superman 1 print run

[Theagenes]

All Star 3, Batman 2, More Fun 73, and New Book of Comics 1are the significant ones.

There are also others on Overstreet's "100 most expensive list." Variant collecting is not

cheap.

 

What are the distinctions and are any noticeable on the cover?

 

More Fun 73 - the banner on the top of the cover that says "3 Smashing New Features!" appears in two different locations. One is nicely centered, and one is shifted to the left and overlaps the "73". This is probably an error that was detected midway through the print-run and corrected. So it's still one printing, but with two variations.

 

The others I don't know about.

 

Aren't the others 15 cent variants? I think there is debate as to whether or not they're Canadian editions or just a pricing experiment.

[ComicConnoisseur]

1st printing 500,000

2nd printing 250,000

3rd printing 150,000

 

There is a way to recognize the different printings?

 

Sort of. Some have a house ad for Action 13 that says "On Sale XXX" and others say "Now on Sale" so you can make a distinction between an early printing and a later printing. All the 1st printings would be the "On Sale XXX" version and all 3rd printings would be the "Now on Sale" version, but it isn't know, afaik, which ad the 2nd printing would have.

 

Action #14.

 

And you're correct. There's no way to pin down exactly what printing any particular copy is, as it's not known if the change in the Action #14 ad occurred in the 2nd or 3rd printing. The closest we could come is to say "this is a 1st or a 2nd printing" and "this is a 2nd or 3rd printing."

 

So the third printing should now be scarcer than the first printing. Have there been observed differences in the current price between the two printings?

 

 

If a third printing became more valuable than a first printing, it would not make sense to most people and wouldn't be consistent with the way thigns occur in most collecting fields.

 

Strange things do happen in the comics world that don't easily make sense to people outside the hobby, sometimes turning the usual norms on their head. But, generaly, when those norms are turned on their head it's in favor of the more numerous items (because there are more people who stand to gain by pushing it) and/or the items held by the most determined people. So the fact that the third printing is both 1) not the the first print but is also 2) not as numerous, would act against it achieving a higher value. If we reach a point where subsequent printings of modern books are hyped because of their individual scarcity (but still numerous because of how many moderns are published), we could actually see people ardently pushing the value of all third printings, and thus, working hard to hype the value of a supe 1 third printing as well, because of the trickle down effect to modern third printings.

Maybe in the early 1990s it would have had an effect,but I don`t think there are that many modern collectors now to have that much of a significance on the golden age or silver age back issue markets to cause that trickle down effect.

[Bat-Man]

It seems to me that if I were to crack out my Superman #1 and post the results, the responses I would get would be either "Wow, it might be a 1st printing, good for you!" or "Aw, that's a shame, looks like it's a 2nd or 3rd print." But neither one of those statements changes the fact that it's a Superman #1 from the summer of 1939.

 

We're already seeing people differentiating between Oct and Nov Marvel Comics #1s, and Batman #1s with or without the period. It seems pretty silly to me to disparage one version and adulate another on that basis. I know it's probably inevitable. It's human nature to do that, and collectors seem especially prone to that type of behavior.

 

So I'm going to do my best not to care too much about these things, leave my Superman 1 resting peacefully in its slab, and if I ever go after a Marvel 1 or Batman 1 try not to let those tiny differences influence my opinion of the book.

 

But I know this is probably a losing battle.

 

I agree, it'll happen.

 

I don't know if I personally feel that I agree with it with the GA, but then again today first printings of modern books are generally worth more than 2nd prints that came out a month later.

 

So really it's not that crazy to see a first print Superman #1 be worth more than a third print, as you already mentioned.

[nearmint]

It seems to me that if I were to crack out my Superman #1 and post the results, the responses I would get would be either "Wow, it might be a 1st printing, good for you!" or "Aw, that's a shame, looks like it's a 2nd or 3rd print." But neither one of those statements changes the fact that it's a Superman #1 from the summer of 1939.

 

We're already seeing people differentiating between Oct and Nov Marvel Comics #1s, and Batman #1s with or without the period. It seems pretty silly to me to disparage one version and adulate another on that basis. I know it's probably inevitable. It's human nature to do that, and collectors seem especially prone to that type of behavior.

 

So I'm going to do my best not to care too much about these things, leave my Superman 1 resting peacefully in its slab, and if I ever go after a Marvel 1 or Batman 1 try not to let those tiny differences influence my opinion of the book.

 

But I know this is probably a losing battle.

 

I agree, it'll happen.

 

I don't know if I personally feel that I agree with it with the GA, but then again today first printings of modern books are generally worth more than 2nd prints that came out a month later.

 

So really it's not that crazy to see a first print Superman #1 be worth more than a third print, as you already mentioned.

 

Except that you can't nail down a copy as being a first print. The best you can do is nail it down as a 1st or 2nd print.

[Theagenes]

It seems to me that if I were to crack out my Superman #1 and post the results, the responses I would get would be either "Wow, it might be a 1st printing, good for you!" or "Aw, that's a shame, looks like it's a 2nd or 3rd print." But neither one of those statements changes the fact that it's a Superman #1 from the summer of 1939.

 

We're already seeing people differentiating between Oct and Nov Marvel Comics #1s, and Batman #1s with or without the period. It seems pretty silly to me to disparage one version and adulate another on that basis. I know it's probably inevitable. It's human nature to do that, and collectors seem especially prone to that type of behavior.

 

So I'm going to do my best not to care too much about these things, leave my Superman 1 resting peacefully in its slab, and if I ever go after a Marvel 1 or Batman 1 try not to let those tiny differences influence my opinion of the book.

 

But I know this is probably a losing battle.

 

I agree, it'll happen.

 

I don't know if I personally feel that I agree with it with the GA, but then again today first printings of modern books are generally worth more than 2nd prints that came out a month later.

 

So really it's not that crazy to see a first print Superman #1 be worth more than a third print, as you already mentioned.

 

Except that you can't nail down a copy as being a first print. The best you can do is nail it down as a 1st or 2nd print.

 

Because of that (and the scarcity of either version) I don't think you would get the spread that you might otherwise. But since you can definately say the later version is not a first printing, I could see a slight spread occurring between the two if CGC were to start noting "early" vs. "later." And that's appropriate if you look at how other collectibles (most notably antiquarian books) deals with later printings. I would expect that later versions wouldn't drop in value, but that early versions would see a little bump (like MC 1 Oct copies).

 

The Batman 1 is a little different as I don't think it's been established positively that there was more than one printing. Correct me if I'm wrong. I think it's been suggestion that it could have been a problem with the plates mid run that caused the period to stop showing up, right? Not sure I buy that though.

[Bat-Man]

It seems to me that if I were to crack out my Superman #1 and post the results, the responses I would get would be either "Wow, it might be a 1st printing, good for you!" or "Aw, that's a shame, looks like it's a 2nd or 3rd print." But neither one of those statements changes the fact that it's a Superman #1 from the summer of 1939.

 

We're already seeing people differentiating between Oct and Nov Marvel Comics #1s, and Batman #1s with or without the period. It seems pretty silly to me to disparage one version and adulate another on that basis. I know it's probably inevitable. It's human nature to do that, and collectors seem especially prone to that type of behavior.

 

So I'm going to do my best not to care too much about these things, leave my Superman 1 resting peacefully in its slab, and if I ever go after a Marvel 1 or Batman 1 try not to let those tiny differences influence my opinion of the book.

 

But I know this is probably a losing battle.

 

I agree, it'll happen.

 

I don't know if I personally feel that I agree with it with the GA, but then again today first printings of modern books are generally worth more than 2nd prints that came out a month later.

 

So really it's not that crazy to see a first print Superman #1 be worth more than a third print, as you already mentioned.

 

Except that you can't nail down a copy as being a first print. The best you can do is nail it down as a 1st or 2nd print.

 

Oh I gotcha.

 

Maybe that's a good thing then?

[Bat-Man]

It seems to me that if I were to crack out my Superman #1 and post the results, the responses I would get would be either "Wow, it might be a 1st printing, good for you!" or "Aw, that's a shame, looks like it's a 2nd or 3rd print." But neither one of those statements changes the fact that it's a Superman #1 from the summer of 1939.

 

We're already seeing people differentiating between Oct and Nov Marvel Comics #1s, and Batman #1s with or without the period. It seems pretty silly to me to disparage one version and adulate another on that basis. I know it's probably inevitable. It's human nature to do that, and collectors seem especially prone to that type of behavior.

 

So I'm going to do my best not to care too much about these things, leave my Superman 1 resting peacefully in its slab, and if I ever go after a Marvel 1 or Batman 1 try not to let those tiny differences influence my opinion of the book.

 

But I know this is probably a losing battle.

 

I agree, it'll happen.

 

I don't know if I personally feel that I agree with it with the GA, but then again today first printings of modern books are generally worth more than 2nd prints that came out a month later.

 

So really it's not that crazy to see a first print Superman #1 be worth more than a third print, as you already mentioned.

 

Except that you can't nail down a copy as being a first print. The best you can do is nail it down as a 1st or 2nd print.

 

Because of that (and the scarcity of either version) I don't think you would get the spread that you might otherwise. But since you can definately say the later version is not a first printing, I could see a slight spread occurring between the two if CGC were to start noting "early" vs. "later." And that's appropriate if you look at how other collectibles (most notably antiquarian books) deals with later printings. I would expect that later versions would drop in value, but that early versions would see a little bump (like MC 1 Oct copies).

 

The Batman 1 is a little different as I don't think it's been established positively that there was more than one printing. Correct me if I'm wrong. I think it's been suggestion that it could have been a problem with the plates mid run that caused the period to stop showing up, right? Not sure I buy that though.

 

I'm not 100% sure either, but I seem to recall this might have been the best case scenario before.

 

I do not believe that it was ever verified there were two printings.

 

But I am unsure as well.

[bluechip]

It seems to me that if I were to crack out my Superman #1 and post the results, the responses I would get would be either "Wow, it might be a 1st printing, good for you!" or "Aw, that's a shame, looks like it's a 2nd or 3rd print." But neither one of those statements changes the fact that it's a Superman #1 from the summer of 1939.

 

We're already seeing people differentiating between Oct and Nov Marvel Comics #1s, and Batman #1s with or without the period. It seems pretty silly to me to disparage one version and adulate another on that basis. I know it's probably inevitable. It's human nature to do that, and collectors seem especially prone to that type of behavior.

 

So I'm going to do my best not to care too much about these things, leave my Superman 1 resting peacefully in its slab, and if I ever go after a Marvel 1 or Batman 1 try not to let those tiny differences influence my opinion of the book.

 

But I know this is probably a losing battle.

 

If it's the same theory I heard it involved the suggestion that the "dot" either fell off or was purposely removed "as a goof" (not a joke quote; I think that's what he theorized). It sounded like somebody who didn't want the no-dot copies to be earlier printings. There is no way to be certain, of course, but I have seen at least one copy that I know was among the earliest printed and it had no dot on it. But then it could have fallen off and then back on again, or been taken off and on as a "goof."

 

 

I agree, it'll happen.

 

I don't know if I personally feel that I agree with it with the GA, but then again today first printings of modern books are generally worth more than 2nd prints that came out a month later.

 

So really it's not that crazy to see a first print Superman #1 be worth more than a third print, as you already mentioned.

 

Except that you can't nail down a copy as being a first print. The best you can do is nail it down as a 1st or 2nd print.

 

Because of that (and the scarcity of either version) I don't think you would get the spread that you might otherwise. But since you can definately say the later version is not a first printing, I could see a slight spread occurring between the two if CGC were to start noting "early" vs. "later." And that's appropriate if you look at how other collectibles (most notably antiquarian books) deals with later printings. I would expect that later versions would drop in value, but that early versions would see a little bump (like MC 1 Oct copies).

 

The Batman 1 is a little different as I don't think it's been established positively that there was more than one printing. Correct me if I'm wrong. I think it's been suggestion that it could have been a problem with the plates mid run that caused the period to stop showing up, right? Not sure I buy that though.

 

I'm not 100% sure either, but I seem to recall this might have been the best case scenario before.

 

I do not believe that it was ever verified there were two printings.

 

But I am unsure as well.

[markseifert]

Sorry, put this in the wrong thread. See the Superman Check thread.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=5187614&fpart=12

[Scrooge]

Thank you for the constantly interesting posts

[markseifert]

Thanks! Heh, Though I see I accidentally resurrected the wrong thread! Ah well.

[markseifert]

However... since we're here. I recently stumbled across something that I've seen repeated here and there and always wondered the source for.

 

But in the 1938 DC v Bruns Wonderman case, Jack Liebowitz gives the following info on the stand:

 

Action 1

202,000 printed, 130,000 sold

 

Action 2

211,000 printed, 136,000 sold.

 

It's probably worth going through some of the other case transcripts to see what's in there in the area of print runs.

[jerome34]

Maybe it is time to list the pre-WW II DC variants. As far as I know, they are:

Action 28 A = 10 cents; B = 15 cents (almost certainly, Canadian)

Action 32 A = blank box under the 10 cent price; B = has "15 cents in Canada" in that box

Adventure 54 (may have a 15 cent version)

Adventure 58 (like Action 32)

All American 18 (may have a 15 cent version)

All American 22 (like Action 32)

All Star 3 (like Action 32)

Batman 1 A = "No .1"; B = " No 1"

Batman 2 A = 10 cents; B = 15 cents (almost certainly, Canadian)

Detective 43 A = 10 cents; B = 15 cents (almost certainly, Canadian)

Detective 47 (like Action 32)

Flash 9 C

Flash 13 (like Action 32)

More Fun 59 (like Action 28)

More Fun 63 (like Action 32)

More Fun 73 A = "3 Smashing" on left; B = "3 Smashing" centered

New Book of Comics 1 A = No price; B = $0.10 price on front cover

Superman 1 A = page 64 ad "on sale June"; B = page 64 ad "Now on sale"

Superman 6 (may have a 15 cent version)

Superman 8 (may be like Action 32)

 

There are also a bunch of DC variants in the period 1942 - 1958.

[jerome34]

Addendum:

Correction:

Flash 9 (may have a 15 cent version)

 

These are the ones for which I have seen. If you are interested, HA has pictures

of a lot of these and Gerber shows one version of each item.

 

We could actually identify the version of the second printing of Superman 1.

Step one is to gather as many "arrival dates" as we can; this can be done with

slabbed copies. They should fall into about three groups of dates since the

printings were, I expect, separated by at least a couple of weeks.

 

Step two (which is the hard part) would be to find at least one copy (preferably

two or three) with an arrival date in the middle group of dates and actually look

at that page to read the ad. It would be nice to have individuals post pictures

of that page for each version since it is possible that there are color differences

as well.

 

I do not have a copy, yet, so I cannot start the postings.