Superman: The Man of Steel #17 & 18 (Doomsday) 3 3

[Cpt Kirk]

Batman 608, 612 reprints are still worth more than 1st prints, and so on....

Both of these are ten years newer than MOS #18. Both of these have more desirable cover art on the second printing.

 

Batman #612 second printing basically started the sketch cover craze... that's a collector's market unto itself.

Batman #608 second printing is a totally new cover that looks much better than the giant boot on the first printing.

 

The difference between MOS #18 reprints is a word color and a little Roman numeral... and a couple of years.

 

valiantman, I get what you are saying, but who are we to decide what people want to collect? If some of these comics are harder to find, and the demand is there, I can see why they rise in value. Some of us collectors are completist. We want to have every permutation of our favorite comics or titles. I have this problem myself. I not only collect all the different versions of the original Marvel Star Wars title (including foreign editions) but I also collect direct and newsstand editions of the Dark Horse Star Wars titles. Think about how masochist that sounds.

 

Would I spend more on a DH SW newsstand issue than a direct issue? Yes, I would be willing to spend cover price for a newsstand issue, whereas most of the direct issues are worth far less than cover price.

 

As for crazy, think about this, a simple number change on the cover of Star Wars #1 (a 0 to a 5) can mean the difference of hundreds if not thousands of dollars. Thousands! For a cover that is identical except for the price.

 

I do have to ask though, wouldn't the ads be different in a comic reprinted a few years later?

 

Those 2nd thru 5th printings (and DC Universe variants) have ads and indicia that are identical to the 1st printings. So it is pretty hard to say when they were published.

 

On the other hand, the 2nd thru 7th printings that occurred in the Batman run from 397 through 480 do have ads that are different than the 1st printings. I studied the problem and found that the date of those different ads could be pinpointed by comparing them to later issues in the same run. For example, the Lynx ad on the back cover of the 2nd printing of Batman 445 (originally dated Mar 1990) can be found on the back cover of all DC issues that are dated Aug 1991. So one can assume that 2nd printing of Batman 445 was published at the same time as the Aug 1991 issues.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

Those 2nd thru 5th printings (and DC Universe variants) have ads and indicia that are identical to the 1st printings. So it is pretty hard to say when they were published.

 

Other than the DC Universe copies, which we can safely assume were printed in the "cover date 1994 or later" range, but as noted above, that only gives us a range.

 

Some of the books, like MOS #18 2nd, Adv #497 2nd, Action #684 2nd, Superman #74 2nd and Superman #75 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, were reprinted within months, if not weeks, of the original publications in Oct/Nov 1992. Superman #75 was like nothing the industry has seen, before or since, and DC was eager to keep the presses running for as long as they could.

 

And some of the books were reprinted a year or more later, such as all the DC Universe copies. We know that the very latest the books could have been reprinted (in their initial format, MOS #19 white cover (4th?) is a long-after-the-fact anomaly) is late 1996, when the DC Universe logo stopped being used.

 

What is really interesting about DOS/FFAF reprints is that DC published both single issue reprints AND trades of the same story, for use in different formats (trades to book stores, reprints to boxed/packs for sale in K-Marts, Wal-Marts, and the like.)

 

They were really taking as much advantage as they could, which was good for them.

 

On the other hand, the 2nd thru 7th printings that occurred in the Batman run from 397 through 480 do have ads that are different than the 1st printings. I studied the problem and found that the date of those different ads could be pinpointed by comparing them to later issues in the same run. For example, the Lynx ad on the back cover of the 2nd printing of Batman 445 (originally dated Mar 1990) can be found on the back cover of all DC issues that are dated Aug 1991. So one can assume that 2nd printing of Batman 445 was published at the same time as the Aug 1991 issues.

 

True, with one caveat: publishers were re-using ads in this time period for several months at a time, and what could be on the back cover one month could be on the inside front cover another, and the inside back cover another. An example of this would be the Konami "Aliens and Terrorists" ad that appears on the back cover of books like X-Men #266 (8/90.)

 

 

This ad also appears on the inside front cover of books from April of 1990, May of 1990, and perhaps June of 1990.

 

But, a safe range can be established by the ads, and most obviously for books originally printed in 1987, but with ads that are copyright 1989-1990, etc.

[mysterio]

Isn't the MOS #19 white cover from an action figure pack? The third print is the DCU, I don't think the fourth print is a DCU printing. If someone could show one that'd be helpful. I think one was shown in the "multiple printings" thread not too long ago, but I don't have an opportunity to look right now.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Isn't the MOS #19 white cover from an action figure pack? The third print is the DCU, I don't think the fourth print is a DCU printing. If someone could show one that'd be helpful. I think one was shown in the "multiple printings" thread not too long ago, but I don't have an opportunity to look right now.

 

Here you go:

 

 

By the way....on a totally unrelated sidepoint, I wanted to point out that this thread and the TMNT #1 Club thread (which needs to be unlocked) have both had the same type of back and forth that this one has, only this one moreso.

 

Same "tone." Same sort of intense discussion. Same sort of "in the details" type back and forth.

 

Totally different outcome (so far.)

 

We should encourage this, and discourage the other (meaning, we should all actively discourage people from internalizing and taking personally these sorts of discussions, and then reporting them to the mods.)

 

I digress...

[GM8]

Isn't the MOS #19 white cover from an action figure pack? The third print is the DCU, I don't think the fourth print is a DCU printing. If someone could show one that'd be helpful. I think one was shown in the "multiple printings" thread not too long ago, but I don't have an opportunity to look right now.

 

As far as I know there is no 4th print of MoS #19. There's 1st, 2nd, 3rd and the white variant you mention. I have a couple of those and don't recall any print notation on it.

[mysterio]

Isn't the MOS #19 white cover from an action figure pack? The third print is the DCU, I don't think the fourth print is a DCU printing. If someone could show one that'd be helpful. I think one was shown in the "multiple printings" thread not too long ago, but I don't have an opportunity to look right now.

 

As far as I know there is no 4th print of MoS #19. There's 1st, 2nd, 3rd and the white variant you mention. I have a couple of those and don't recall any print notation on it.

 

If the white variant was printed after the third print, which it seems to have been, what else would we call it? I'm torn on this as well, I don't like referring to comics printed for inclusion in toy packaging (i.e. Marvel legends comics) as second prints. I prefer to save that designation for books that hit the stands. It may just be me.

[RockMyAmadeus]

If the white variant was printed after the third print, which it seems to have been, what else would we call it? I'm torn on this as well, I don't like referring to comics printed for inclusion in toy packaging (i.e. Marvel legends comics) as second prints. I prefer to save that designation for books that hit the stands. It may just be me.

 

The white variant was printed a decade and a half after the others.

 

I don't think it's a "4th print", but it could reasonably be called that. \

 

Why they chose MOS #19, and none of the other books, I don't know. Seems a very odd choice.

[troydivision1]

Just arrived...very happy...

(never owned a 4th print)

[revat]

Just arrived...very happy...

(never owned a 4th print)

 

there's a fourth for sale in the sales threads right now!

[Brandon Shepherd]

Just arrived...very happy...

(never owned a 4th print)

 

Congrats!

[Brandon Shepherd]

I just got a new book in the mail the other day!

 

 

 

Damn, they look good together!

 

 

Go Broncos!

[Chillax23]

I just got a new book in the mail the other day!

 

 

 

Damn, they look good together!

 

 

Go Broncos!

 

Very nice - now you just need the 2nd, 3rd and 5th

[Brandon Shepherd]

I just got a new book in the mail the other day!

 

 

 

Damn, they look good together!

 

 

Go Broncos!

 

Very nice - now you just need the 2nd, 3rd and 5th

 

Thanks! Having all five would make for a nice picture, wouldn't it?!

[Master_P]

How is this book a $100 + CGC book when there are so many copies?

[rjrjr]

How is this book a $100 + CGC book when there are so many copies?

 

Demand is greater than supply?

 

There are a bunch of books that fall into this category from this era. But, despite the high supply, they keep rising. I think you have a lot of collectors who do not want to be left out on a possible breakout book, so they are snatching up the available copies.

[thecopperagekids]

How is this book a $100 + CGC book when there are so many copies?

 

 

 

So many copies?

 

You're thinking about MOS # 18, 1st print.

 

Not 4th or 5th print.

 

1st prints are worth a solid $100-$125 in CGC 9.8.

 

 

 

Pull up a search on ebay under "Man Of Steel 18 4th print".......and then search for "Man Of Steel 18 5th print".

 

 

4th & 5th printings of MOS 18 in CGC 9.8 are worth about 500%+ the cost of a CGC 9.8 1st print.

 

 

Then read the 20 or so pages in this thread for a detailed explanation as to why they are more valuable.

 

 

 

 

[thecopperagekids]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

 

One might think a tad bit of research would be in order for a professional grading company.

 

Let's not get lost in the weeds. Publication month/year is all that matters. Reprint dates aren't even generally made public (except in cases like Bone, interestingly enough), much less have any bearing on the original publication date. For a reprint to have a new date on the label, it would have to have that new date somewhere on the book, and would probably have to be substantively different from the original (like the EC reprints of the 1970's.)

 

Was MOS #18 5th printed in 1994? Probably. The first "DC Universe" UPC logo books have a Jan 1994 (printed in Nov 1993) cover date. But it doesn't matter, because the cover date is still Dec 92, and that didn't change. Trying to figure out the "actual date" would be a task beyond the scope of CGC.

 

RMA, not directly related but I've got a question for you....which I'm sure you know the answer to.

 

I actually *remember* you breaking this down but I can't find where you posted it.

 

What are the top 5 (or 10, if you want to go that far) toughest books to find, in the cumulative DOS & ROS storylines....as far as reprints and DCU logo reprintings are concerned.

to find because the ROS DCU's were (exclusively or mainly) sold in prepacks.

 

I know JLA 69 4th is fairly tough...Adv 497 3rd...MOS 19 3rd....

 

But I could have sworn you posting *somewhere* on this board, that Action 686 (DCU logo) was the hardest one and that even you have yet to come across a copy.

 

Is my memory correct?

 

 

 

 

[mysterio]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

 

One might think a tad bit of research would be in order for a professional grading company.

 

Let's not get lost in the weeds. Publication month/year is all that matters. Reprint dates aren't even generally made public (except in cases like Bone, interestingly enough), much less have any bearing on the original publication date. For a reprint to have a new date on the label, it would have to have that new date somewhere on the book, and would probably have to be substantively different from the original (like the EC reprints of the 1970's.)

 

Was MOS #18 5th printed in 1994? Probably. The first "DC Universe" UPC logo books have a Jan 1994 (printed in Nov 1993) cover date. But it doesn't matter, because the cover date is still Dec 92, and that didn't change. Trying to figure out the "actual date" would be a task beyond the scope of CGC.

 

RMA, not directly related but I've got a question for you....which I'm sure you know the answer to.

 

I actually *remember* you breaking this down but I can't find where you posted it.

 

What are the top 5 (or 10, if you want to go that far) toughest books to find, in the cumulative DOS & ROS storylines....as far as reprints and DCU logo reprintings are concerned.

to find because the ROS DCU's were (exclusively or mainly) sold in prepacks.

 

I know JLA 69 4th is fairly tough...Adv 497 3rd...MOS 19 3rd....

 

But I could have sworn you posting *somewhere* on this board, that Action 686 (DCU logo) was the hardest one and that even you have yet to come across a copy.

 

Is my memory correct?

 

 

The thread you seek lives in the modern forum.

[RockMyAmadeus]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

 

One might think a tad bit of research would be in order for a professional grading company.

 

Let's not get lost in the weeds. Publication month/year is all that matters. Reprint dates aren't even generally made public (except in cases like Bone, interestingly enough), much less have any bearing on the original publication date. For a reprint to have a new date on the label, it would have to have that new date somewhere on the book, and would probably have to be substantively different from the original (like the EC reprints of the 1970's.)

 

Was MOS #18 5th printed in 1994? Probably. The first "DC Universe" UPC logo books have a Jan 1994 (printed in Nov 1993) cover date. But it doesn't matter, because the cover date is still Dec 92, and that didn't change. Trying to figure out the "actual date" would be a task beyond the scope of CGC.

 

RMA, not directly related but I've got a question for you....which I'm sure you know the answer to.

 

I actually *remember* you breaking this down but I can't find where you posted it.

 

What are the top 5 (or 10, if you want to go that far) toughest books to find, in the cumulative DOS & ROS storylines....as far as reprints and DCU logo reprintings are concerned.

to find because the ROS DCU's were (exclusively or mainly) sold in prepacks.

 

I know JLA 69 4th is fairly tough...Adv 497 3rd...MOS 19 3rd....

 

But I could have sworn you posting *somewhere* on this board, that Action 686 (DCU logo) was the hardest one and that even you have yet to come across a copy.

 

Is my memory correct?

 

 

The thread you seek lives in the modern forum.

 

It's nice to have minions...

 

 

[the blob]

I think these weird wacky rare 4th and 5th prints are actually keeping the value of the 1st print, CGC 9.8 notwithstanding, down. It is still lingering in this below $20 range for pristine raw copies despite movie hype, etc. where it was a year or two ago basically.