How much of a premium are we talking for newsstand issues v/s direct editions? 10 10

[paqart]

2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

This cannot be overstated:

The CGC Census is COMPLETELY USELESS for determining surviving copies of Newsstand vs. Direct editions, because it DOES NOT DISTINGUISH between them for most of the history of CGC.

It's unfortunate, but that's the path CGC chose, and we have to deal with that fact.

You could, however, pay attention to the census after the date they started listing these separately. If the other poster is correct, that means there are 509 direct/2 newsstand copies for the period when they were keeping track. That is enough to approximate the actual rarity using statistical tools.

[RockMyAmadeus]

4 hours ago, paqart said:

ASM #300 (1988), 290 auctioned, app 325,000 print run,

The approximate print run for ASM #300 was roughly 450,000-500,000 copies...not 325,000.

https://www.comichron.com/titlespotlights/amazingspiderman.html

We know this from the Statement of Ownership printed in Amazing Spiderman #315, which covers #300. 

4 hours ago, paqart said:

ASM #700 (2013), 146 offered on ebay, 8 of which are newsstand copies, app 262,626 print run (based on adding up Diamond sales for the four months sales are recorded for this issue),

That is not an accurate print run figure, because we do not know how many Marvel printed (although kudos to you for actually including REORDERS, which most of the "sales = print run!" people here fail to do.) We only know how many Diamond sold in North America.

How many copies were distributed to the UK? We don't know.

How many copies were sold on the newsstand? We don't know.

How many copies were distributed to Australia? We don't know.

How many copies were distributed to other countries that desire English language comics? We don't know.

Too much unknown information.

[paqart]

14 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

The approximate print run for ASM #300 was roughly 450,000-500,000 copies...not 325,000.

https://www.comichron.com/titlespotlights/amazingspiderman.html

 

That is not an accurate print run figure, because we do not know how many Marvel printed (although kudos to you for actually including REORDERS, which most of the "sales = print run!" people here fail to do.) We only know how many Diamond sold in North America.

How many copies were distributed to the UK? We don't know.

How many copies were sold on the newsstand? We don't know.

How many copies were distributed to Australia? We don't know.

How many copies were distributed to other countries that desire English language comics? We don't know.

Too much unknown information.

Looks like you got me on the ASM 300 print run. I'll correct my database now. However, my interest is in the "distributed" number, not the "print run" number. I would be interested in the print run number if it was the only number available but the distributed number is, I think, more pertinent to rarity of comics in circulation. Therefore, I will amend it to 275,000 (rounded up to account for averaging over the year). As for the English-language foreign editions, I'm not counting those because I don't look at those as having equivalent collector interest to American collectors.

EDIT: Just checked my database and see it has the correct number. Makes me think I was looking at the wrong column when I wrote my previous reply.

Edited October 10, 2019 by paqart

[RockMyAmadeus]

8 minutes ago, paqart said:

You could, however, pay attention to the census after the date they started listing these separately. If the other poster is correct, that means there are 509 direct/2 newsstand copies for the period when they were keeping track. That is enough to approximate the actual rarity using statistical tools.

The first newsstand distinction on the census was made in May of 2017. Since that same census, the total newsstand count is 19 (of all flavors.) Since that same census update (May 30, 2017) an additional 364 copies (of all flavors) have been added to the census.

http://www.cgcdata.com/cgc/search/title/:amazing:/issue/529/label/all/orderby/alphabetical/census/191008/

That does not include newsstand copies that were graded AFTER that date (5/30/17) which were incorrectly identified as "regular" (that is, Direct market) copies, if any.

It is important to remember that Heritage does not deal in moderns relatively much, and does not have a clientele that does, either...again, not NONE, but that's certainly not their main focus. So, while yes, sales data there is relevant, it's important to factor that in.

It's also INCREDIBLY important to remember that books that get submitted to CGC are almost always because they are WORTH SUBMITTING to CGC. There are a lot of "not worth submitting" books hidden out there, that no one knows about, which skews results wildly.

That all said...the ratio of all Direct copies to newsstand copies ON THE CENSUS, since CGC first made the distinction, is 364:19....or about 20 Directs for every 1 newsstand. That's a substantially higher number than "100:1" by about a factor of 5.

[mr_highgrade]

9 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

This cannot be overstated:

The CGC Census is COMPLETELY USELESS for determining surviving copies of Newsstand vs. Direct editions, because it DOES NOT DISTINGUISH between them for most of the history of CGC.

It's unfortunate, but that's the path CGC chose, and we have to deal with that fact.

Granted, but common sense will tell you that most newsstand books after the mid 2000's are scarce. Who cares if we don't know exactly how many were printed. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that they obviously weren't printed as high as their direct editions counterpart. 

[Lazyboy]

3 minutes ago, paqart said:

As for the English-language foreign editions

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 minute ago, paqart said:

Looks like you got me on the ASM 300 print run. I'll correct my database now. However, my interest is in the "distributed" number, not the "print run" number. I would be interested in the print run number if it was the only number available but the distributed number is, I think, more pertinent to rarity of comics in circulation. Therefore, I will amend it to 275,000 (rounded up to account for averaging over the year). As for the English-language foreign editions, I'm not counting those because I don't look at those as having equivalent collector interest to American collectors.

I'm not referring to "English-language foreign editions", but editions that are the same...identical...as the regular US version, and are indistinguishable (because they were never distinguished.) Those counts DO matter, because those copies have a way of making their way back into the market channels of American collectors.

This book:

...was sold in the US, Canada, the UK, and elsewhere. They are all identical copies.

[paqart]

2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That all said...the ratio of all Direct copies to newsstand copies ON THE CENSUS, since CGC first made the distinction, is 364:19....or about 20 Directs for every 1 newsstand. That's a substantially higher number than "100:1" by about a factor of 5.

You are correct about that. The point about Heritage and CGC self-selecting certain types of comics is a persuasive argument that other sources for comics that only rarely appear in those venues are better. This is why I look at Heritage for comics before around 2000, ebay after that.

[paqart]

1 minute ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

...was sold in the US, Canada, the UK, and elsewhere. They are all identical copies.

In that case, okay, they should be added in, which is what Nobel was saying now that I think of it. I remember him adding 10% to his numbers for other copies and think these were in that group. I was thinking of the UK editions with pence prices and Canadian price variants. Didn't know there were identical versions going to other countries.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Just now, mr_highgrade said:

Granted, but common sense will tell you that most newsstand books after the mid 2000's are scarce. Who cares if we don't know exactly how many were printed. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that they obviously weren't printed as high as their direct editions counterpart. 

Of course. This is what I said yesterday:

However...this is the Copper Age section, and the year 2000 is long after that era had ended.

I, personally, don't care if we don't know how many were printed. The issue I have is with people who ALSO don't know trying to claim they do, applying whatever kind of wonky rationalizations to arrive at their conclusions. THAT SAID, however...the issue isn't how many were printed...but how many survived. I would be willing to bet a large amount of money that even by 2005, the publishers were still printing "to the old model", and were printing MORE newsstand copies....60-70% of which did not sell and were returned and presumably destroyed...than Direct copies.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 minute ago, paqart said:

In that case, okay, they should be added in, which is what Nobel was saying now that I think of it. I remember him adding 10% to his numbers for other copies and think these were in that group. I was thinking of the UK editions with pence prices and Canadian price variants. Didn't know there were identical versions going to other countries.

Let me be blunt: Nobel has no idea. Neither does anyone else. 10%, 50%, 200%, nobody knows, because that information isn't released. It's all a guess. His guess isn't any better than anyone else's, and the problem with his guess is that he presents it as a point of fact, rather than the "throw a dart at the board" guess that it actually is.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Why print runs in the Statements of Ownership matter over distribution (aka "copies sold"): because they TEND....TEND!!...to give you a better idea of how an "event" book might have sold, over a run of the mill book. Since we don't have accurate numbers for any issue except one during the year (usually the issue with the December cover date), we can figure that an event issue...like ASM #293-294, for example, or #300, or #350...TEND to sell a little higher than the average, and the PRINT RUN gives us an absolute ceiling on what that number can potentially be.

Why print runs in the Statements of Ownership DO NOT matter over distribution (aka "copies sold"): because they don't make any distinction between number of Direct copies printed and number of newsstand copies printed. We know that all of the copies RETURNED and reported as unsold are newsstand copies...but of the remainder, we have no idea how many are Direct and how many are newsstand.

[paqart]

1 minute ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

hat even by 2005, the publishers were still printing "to the old model", and were printing MORE newsstand copies....60-70% of which did not sell and were returned and presumably destroyed...than Direct copi

I see a few issues from 1992 that indicate approximately equal numbers of copies surviving but not many. I'm focusing on Spider-man because it is a long run that is highly collectible, so I'll just point out that the three Carnage issues: 361, 362, 363 don't appear to be rare at all, possibly more common than direct copies. Issues on either side however, are much harder to find but not impossible. Issue 316 is quite tough in high grade, and #410, though not exceedingly rare, shows up 5 times in direct for every newsstand copy found on ebay (checked just now). So, not 100:1, but 5:1 doesn't support the breakdown you just gave, and that issue was published in 1996. By the time you get to 2005, you are at ASM 525. That issue shows up once in newsstand edition for every 16 direct copies on eBay. Not only does this make it look more scarce than you suggest, but it shows that it is more scarce than 410, in a downward trend that is nearly linear between the two.

[mr_highgrade]

1 minute ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Of course. This is what I said yesterday:

However...this is the Copper Age section, and the year 2000 is long after that era had ended.

I, personally, don't care if we don't know how many were printed. The issue I have is with people who ALSO don't know trying to claim they do, applying whatever kind of wonky rationalizations to arrive at their conclusions. THAT SAID, however...the issue isn't how many were printed...but how many survived. I would be willing to bet a large amount of money that even by 2005, the publishers were still printing "to the old model", and were printing MORE newsstand copies....60-70% of which did not sell and were returned and presumably destroyed...than Direct copies.

I doubt very much that they were still printing "to the old model", when it came to newsstands. Why would they wanna lose money on returns? Not to mention that, not every title had a newsstand version. Only the best selling titles did. I don't think I ever saw a NYX #3 newsstand. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 minutes ago, paqart said:

15 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

hat even by 2005, the publishers were still printing "to the old model", and were printing MORE newsstand copies....60-70% of which did not sell and were returned and presumably destroyed...than Direct copi

I see a few issues from 1992 that indicate approximately equal numbers of copies surviving but not many. I'm focusing on Spider-man because it is a long run that is highly collectible, so I'll just point out that the three Carnage issues: 361, 362, 363 don't appear to be rare at all, possibly more common than direct copies. Issues on either side however, are much harder to find but not impossible. Issue 316 is quite tough in high grade, and #410, though not exceedingly rare, shows up 5 times in direct for every newsstand copy found on ebay (checked just now). So, not 100:1, but 5:1 doesn't support the breakdown you just gave, and that issue was published in 1996. By the time you get to 2005, you are at ASM 525. That issue shows up once in newsstand edition for every 16 direct copies on eBay. Not only does this make it look more scarce than you suggest, but it shows that it is more scarce than 410, in a downward trend that is nearly linear between the two.

You're not following what I said:

"The publishers were STILL PRINTING "to the old model" and were printing MORE newsstand copies than Direct copies IN 2005...and then 60-70% of those newsstand copies were "returned and destroyed." 

Copies SURVIVING is not copies PRINTED, except in the case of the Direct market (barring standard attrition.)

In 2005, print runs for DIRECT copies were in the dumps compared to the 80s and 90s...but SALES of newsstand copies were even dumpier. So, if Marvel printed, say, 100k Direct copies (we don't know), it's entirely possible they were still printing 100k...or more...newsstand copies...60-70% of which were "returned and destroyed", meaning the SURVIVING total would be about 30,000-40,000 newsstand copies. Assuming 99% of the Direct copies survived, that means a survival rate of 10 Directs for every 3-4 newsstands WHEN NEW. Further attrition tends to affect newsstand copies to a far greater degree than Direct copies.

And as I said before, newsstand copies tended to sell to READERS, not dealers, which is a factor that has to be remembered. 

I'm not stating this as fact....I'm simply saying it's certainly comfortably within the realm of possibility.

ASM #361-363 are much like #252 and the other books I mentioned earlier: #361 was an INSTANT sellout, and as a result, the newsstand copies of this and the subsequent two books are going to be SUBSTANTIALLY higher than other issues which got "returned and destroyed" in the normal course of business.

[RockMyAmadeus]

9 minutes ago, mr_highgrade said:

I doubt very much that they were still printing "to the old model", when it came to newsstands. Why would they wanna lose money on returns? Not to mention that, not every title had a newsstand version. Only the best selling titles did. I don't think I ever saw a NYX #3 newsstand. 

Because 1. that was the way they'd been doing it since 1939, and 2. having a sell-through of 25-35% was standard across the magazine publication industry, and not "losing money."

NYX, as a mature title, wasn't distributed to the newsstand, and never was intended to.

[mr_highgrade]

2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Because 1. that was the way they'd been doing it since 1939, and 2. having a sell-through of 25-35% was standard across the magazine publication industry, and not "losing money."

NYX, as a mature title, wasn't distributed to the newsstand, and never was intended to.

Do you have any documentation proof?  

[paqart]

So, for fun, is there any consensus any what kind of premium is appropriate for newsstand editions? Personally, it looks like scarcity is issue-dependent up until around 2005, after which everything is scarce. to me, that indicates that at a minimum, the scarcity premium should be applied to all NS copies from 2005 on. Before that, there are many examples of newsstand comics that are harder to find than direct counterparts. For pricing, I think it would be quite messy to try and assign individual premiums to these based on the circumstances of each comic, but also think it wouldn't be right to charge a premium for something like ASM 252, which isn't scarce at all in NS form, just because ASM 238 is hard to find as an NS comic.

The premium charged for post 2005 copies would have to accommodate rarity and demand. If we knew the actual rarity of a comic because we had exact information about print run, copies destroyed, copies in attics, etc, and that rarity figure was something like 100:1, should the premium be the value of the direct edition multiplied by the rarity? That would yield prices so high that in most cases no collector would pay them. Should it be actual rarity divided by 10? So, a comic that is found in a 100:1 ratio would be valued at ten times its base direct value? Does that make sense in the context of Star Wars 1, 35 cent variation? It seems to me that the prices should initially be doubled, then again, and again, until collectors stop buying them. That said, as a collector, I have no intention of selling that I think has a 100:1 rarity, meaning that many fewer to sell in the market, regardless of price. Personally, I think it would be cool to have several boxes of unobtanium at home. How many other people would treat these comics that way? The reason is that I don't have any pressing need to sell the comics if they are worth only twenty, forty, or even a hundred dollars a copy. If they did hit 100x prices, I would be tempted to sell, but only then. If others did the same thing, it would have the effect of driving prices up, possibly to the 50x level, or maybe even SW1 levels. Right now though, most of these comics are worth only 3-10 dollars a copy in direct versions, so a 10x multiplier doesn't make any dent in my interest in selling. Collectors would have to sell to keep the prices low. If they just get sucked up into private collections, there to stay, prices would naturally go up.

[mr_highgrade]

Since this is a Copper thread I'll throw this bad boy out there. 

Sold to a private collector for $500.00

 

 

[paqart]

5 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

You're not following what I said

To summarize:

1) Stop trying to figure out rarity by using calculations that include print run estimates

2) How many ways do I have to say this before you figure it out?

My answer:

1) I'm not trying to figure out rarity by using print run estimates. I am including print run estimates to get an idea how well a statistical test run on observed copies in the wild generalizes to the specific comic in question. In other words, not to determine rarity, but whether the sample size is adequate. Because the calculation needed to ascertain the right sample size yields exactly the same number even when the print run estimate is off by 200,000 copies, the kind of errors you point out have no effect on the result. Actually, I am running another comparison, and that is to use the "observed in the wild" ratio to check the chart Nobel prints all over his page for reliability. My observations show that it is far from a straight linear progression, with many spikes and dips, but the general trend appears correct.

2) Not sure but I think I get your drift.