see through.

The PROVEN FACT is that the publishers have, for many years, sold, through Diamond (or directly BY Diamond) so-called "ratio variants" far, far in excess of Jaydogrules supposed "1-5% overages" number...hundreds and hundreds of copies.

@Chuck Gower, a Diamond retailer, has provided countless numbers and order forms to demonstrate this and refute Jaydogrules' erroneous claims.

Jaydogrules repeats his fiction because he has heavily invested in these "ratio variants", especially books like ASM #667 1:100, and needs people to believe that those numbers are tied to sales numbers reported by Diamond, because he wants everyone to think these books are scarcer than they might actually be.

Actually, as both an early adopter and someone who has never and will never sell a comic (I thought that was common knowledge around here by now), I'm doing just fine with my comic "investments" (that I simply refer to as "my fun hobby"), moderns and otherwise, thank you very much.  (thumbsu And please, quit referring to those worthless sales figures Gower posted from 30 years ago that don't mean squat today, while ignoring that he himself SPECIFICALLY stated that publishers are and have been printing very close to actual orders now, rounded up to the nearest case packs. 

This will be my final response to you on this matter here.  

:troll:

-J.

Edited by Jaydogrules
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Nico Esq said:

This is my last post regarding any of this but it appears that you are the one who has made this all very personal.  For what reason, I don't know.  

There is no reason for you to feel like you need to qualify yourself to me or anyone else.  I think you are smart about comics.  An anecdote is really bad evidence.  I think a better way to try and prove your point is to stick with the "no one knows the real numbers" angle, but I don't think there's any real disagreement about that.  There is however no need to argue and disagree just to disagree.  To suggest that I am somehow thin skinned because I am encouraging a higher level of discussion than "I'm right, you're wrong," "I'm smart, you're stupid," "you're motivated by self interest, I'm self-less" is kind of ridiculous.  Again, I would encourage you to approach conversations looking for a win-win.  To see the CGC boards or the comic business generally as a zero-sum game where "others have to lose so that I can win" is really antithetical to the hobby as a whole.  In other words, I believe that vast majority of the people who participate in the CGC boards are looking to improve their understanding of collecting and the hobby and to share their knowledge and passion for the hobby with others.  It's really that simple.  

If you can't handle being challenged without being offended, and making it personal, the internet is probably not the place for you. If you think being challenged is "making it personal", or "I'm right, you're wrong" or "I'm smart, you're stupid", or "others have to lose so that I can win", the internet is probably not the place for you. None of this personal commentary has any place here. Your characterizations of this (thus far incredibly brief) conversation are completely inaccurate, and indicative of someone who has been very offended...and at what? Someone challenging them publicly.

That's a really dumb...and regressive...reason to be offended. I don't need to be right, while you are wrong. I want *BOTH* of us to be right. And I think that's a good goal. Don't you?

Let's talk about comics...not what we think about each other personally. That never ends well.

PS. If you'd like to discuss personality differences, I'd be happy to discuss it in PMs.

Edited by RockMyAmadeus
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
71 71