"Secrets Behind the Comics" ID: OG, HC reprint, and SC reprint

[dragonmgmt]

Hey gang,

 

I purchased a very high-grade copy of "Secrets Behind the Comics" (1947) and sent it to JoeyPost for pressing before getting it signed by Stan Lee and graded by CGC. I found out today (onsite grading at Megacon) that it came back 9.8 (and much to my surprise) as a reprint.

 

 

Here are pics of the pre-pressed, pre-graded book:

 

I already own another graded and signed copy of this book (see below).

 

I've been looking for a better copy (for a reasonable price) for a while now. So, I'm aware of the different versions that exist: the 1947 original, the 1994 Marvel Limited blue hardcover, the 2011/12 (?) softcover reprint (published by Pure Imagination). The 2011/12 reprint looks like this:

 

The cover differences are pretty obvious ("Digitally Remastered" instead of "PRICE $1" and the $20 price tag on the lower lefthand corner).

 

To make matters more interesting,the census lists the reprint publication date as 1900, which makes me think that this reprint does not list the actual reprint date. There is only one other graded copy of this reprint version.

 

There are 14 graded copies of the original on the census.

 

My thought is that maybe the high quality of this copy made an onsite grader assume this was a reprint of the 1947 book.

 

All that to ask the following:

Are there other reprint versions of this book that I am unaware of? And if so, how do I tell the difference between them?

 

Follow-up question:

If I feel that this book has been misidentified as a reprint by CGC, what are the procedures for handling that? Is it as simple as calling up CGC?

[Dr. Love]

I have seen two references to a bootleg edition. It's of course fair to ask CGC how they determined it's a reprint. If you could pass along that answer, it would be appreciated. If it is true that it's a reprint, then it's still an unbelievable copy from 40+ years ago. Worst case.

 

Booksteve's Library

"yes, there is a bootleg copy out there. It's alot more common than the original."

 

Kleefeld on Comics

"Now, I had seen/heard rumors of a reprint version sometime in the 1970s. But some people had suggested it was an illegal version, and I couldn't pinpoint when it was actually published either."

[dragonmgmt]

Thanks, Love. I will definitely post about what CGC says.

[eman13]

[dragonmgmt]

From CGC:

"There is nothing printed in the Secrets Behind the Comics to indicate it is a reprint. The way of telling it is a reprint is the materials used. The staples and the paper quality are the only way to tell the difference between the original and your reprint. If you have any more questions please let me know."

 

 

My reply:

"Thank you very much for your help. I am very appreciative of your quick response.

 

As to the rationale for categorizing this copy as a "REPRINT": Because this copy of the book is exactly the same in terms of size, indicia, etc. as the original version, I would like to know what specifically about the staples and paper makes this copy a "REPRINT." I purchased this copy of "Secrets..." under the (not unreasonable) impression that it was an original, and I would like to know what to look for in the future if I purchase another copy.

 

Also, I am concerned that CGC has not identified a publisher or date of publication for the "REPRINT" version of this book. It seems to me that these details should be made transparent and explicit if copies like this are going to be judged as anything other than an original.

 

Thank you very much, and I look forward to hearing back from you and/or the graders."

 

 

Soooo, we'll see.

[dragonmgmt]

Can one of you Golden Age aficionados explain to me how one would ID a 1947 staple or paper from 1947?

[bffnut]

[Dr. Love]

In other words, you were basically correct in your first statement - to them it just looks too darn fresh to be from 1947? Like you, I wonder if the staples are the tell.

 

Maybe pay Susan Ciccone for an appraisal? If she states it is from 1947, or that it can't conclusively be determined to be from the 70's, crack and resubmit with the appraisal. Depending on how much you've got into the book it might be worth it. After all, the new highest graded Secrets will be worth a pretty penny.

 

Not that it's anybody's business, but...was it priced like a super high grade 1947 white Secrets would have been priced or was it the deal of a lifetime sort of price?

 

 

 

 

[bronze johnny]

Can one of you Golden Age aficionados explain to me how one would ID a 1947 staple or paper from 1947?

 

Is this your copy?

 

http://m.ebay.com/itm/161637417647?nav=WATCHING_ENDED

[dragonmgmt]

Can one of you Golden Age aficionados explain to me how one would ID a 1947 staple or paper from 1947?

 

Is this your copy?

 

http://m.ebay.com/itm/161637417647?nav=WATCHING_ENDED

 

Yes, this is my copy. I purchased it offline from the seller.

[dragonmgmt]

I've never used an appraisal service. If I send Susan the slab, will it maintain it's yellow label and grade when I resubmit with her appraisal? (In other words, is she a CGC facilitator?) I'd be worried about losing the yellow label and the possibility of losing the 9.8.

 

It was around the same price as I paid for my 8.5.

 

In other words, you were basically correct in your first statement - to them it just looks too darn fresh to be from 1947? Like you, I wonder if the staples are the tell.

 

Maybe pay Susan Ciccone for an appraisal? If she states it is from 1947, or that it can't conclusively be determined to be from the 70's, crack and resubmit with the appraisal. Depending on how much you've got into the book it might be worth it. After all, the new highest graded Secrets will be worth a pretty penny.

 

Not that it's anybody's business, but...was it priced like a super high grade 1947 white Secrets would have been priced or was it the deal of a lifetime sort of price?

 

 

 

[bronze johnny]

Did you notify the seller? Is the seller amenable to your returning the book in the event the book is not substantiated as a legit copy by a 3rd Party Grading Co.?

 

Perhaps you may have asked this question:

 

Why didn't the seller get this book graded?

 

[dragonmgmt]

Response from CGC:

 

"The staples were modern staples on the reprint and the original had vintage staples. The paper quality on the original is more like cardboard paper where as the reprint used a more common printing material although I have been told the clearest way to tell the difference is by looking at the staples.

 

The reason there is no information other than REPRINT on the label is because there are no dates printed in the book to indicate it is a reprint. The book was printed in the early 90's but because nothing was printed in the indicia or anywhere else in the book we did not note it on the label.

 

Hopefully this helped answer your questions and will help you when looking for an original print. Please let me know if there is anything else."

[Crowzilla]

Have you looked at the paper under a blacklight?

Not sure when the reprint was made, but modern paper has a definite glow under blacklight that 1940s paper does not have.

 

[dragonmgmt]

Have you looked at the paper under a blacklight?

Not sure when the reprint was made, but modern paper has a definite glow under blacklight that 1940s paper does not have.

 

No, I have not, but this is the kind of super helpful info that I was looking for. Thank you very much...and I'll let you know what I find out (as soon as I get a blacklight).

[dragonmgmt]

Can anyone explain to me what the difference is between a modern staple and a vintage staple?

[dragonmgmt]

Staples from 1947 OG version

 

Staples from "REPRINT" version

 

 

The big difference to me looks like the placement of the top staple and the length of the staple ends on the inside of the book.

 

Anyone see anything else (or know anything else about staples)?

[dragonmgmt]

From me:

 

"Can you or the graders provide any guidance as to what a vintage staple (vs. a modern staple) looks like? Like I mentioned previously, I want to be able to tell which version of this book I am purchasing in the future.

 

Regarding the lack of publication history, I'm still concerned about how the graders can be so sure when this "REPRINT" edition was printed if there are no identifying markers in the book. Also, since there are at least two other reprints of this book (with known publishers and dates of publication), it makes the "REPRINT" moniker on the slab all the more confusing. Any thoughts about how to make this more clear going forward?"

 

 

Reply from CGC:

 

"Modern staples are smaller and thinner whereas vintage staples are bigger and look closer to furniture staples. I asked the grader's more about the page quality as well and was told the paper on the reprint is stippled and has a grey tone to it. If you are concerned that the book was misidentified as a reprint you can send it in for review.

 

As far as other reprints go if they have any reprint information printed inside the book it will be noted on the label. It is the fact that it is not noted anywhere that we only list reprint. Other graded books are noted the same way, for example there is a Playboy 1 reprint that has no identifying marks as a reprint and can only be detected by the material used so the label for it simply says "REPRINT"."

 

 

Just FYI, the CGC customer service rep that I've been emailing with has been very courteous and helpful.

[ThothAmon]

Great thread. Just checked my copy (about a FN 6.0). Pretty sure its the 1947 printing as it has the longer staples and paper that has a construction paper feel to it. Interestingly, the top staple in my copy is situated higher on the spine than the pictured copy has.

[dragonmgmt]

Great thread. Just checked my copy (about a FN 6.0). Pretty sure its the 1947 printing as it has the longer staples and paper that has a construction paper feel to it. Interestingly, the top staple in my copy is situated higher on the spine than the pictured copy has.

 

Not sure if staple placement is really relevant, but I noted it just in case. Post pics of the staples (both inside the centerfold and outside on the spine), if you can. It might prove to be another good data point.