How To Tell Marvel Graphic Novel printings 3 3

[Plantman]

This was the 4th "5.95 single price" copy from Canada. It doesn't show up on eBay.ca for me either.

[Transplant]

RMA, are you sure the $4.95 cover price is in the thicker font? 1. Broke as a joke just listed a MGN #4 that CGC doesn't note as a later print. 2. My copy with the same font does not have any indicia to indicate a later printing either.

 

Post pictures?

 

Here's one of mine:

 

 

Not entering the fray on the existence or not of a Canadian $5.95 first print. My comment was just to the font type used for the $4.95 single price US first print. Mine does not appear to be the frumpy font you described. Mine appears to be the picture you show above, not the frumpy one in the single $5.95 picture. But your original "guide" said first print should be "frumpy" not "sleek" for the first print $4.95 type.

[RockMyAmadeus]

RMA, are you sure the $4.95 cover price is in the thicker font? 1. Broke as a joke just listed a MGN #4 that CGC doesn't note as a later print. 2. My copy with the same font does not have any indicia to indicate a later printing either.

 

Post pictures?

 

Here's one of mine:

 

 

Not entering the fray on the existence or not of a Canadian $5.95 first print. My comment was just to the font type used for the $4.95 single price US first print. Mine does not appear to be the frumpy font you described. Mine appears to be the picture you show above, not the frumpy one in the single $5.95 picture. But your original "guide" said first print should be "frumpy" not "sleek" for the first print $4.95 type.

 

This picture here is the fat, thick, "frumpy" font. Note the uniform thickness of the numbers in the price. On the $5.95 price posted several posts back, the $5.95 has a sleeker, skinnier font, with varying degrees of thickness on the stroke of the "bowl" of the 5, from thin, to thick, to thin. There are words for this typeface anatomy, but I don't know them well.

[comicwiz]

And here's Comicwiz' listing, which is absolutely filled with inaccuracies

 

The numbers are from circulation/order statements published by Krause - and the MGN's had an approximate range of 5-6K produced for first print runs, which are first reported for the 16th issue (that number is 5,050) and remained that way for issues under 20, with the exception of one in the 9K range (issue 20) and are reported number of 3,750 (issue 19). The highest reported metric is over 11K for issue 22. A similar explanation applies for the NM comic series, albeit the approximate range given applies to circulation/order statements for that specific title. The 1/10th estimate is again, an approximation, based on population size differences between Canada and the US.

 

You know my sources now (if you didn't already). Prove any of this wrong, with actual evidence, and I'll revise the listing.

[comicwiz]

 

While it's possible that the $5.95 is a "Canadian version", why would they print a different version using an entirely different font for the price, rather than just using the original font, which already had a "5" in the price?

 

The single price $5.95 with the NEW MUTANTS logo/wordmark on the rear cover is a first, and it was produced for the Canadian market. And to answer your question about whether they would use a different font, there's quite a few examples of these. I just don't have the time right now to spend walking you through a tour, especially with these boards crashing on me every time I try to post. There's an old Canadian Price Variants threads where I detailed a few differences in the pricing font for Canadian and US newsstand Marvel copies. Some with misaligned pricing, which looked like they rushed the price plate change through. Here is an example of NM SE 1 ($1.75 is the Canadian Price Variant) - not only is the font different to the US copy, but note the different font weight and size for the 75 compared to the 1. DC were more consistent in terms of the way the price appeared, but there were still differences in font and size between Canadian and US newsstand comics for issues priced higher than 75¢:

 

[comicwiz]

From Doug Sulipa's website:

 

MARVEL GRAPHIC NOVEL#4 - NEW MUTANTS (1982;

ORIGIN and FIRST appearance of the NEW MUTANTS cover & story;

First appearance of Cannonball, Danielle Moonstar, Karma, Sunspot,Wolfsbane;

Claremont-s ; Bob McLeod-a;

>>> FIRST PRINTING; RARE VARIANT with the Solo $5.95 ORIGINAL COVER PRICE;

CANADIAN VARIANT (PRINTED in the USA, but ONLY Distributed in Canada);

(Only 11 Copies of this VARIANT So Far Graded by CGC, as compared to 128

Copies of the common American Edition) =Thus about ELEVEN TIMES SCARCER;

>>> NOTE; (The Canadian Newsstand Cover Price Variants COMICS, Printed in

the USA but only Sold in Canada, from the 1982-1986 Era REGULARILY Bring

PREMIUMS Sell for 150% to 500% of the Prices of the Common USA Printings =

See the Amazing Results in in the GPA price Guide)

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

And here's Comicwiz' listing, which is absolutely filled with inaccuracies

 

The numbers are from circulation/order statements published by Krause - and the MGN's had an approximate range of 5-6K produced for first print runs, which are first reported for the 16th issue (that number is 5,050) and remained that way for issues under 20, with the exception of one in the 9K range (issue 20) and are reported number of 3,750 (issue 19). The highest reported metric is over 11K for issue 22. A similar explanation applies for the NM comic series, albeit the approximate range given applies to circulation/order statements for that specific title. The 1/10th estimate is again, an approximation, based on population size differences between Canada and the US.

 

You know my sources now (if you didn't already). Prove any of this wrong, with actual evidence, and I'll revise the listing.

 

"The Standard Catalog of Comic Books" (aka "Krause"), only lists CAPITAL CITY circulation numbers. As such, they are often vastly incomplete, and further information must be applied to arrive at reasonable approximations.

 

In 1982-83, which covers the timeframe being discussed, there were several Direct market distributors, and Cap City was only one of many. There was Bud Plant, Westfield, the fledgling Diamond, Seagate, Pacific Comics, and others.

 

There's the proof, with actual evidence. Let's see if the listing is revised.

 

As well, assuming that Cap City circulation numbers for later issues of the MGN series can be applied with any degree of accuracy to the earlier issues is also not well reasoned. Those numbers aren't approximations, any more than numbers for X-Men (1991) #15 is a good approximation for issue #1.

 

As well, the 1/10th estimation is about as approximate an approximation as it gets. Basing it on the idea that the population of Canada was/is 10% of the population of the US is so broad as to render it a meaningless number.

 

As well, reason tells you that if there were only 500-600 Canadian versions printed, as you claim, and 33 years ago no less, there probably wouldn't be at least 7 copies of this book for sale in the last couple of weeks. Not impossible, but so improbable as to render the likelihood negligible.

[RockMyAmadeus]

From Doug Sulipa's website:

 

MARVEL GRAPHIC NOVEL#4 - NEW MUTANTS (1982;

ORIGIN and FIRST appearance of the NEW MUTANTS cover & story;

First appearance of Cannonball, Danielle Moonstar, Karma, Sunspot,Wolfsbane;

Claremont-s ; Bob McLeod-a;

>>> FIRST PRINTING; RARE VARIANT with the Solo $5.95 ORIGINAL COVER PRICE;

CANADIAN VARIANT (PRINTED in the USA, but ONLY Distributed in Canada);

(Only 11 Copies of this VARIANT So Far Graded by CGC, as compared to 128

Copies of the common American Edition) =Thus about ELEVEN TIMES SCARCER;

>>> NOTE; (The Canadian Newsstand Cover Price Variants COMICS, Printed in

the USA but only Sold in Canada, from the 1982-1986 Era REGULARILY Bring

PREMIUMS Sell for 150% to 500% of the Prices of the Common USA Printings =

See the Amazing Results in in the GPA price Guide)

 

Just because someone says something, even someone as knowledgeable as Doug, doesn't make it proof.

 

And I would have to see sales data that proved....proof, not just statements....that the Canadian Newsstands bring 150% to 500% of the common US printings.

 

Is there a premium? Sure. Is it 150% to 500%?

 

Unlikely.

 

I just pulled a completely random book...ASM #251....and in July of 2012, a Canadian 9.6 sold for $75 (a price no doubt due to census rarity, as opposed to actual rarity)...and in Oct of 2012, a regular 9.6 sold for $42. That's a mere 56% price difference, not 150% to 500%.

 

As well, a 7.0 Canadian version sold for $10 in April of 2010, while a regular 7.0 sold in May of 2010...for $9.

 

And I suspect I could find these types of numbers up and down GPA.

 

Do Canadians bring premiums in ultra high grade? Of course. Is that a result of census rarity, or actual rarity? Hard to say conclusively.

 

But do Canadians bring 150% to 500% premiums in ANY grade?

 

No.

 

So...does Doug Sulipa's comment that "The Canadian Newsstand Cover Price Variants COMICS REGULARILY Bring PREMIUMS" stand up to scrutiny?

 

No.

 

Is Doug Sulipa actively SELLING Canadians?

 

Yes.

 

Is it therefore in Doug's interests to aggressively promote these books?

 

Yes.

[manetteska]

Define "REGULARILY" then we'll talk.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

While it's possible that the $5.95 is a "Canadian version", why would they print a different version using an entirely different font for the price, rather than just using the original font, which already had a "5" in the price?

 

The single price $5.95 with the NEW MUTANTS logo/wordmark on the rear cover is a first, and it was produced for the Canadian market.

You'll have to show me a picture of what you're talking about. Every copy of MGN #4 I have seen has the New Mutants logo on the back.

 

And to answer your question about whether they would use a different font, there's quite a few examples of these. I just don't have the time right now to spend walking you through a tour, especially with these boards crashing on me every time I try to post. There's an old Canadian Price Variants threads where I detailed a few differences in the pricing font for Canadian and US newsstand Marvel copies. Some with misaligned pricing, which looked like they rushed the price plate change through. Here is an example of NM SE 1 ($1.75 is the Canadian Price Variant) - not only is the font different to the US copy, but note the different font weight and size for the 75 compared to the 1. DC were more consistent in terms of the way the price appeared, but there were still differences in font and size between Canadian and US newsstand comics for issues priced higher than 75¢:

 

 

Yes, but these are the exceptions that prove the rule. We can always come up with exceptions, but they are the exceptions, and clearly, with books like New Mutants Special Edition #1, which was not a typical book with a typical price, this was a last minute "fix" to address the issue for a regular run book. These font eccentricities had more to do with the difficulty in assessing what was the correct price for these books at the time of production (which is why several double size DCs have a $1.60 price...quite an oddball price), and then getting that price printed properly. They were clearly rushed, as evidenced by your own example: the "75" in the $1.75 price is from the then current 75 cent price used for regular books, like ASM #267 It is quite obviously a rush job.

 

MGN in 1982 didn't have that issue. These were their "premiere format" books, and they weren't rushed.

 

The comparison between Marvel's premiere new format, which had no deadline issues, and production eccentricities of regular newsprint books later on down the line, isn't apt.

 

The question isn't, and never was, whether they WOULD use a different font...it is WHY they would use a different font....what is the justification for doing so, especially if it wasn't necessary due to time constraints.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Define "REGULARILY" then we'll talk.

 

Exactly.

[comicwiz]

If you actually believe what you wrote to be more accurate than myself, Doug, and Krause, then I'll be "inaccurate" this one time.

[comicwiz]

There's the proof, with actual evidence.

 

Keep dreaming.

 

Let's see if the listing is revised.

 

The listing stays as is. (thumbs u

[Plantman]

...MGN in 1982 didn't have that issue. These were their "premiere format" books, and they weren't rushed.

 

The comparison between Marvel's premiere new format, which had no deadline issues, and production eccentricities of regular newsprint books later on down the line, isn't apt.

 

The question isn't, and never was, whether they WOULD use a different font...it is WHY they would use a different font....what is the justification for doing so, especially if it wasn't necessary due to time constraints.

 

I apologize in advance if I'm misconstruing this section of your post, but, according to Louise Simonson, MGN 4 did have deadline issues:

 

"It was supposed to be just a regular-sized issue. What happened was that graphic novels had just recently been introduced, and there was some sort of publishing schedule for these things that was not being met," says Simonson. "The first issue of The New Mutants was half-drawn, and Shooter came down to my office and said someone had not turned in his graphic novel because we needed something in that publishing slot. None of us were very pleased about that. I think we felt that it was a perfectly good introductory issue, but a graphic novel really ought to be something more. It should have a bigger story than this."

 

Left with no choice, the team went about expanding the book for the revised format. They had to come up with about 10 more pages of story and art, and get it to the publisher three weeks earlier. This created a scheduling conflict of a highly personal nature for artist Bob McLeod.

 

"Bob was getting marred and going on his honeymoon right in the middle of it," Simonson recalls. "I told Shooter, 'Jim, he's not going to be able to ink it himself in the time you've given us, which isn't fair because I told him he could ink it.' And Shooter said 'Tough. That's the way it's gotta be.' I said okay, but went ahead and let Bob ink it when he came back. So the book missed its shipping slot by two weeks, and I was on Shooter's bad list for maybe a year and a half or two years after that, but I had let the creators do what I promised they could do."

[RockMyAmadeus]

...MGN in 1982 didn't have that issue. These were their "premiere format" books, and they weren't rushed.

 

The comparison between Marvel's premiere new format, which had no deadline issues, and production eccentricities of regular newsprint books later on down the line, isn't apt.

 

The question isn't, and never was, whether they WOULD use a different font...it is WHY they would use a different font....what is the justification for doing so, especially if it wasn't necessary due to time constraints.

 

I apologize in advance if I'm misconstruing this section of your post, but, according to Louise Simonson, MGN 4 did have deadline issues:

 

"It was supposed to be just a regular-sized issue. What happened was that graphic novels had just recently been introduced, and there was some sort of publishing schedule for these things that was not being met," says Simonson. "The first issue of The New Mutants was half-drawn, and Shooter came down to my office and said someone had not turned in his graphic novel because we needed something in that publishing slot. None of us were very pleased about that. I think we felt that it was a perfectly good introductory issue, but a graphic novel really ought to be something more. It should have a bigger story than this."

 

Left with no choice, the team went about expanding the book for the revised format. They had to come up with about 10 more pages of story and art, and get it to the publisher three weeks earlier. This created a scheduling conflict of a highly personal nature for artist Bob McLeod.

 

"Bob was getting marred and going on his honeymoon right in the middle of it," Simonson recalls. "I told Shooter, 'Jim, he's not going to be able to ink it himself in the time you've given us, which isn't fair because I told him he could ink it.' And Shooter said 'Tough. That's the way it's gotta be.' I said okay, but went ahead and let Bob ink it when he came back. So the book missed its shipping slot by two weeks, and I was on Shooter's bad list for maybe a year and a half or two years after that, but I had let the creators do what I promised they could do."

 

You are misconstruing my post.

 

I'm talking about production deadlines, not creation deadlines.

 

As you can see, these books were not produced on a monthly schedule. Any "deadlines" were artificially created by Shooter, not because they had to get the book out by a certain timeframe.

 

See this quote from Simonson, pulled out here: "What happened was that graphic novels had just recently been introduced, and there was some sort of publishing schedule for these things that was not being met," says Simonson. "

 

...which, of course, we know isn't entirely true, because of the haphazard publishing schedule of the entire line form start to finish. Yes, there may have been some publishing schedule for these things that was not being met, but it was never met, throughout the entire existence of the line, if, indeed, what Simonson was told was true (and there's compelling reason to believe it was not.)

 

There was no such thing as a "publishing slot" that Shooter talks about. Yes, there is a publication schedule, and monthly and bi-monthly books had to be religiously kept on schedule, to avoid the "Dreaded Deadline Doom", but...as is clear from the aforementioned haphazard publishing schedule, the "deadline" for the MGN was solely and completely an arbitrary decision by Shooter (or someone above him, though not likely.)

 

Yes, there probably was a spot on the publication schedule for MGN #4, but it would not have made any difference to anyone if this spot was blown...which, as Simonson implies, probably happened. Comic shops who ordered these books wouldn't have too great a problem if they ended up being two weeks late. They didn't rely on them for their revenue.

 

Here's the publication schedule for MGNs:

 

#1 - April 82

#2 - July 82

#3 - August 82

#4 - November 82

#5 - Jan 83

#6 - April 83

#7 - Jul 83

#8 - "1983"

#9 - "1983"

#10 - June 84 (!)

 

http://marvel.wikia.com/Marvel_Graphic_Novel_Vol_1

 

All of that had nothing to do with the actual production of the books, which could take a reasonable amount of time in formatting and producing the finished product....while a regularly scheduled book doesn't have that luxury.

[RockMyAmadeus]

If you actually believe what you wrote to be more accurate than myself, Doug, and Krause, then I'll be "inaccurate" this one time.

 

You don't need to believe me. The information is in Krause, plain as day. The numbers reported in Krause are Capital City Distribution numbers ONLY. It says, right there in black and white: "CapCity orders." Capital City distribution was just one of SEVERAL Direct market comic book distributors in 1982/3.

 

They are NOT numbers that represent the entire Direct market orders, or print numbers, for these books. They are ONLY the numbers that CAPITAL CITY ordered.

 

And as I said before, trying to "approximate" numbers based on later issues is an error, as is the blanket "10%" figure you arrive out, based on nothing more than the reasoning that Canada has/had 1/10th the population of the US. It is too broad to be of any real use.

 

Krause and Sulipa have nothing to do with each other in this discussion.

 

You issued a challenge: provide proof that your numbers are wrong, and you'll change the listing. I have done exactly that. Are you going to change your listing, or are you going to be stubborn and resist because you resent the source of the information?

 

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

There's the proof, with actual evidence.

 

Keep dreaming.

 

Let's see if the listing is revised.

 

The listing stays as is. (thumbs u

 

That's right...because you reject the facts, and resent the source of those facts. You have no interest in being accurate and factual; just in being "right."

 

All I can tell you is this: read your Krause again. Your numbers are wrong, and now that you've been made aware of it, border on fraud.

 

You are giving people information that is easily, provably false, and asking them to make buying decisions based on factually inaccurate information.

 

Here's the page in Krause:

 

 

 

 

 

[Broke as a Joke]

Has anyone thought to ask CGC how they tell the different printings apart? I know I have seen the $5.95 only price book in a slab with a note saying "$5.95 cover price". That was it. No Canadian notation, no mention of printing.

 

I would think maybe the fine experts at CGC could help shed some light on this issue themselves

[RockMyAmadeus]

Here is what your listing says:

 

"The Marvel Graphic Novel first print runs averaged roughly a 5-6K output, meaning 500-600 were produced with the $5.95 cover price. And somewhere between 30-50K copies produced for New Mutants #1, putting the 75¢ price variant somewhere around 3-5K copies. These figures are an approximation based on the circulation statements for the Marvel Graphic Novel series, and New Mutant comic series."

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-New-Mutants-1-Marvel-Graphic-Novel-4-Price-Variants-Beauties-/321760537971?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4aea6c2d73

 

Those numbers are grossly inaccurate.

 

Here is the information from New Mutants #35 (which would report roughly around #18-#29): Statement of Ownership: Total No. Copies Printed (net press run): Average no. of copies each issue during preceding 12 months: 509,545. Single issue nearest to filing date: 434,430.

 

Why, then, do you think that New Mutants #1....a spinoff of the X-Men when the X-Men were at the absolute height of their hysteria...would only have had a print run of 30-50k copies TOTAL?

 

It's quite obviously incorrect.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Has anyone thought to ask CGC how they tell the different printings apart? I know I have seen the $5.95 only price book in a slab with a note saying "$5.95 cover price". That was it. No Canadian notation, no mention of printing.

 

I would think maybe the fine experts at CGC could help shed some light on this issue themselves

 

CGC isn't known for their accuracy with regards to identifying and notating later printings. They are experts at grading, not necessarily information gathering.

 

This, doing journeyman research work, is how these things get found out. Gathering information and experience from multiple sources. One of the better aspects of having this board.

 

I have two slabs, both Albedo #0, one of which is a second, and the other a third, printing. Neither is marked as such.