ASM 238 missing tattooz: valuation question 0

[Bosco685]

Doesn't the ASM #238 (with tatooz missing) still get a Blue label, but with the notation? I'm pretty sure I've seen plenty of those. Much like Harbinger #1.

 

I guess not:

 

Harbinger #1 too, because without the coupon (which also contains a sub-story about Harada), it is an incomplete book.

[rjrjr]

 

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

[Bosco685]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

And, even more importantly, did the tattoos differ per each book. When you hold a bright light up behind the tattoos pouch, the outline becomes slightly clear without having to open it.

[ygogolak]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

https://www.mycomicshop.com/search?SeriesID=13453691

[RockMyAmadeus]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

Just FF #252 and Spidey #238. Any others would be later additions.

 

Unless it has the Lakeside blurb on the cover, it didn't have them.

[divad]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

Just FF #252 and Spidey #238. Any others would be later additions.

 

Unless it has the Lakeside blurb on the cover, it didn't have them.

 

Which, should create a market demand for the FF #252 . . .

[joe_collector]

I believe that many collectors would consider an ASM 238 with the tattooz removed to be incomplete.

 

Agreed, and while it's not as bad as a "clipped MVS" (which IMO is the worst type of these), it's still an incomplete book and deserving of the GLOD.

[divad]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

And, even more importantly, did the tattoos differ per each book. When you hold a bright light up behind the tattoos pouch, the outline becomes slightly clear without having to open it.

 

I've only seen a few of these, but as I recall, each insert had different tattooz.

[divad]

I believe that many collectors would consider an ASM 238 with the tattooz removed to be incomplete.

 

Agreed, and while it's not as bad as a "clipped MVS" (which IMO is the worst type of these), it's still an incomplete book and deserving of the GLOD.

 

I would normally agree, but here I don't. Really, as a comic collector, do I care about some crappy little tattooz or a coupon, neither of which impact the structural integrity of the book (if missing)? Not. At. All.

 

As a reseller of slabbed books, do I care? Abso-freakin'-lutely!

[joe_collector]

For my money if its just the mini tatooz sticker, would it really matter where that came from and if it were married?

 

Can you even get the Tattooz out of the little envelope without ripped it apart? I would never try, but it doesn't look easy, if at all possible.

 

I have my OO copy, but I bought a couple of OO copies off eBay (in ASM lots) and I was a bit worried, but couldn't find any way to safely check. So I just held them up to the light and saw the little spiders/stars or whatever is in them.

[Bosco685]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

And, even more importantly, did the tattoos differ per each book. When you hold a bright light up behind the tattoos pouch, the outline becomes slightly clear without having to open it.

 

I've only seen a few of these, but as I recall, each insert had different tattooz.

 

Not so straightforward as I assumed with one tattoo type per comic.

[rjrjr]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

Just FF #252 and Spidey #238. Any others would be later additions.

 

Unless it has the Lakeside blurb on the cover, it didn't have them.

 

I have the Star Wars 69 with the tatooz and I see it listed on that link above too. I'm guessing that is a legitimate book with the tatooz as well, correct?

[RockMyAmadeus]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

Just FF #252 and Spidey #238. Any others would be later additions.

 

Unless it has the Lakeside blurb on the cover, it didn't have them.

 

I have the Star Wars 69 with the tatooz and I see it listed on that link above too. I'm guessing that is a legitimate book with the tatooz as well, correct?

 

No.

 

Only FF #252 and Spidey #238.

 

If others have the tats, they were either added after the fact (which is fairly easy to tell), or someone at the printer was fooling around or made a mistake.

 

 

[rjrjr]

Has someone gone to the trouble of documenting all the Marvel comics from this month that had the tattooz insert? I know I've seen issues besides the ASM and FF with the tattooz in them. I'm assuming with the other Marvel issues, these weren't inserted into the complete run for the month but just some of the run.

 

 

Just FF #252 and Spidey #238. Any others would be later additions.

 

Unless it has the Lakeside blurb on the cover, it didn't have them.

 

I have the Star Wars 69 with the tatooz and I see it listed on that link above too. I'm guessing that is a legitimate book with the tatooz as well, correct?

 

No.

 

Only FF #252 and Spidey #238.

 

If others have the tats, they were either added after the fact (which is fairly easy to tell), or someone at the printer was fooling around or made a mistake.

 

 

So, this is a mistake at the printer:

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/291117726195?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

 

Strange that this particular comic (Star Wars 69) with the tatooz is found at several sources. This one on E-Bay and the one on the My Comic Shop site for example. Maybe the printer inserted the remainder in other Marvel comics that month?

Edited April 11, 2014 by rjrjr

[rjrjr]

Here is the Incredible Hulk 281 with the tattooz insert:

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/THE-INCREDIBLE-HULK-281-Marvel-Comics-March-1983-Never-Read-FREE-TATTOOZ-/291121502981?pt=US_Comic_Books&hash=item43c8319b05

 

And another:

 

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/INCREDIBLE-HULK-281-VF-1983-Tattooz-Attached-Bronze-Age-Classic-L-K-WOW-/371038783294

Edited April 11, 2014 by rjrjr

[RockMyAmadeus]

All mistakes, or deliberate screw-ups.

 

The thing is, the Tattooz were a promo premium. That's why the blurb on the FF #252 and #238. It doesn't follow that they would put the blurb on just those two, but then purposely include them in several other random issues.

 

It's meant to spur sales.

 

It is quite possible that Lakeside sent the printer more tattooz samples than the print run for FF #252 and Spidey #238, and the printer (Sparta) could have simply used them up for random books.

 

But it's definitely not "official", hence the lack of the blurb.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Remember...Lakeside would have paid Marvel a substantial amount of money to include their premium in the books. Part of that was to get the blurb on the cover, advertising the free sample. If the Tattooz were meant to be in these other books, Lakeside would have paid for something they did not get: that cover blurb.

 

That little blurb was worth a LOT of money.

[joe_collector]

I can just see some maroons sitting in the board room in the early-80's:

 

"Oh man, that was money well spent - we are going to make millions once the kids get wind of our wicked Tattooz!!"

[Gsims718]

I'm really surprise how many people seem to be OK with the Tattooz being replaced and undisclosed.

 

I think it is extremely shady to do this without disclosing, and absolutely should be considered restoration.

 

What about marrying a page without story on it? "well it was just ads so who cares?"

[joe_collector]

I'm really surprise how many people seem to be OK with the Tattooz being replaced and undisclosed.

 

I don't think too many collectors are cool with removing the staples, removing the pages, then marrying a Tattooz insert to a comic, and then putting the Frankenstein book all back together, so you're probably referring to some unethical sellers.