Copper Era newsstand vs direct - variants or not? 0

[RockMyAmadeus]

I have to disagree with you in the fact that I don't feel that publishers like Marvel & DC kept meticulous records on the number of comics they published each month and on the returns.

 

Your reasoning is flawed. DC, Marvel, and the rest kept meticulous records because they HAD to: both for postal service regulations AND because they had contracts in place with various distributors, who you bet kept close track of what they sold and what they returned.

 

Your contention doesn't make any sense. The printer knew exactly how many copies they printed; they had to. Marvel knew how many copies they ordered. DC knew how many copies were claimed for credit. They all, if they were sent out via subscription, had to keep these numbers for filing every year.

 

When you have competing interests making sure everything was accounted for, of course they would keep meticulous records.

 

Does that mean there wasn't human error and fraud? Of course not. But that doesn't therefore mean Marvel just told the printer to print whatever they felt like printing, and vendors to claim whatever they felt like claiming on returns, and no one kept accounts.

 

 

so I highly doubt a printing company that has been on the verge of bankruptcy on several occasions could.

 

What printing company are you referring to?

 

There are just so many unkown factors that come into play throughout the production process, through the shipping and warehouse process and in the return process to the fudge factor that you have to allow for when people are involved that it just isn't possible to keep track of everything.

 

UNLESS you have competing interests keeping everybody honest. No one said it was absolutely NASA precise down to the very last copy, but it's beyond silly to think that Marvel, DC, and the rest kept loose books.

 

Comic collecting isn't like coin collecting in the fact that Marvel and DC aren't likely to be hoarding back issues of comics away in a safe like the U.S. Mint could be with coins. I can pretty much guarantee that Marvel and DC doesn't have the accountability for each indiviual comic produced that the U.S. Mint does with each coin or paper bill produced also.

 

Not the point. The point was, and is, that record keeping was precise 230+ years ago, so to say "well, technology wasn't that advanced in 1970" doesn't fly.

 

If history and experience has taught me anything it's that Chuck's ego is only overshadowed by the amount of sheer luck that he has had in his career and comic publishers weren't good businessmen prior to Walt Disney buying Marvel.

 

Wait...are you envious of Chuck?

 

And what do you mean, "comic publishers weren't good businessmen prior to Disney buying Marvel"?

 

Warners has owned DC since the 60's. Martin Goodman, owner and publisher of Marvel comics from 1939 to 1972, was a very capable businessman.

[natevegas]

Nobody knows how many over printings occurred and / or were handed out etc.

[revat]

RMA, your previous answer was too nice.

 

I can't believe you just didn't eviscerate the guy, his assertions are near insane.

 

Accountant: "Hey Stan Lee, how many returns were there for ASM in May?"

 

Stan Lee: "I think there were about 3000"

 

Accountant: "No I mean, can I get a listing of how many per newsstand so I can issue credits to each newsstand?"

 

Stan Lee: "No, our receptionist fields phone calls and just tallied them in her memory. We didn't write anything down."

 

Accountant: "That's a relief, I don't like to keep any paperwork to support the payments I make, nor do I like to have support, I don't want to give the IRS anything to audit if they ever ask.

 

Editor: "I agree, that's why we don't track how much we print or how much we return, we don't like to analyze any of our information to see what sells well and what doesn't. There's nothing more useless than proprietary information about buying preferences and trends of our customers. I'd hate to know what they like to buy, when and where they buy from. There's nothing worse than trying to figure out how many to print next month, which is why I tell the printer to just surprise me. ITS SOOOO cumbersome."

 

CEO: "You know what's worse than knowing what sells well and keeping the most basic of sales records? Making money! It takes up space in my wallet, and people are always trying to make me give it to them for goods and services, I hate those people."

 

 

[thecopperagekids]

2000 and on is very difficult to find some newsstands and even harder to find high grade.

 

Any newsstand I find in high grade I ask a small premium because I never know if I will ever find another one.

 

 

Yup.

 

1985-1990 newsstands were produced in higher amounts than post 2000 newsstands but they are still pretty tough books to find in CGC 9.8 slabs.

 

Look up any key book from those time periods on eBay and you'll see about a dozen CGC 9.8's....and maybe ONE newsstand copy.

 

Those newsstand 9.8's typically sell at a decent premium over CGC 9.8 direct markets......but the premium is much higher, on newsstands from the early 200's and on.

 

GPA does note newsstand sales on SOME books....Spawn #9 has newsstand sales at about 500% the price of direct markets for example.

 

Meanwhile, a Suicide Squad #1 CGC 9.8 3/1987 newsstand sold on 2/21/2016 via Heritage Auction at $359 PLUS a 19.5% buyer's premium.

 

That sale is not notated as a newsstand edition in GPA, nor did the 19.5% buyer's premium figured into the cost of the bid.....IOW, the buyer paid about $470 for that CGC 9.8 SS #1 1987 newsstand...plus shipping/insurance, bringing the total paid for that book to around $500, or thereabouts.

 

That SS 1 newsstand cgc 9.8 that sold on Heritage on the 21st also had very nice centering, as well.

 

Wonder if there was tax involved as well as some states like Florida and California I believe heritage adds that to the total price.

 

Yes, sales taxes are are an additional charge.

 

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/sales-tax.zx

 

This book did have a few sales in the $500-$550 range back in July/August...with a 2015 GPA average of $421.

 

And there was another CGC 9.8 that sold at $371, dunno where that was sold and I also don't wether it was a newsstand as I don't see it in ebay completed /sold listings.

 

On 2/25...4 days after the HA 9.8 newsstand sold, GPA shows a sale of $235 for a 9.8...which is the GPA low for 2016.

 

That $235 sale isn't coming up in eBay completed/sold listings, dunno where that sale took place but given the price, it couldn't have been a newsstand 9.8.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[StuporMan]

Does the UPC with the black line through it count as a "direct" variant? If so, these go back into the late Bronze Age. I was thinking this was pretty much an issue with the Copper years, so that's why I OP'd here.

 

Just to do a random check, I chose Spectacular Spider-Man and found that the earliest direct that I could find was #39 (Feb. 1980). The first issue with a line through the UPC that I could find was issue #31 (June 1979). Either one of these could line up with the direct market starting in the late 70s.

 

Does anyone know of an earlier direct issue?

[bababooey]

Does the UPC with the black line through it count as a "direct" variant? If so, these go back into the late Bronze Age. I was thinking this was pretty much an issue with the Copper years, so that's why I OP'd here.

 

Just to do a random check, I chose Spectacular Spider-Man and found that the earliest direct that I could find was #39 (Feb. 1980). The first issue with a line through the UPC that I could find was issue #31 (June 1979). Either one of these could line up with the direct market starting in the late 70s.

 

Does anyone know of an earlier direct issue?

 

The answer to your question was recently posted in the BA forum. The slashed UPCs are direct, not sure when that design was implemented but I'm pretty sure I've got an earlier issue of PPTSS with a slash through the UPC.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9090670#Post9090670

Edited February 27, 2016 by bababooey

[waahehe94]

I have to disagree with you in the fact that I don't feel that publishers like Marvel & DC kept meticulous records on the number of comics they published each month and on the returns.

 

Your reasoning is flawed. DC, Marvel, and the rest kept meticulous records because they HAD to: both for postal service regulations AND because they had contracts in place with various distributors, who you bet kept close track of what they sold and what they returned.

 

Your contention doesn't make any sense. The printer knew exactly how many copies they printed; they had to. Marvel knew how many copies they ordered. DC knew how many copies were claimed for credit. They all, if they were sent out via subscription, had to keep these numbers for filing every year.

 

When you have competing interests making sure everything was accounted for, of course they would keep meticulous records.

 

Does that mean there wasn't human error and fraud? Of course not. But that doesn't therefore mean Marvel just told the printer to print whatever they felt like printing, and vendors to claim whatever they felt like claiming on returns, and no one kept accounts.

 

 

so I highly doubt a printing company that has been on the verge of bankruptcy on several occasions could.

 

What printing company are you referring to?

 

There are just so many unkown factors that come into play throughout the production process, through the shipping and warehouse process and in the return process to the fudge factor that you have to allow for when people are involved that it just isn't possible to keep track of everything.

 

UNLESS you have competing interests keeping everybody honest. No one said it was absolutely NASA precise down to the very last copy, but it's beyond silly to think that Marvel, DC, and the rest kept loose books.

 

Comic collecting isn't like coin collecting in the fact that Marvel and DC aren't likely to be hoarding back issues of comics away in a safe like the U.S. Mint could be with coins. I can pretty much guarantee that Marvel and DC doesn't have the accountability for each indiviual comic produced that the U.S. Mint does with each coin or paper bill produced also.

 

Not the point. The point was, and is, that record keeping was precise 230+ years ago, so to say "well, technology wasn't that advanced in 1970" doesn't fly.

 

If history and experience has taught me anything it's that Chuck's ego is only overshadowed by the amount of sheer luck that he has had in his career and comic publishers weren't good businessmen prior to Walt Disney buying Marvel.

 

Wait...are you envious of Chuck?

 

And what do you mean, "comic publishers weren't good businessmen prior to Disney buying Marvel"?

 

Warners has owned DC since the 60's. Martin Goodman, owner and publisher of Marvel comics from 1939 to 1972, was a very capable businessman.

 

You haven't submitted one bit of solid evidence here that the publishers have kept meticulous records and can account for the number of newsstand copies that survived other than your opinion and maybe a quick google search you've done in your spare time. There's other factors to consider than you seem to be aware of when producing a product, storing it, shipping it, selling it and dealing with returns.

 

I'm not saying that the publishers don't have a general idea of the newsstand copies that survived, just that it probably isn't as precise and accurate as most people seem to believe or claim. Anyone with any experience in that type of sales and returns knows what I'm talking about. Nothing is exact when you work with machinery like a printing press, you have 2 sets of numbers that you go by, Efficiency and True Efficency. If you don't know what those are then I suggest that you step away from your keyboard, get some real world experience in the industry and then check back with me in about 10 or 15 years if you make it that long.

 

You keep saying that my statements are wrong and that my reasoning is flawed. Exactly what proof do you have that my statements aren't as accurate as yours? Do you work for DC, Marvel or any other publisher? Exactly what and how much experience in this field? I only have 30+ years of experience dealing with comics, how much do you have?

 

As far as Chuck goes, I've met the guy on several occasions at cons and we have some of the same friends and associates in the comics industry. I don't like him, never have and never will. The only difference between him and 90% of the other comic dealers that I know is that he got a lucky break and was smart enough to exploit it and take advantage of it.

 

How do you know how efficient or inefficient recording keeping was X-Amount of years ago before technology advancements like computers were avaliable? Were you there X-Amount of years ago? Were you even involved in the industry in the 70's or 80's or are you just assuming?

 

Please enlighten me on your experience in the comics industry and dealing with newsstand editions since I seem to know so little about it and you have all of the answers?!?

Edited February 27, 2016 by waahehe94

[BishopT]

I would guess around 90 and 95 the ratios were closer...there were tons of newsstand books and tons of comic stores...both are plentiful, but different than the 90's, motivated buyers will pay some premium for a newsstand. Try to find newsstand ASM's v2 10, 11 and 13. They exist as price variants. I think 2.25 and 2.49? And both are scarce to rare.

I picked up an ASM vol2 #13 newsstand edition a few weeks ago at 2nd And Charles ($2). I was looking all over for it the other day when I saw this post, and I figured I was mistaken, but I did indeed find it sandwiched out of order with the rest of my ASM vol 2 early issues (pre Straczinski). Mine appears to have a $1.99 cover price... so, is there another newsstand version with the $2.25 price point?

[StuporMan]

Does the UPC with the black line through it count as a "direct" variant? If so, these go back into the late Bronze Age. I was thinking this was pretty much an issue with the Copper years, so that's why I OP'd here.

 

Just to do a random check, I chose Spectacular Spider-Man and found that the earliest direct that I could find was #39 (Feb. 1980). The first issue with a line through the UPC that I could find was issue #31 (June 1979). Either one of these could line up with the direct market starting in the late 70s.

 

Does anyone know of an earlier direct issue?

 

The answer to your question was recently posted in the BA forum. The slashed UPCs are direct, not sure when that design was implemented but I'm pretty sure I've got an earlier issue of PPTSS with a slash through the UPC.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9090670#Post9090670

 

Thanks for digging that thread up for me. I guess it's pretty much settled

[RockMyAmadeus]

I have to disagree with you in the fact that I don't feel that publishers like Marvel & DC kept meticulous records on the number of comics they published each month and on the returns.

 

Your reasoning is flawed. DC, Marvel, and the rest kept meticulous records because they HAD to: both for postal service regulations AND because they had contracts in place with various distributors, who you bet kept close track of what they sold and what they returned.

 

Your contention doesn't make any sense. The printer knew exactly how many copies they printed; they had to. Marvel knew how many copies they ordered. DC knew how many copies were claimed for credit. They all, if they were sent out via subscription, had to keep these numbers for filing every year.

 

When you have competing interests making sure everything was accounted for, of course they would keep meticulous records.

 

Does that mean there wasn't human error and fraud? Of course not. But that doesn't therefore mean Marvel just told the printer to print whatever they felt like printing, and vendors to claim whatever they felt like claiming on returns, and no one kept accounts.

 

 

so I highly doubt a printing company that has been on the verge of bankruptcy on several occasions could.

 

What printing company are you referring to?

 

There are just so many unkown factors that come into play throughout the production process, through the shipping and warehouse process and in the return process to the fudge factor that you have to allow for when people are involved that it just isn't possible to keep track of everything.

 

UNLESS you have competing interests keeping everybody honest. No one said it was absolutely NASA precise down to the very last copy, but it's beyond silly to think that Marvel, DC, and the rest kept loose books.

 

Comic collecting isn't like coin collecting in the fact that Marvel and DC aren't likely to be hoarding back issues of comics away in a safe like the U.S. Mint could be with coins. I can pretty much guarantee that Marvel and DC doesn't have the accountability for each indiviual comic produced that the U.S. Mint does with each coin or paper bill produced also.

 

Not the point. The point was, and is, that record keeping was precise 230+ years ago, so to say "well, technology wasn't that advanced in 1970" doesn't fly.

 

If history and experience has taught me anything it's that Chuck's ego is only overshadowed by the amount of sheer luck that he has had in his career and comic publishers weren't good businessmen prior to Walt Disney buying Marvel.

 

Wait...are you envious of Chuck?

 

And what do you mean, "comic publishers weren't good businessmen prior to Disney buying Marvel"?

 

Warners has owned DC since the 60's. Martin Goodman, owner and publisher of Marvel comics from 1939 to 1972, was a very capable businessman.

 

You haven't submitted one bit of solid evidence here that the publishers have kept meticulous records and can account for the number of newsstand copies that survived other than your opinion and maybe a quick google search you've done in your spare time. There's other factors to consider than you seem to be aware of when producing a product, storing it, shipping it, selling it and dealing with returns.

 

What do you think the Statements of Ownership are? Chopped liver?

 

Just to be clear: nobody is talking about extant copies. I am only referring to the number of copies known at the time of return. (More on that below.)

 

Once more: when you are dealing with competing interests (that is, vendors vs. distributors vs. publishers vs. printers), accounting is, OF NECESSITY, meticulous.

 

That is, vendors keep distributors honest, and distributors keep publishers honest, and publishers keep printers honest, and so forth.

 

This isn't rocket science.

 

No one is saying "there were precisely 45,273 copies of FF #378 actually, physically destroyed, and therefore there were precisely 137,583 copies extant at the time of the issuing of credits to vendors, and payment to the printer, etc, etc."

 

There is, of course, "overage" and "spoilage" and "shortage" and outright fraud to contend with, always.

 

But you are not in tune with reality if you think that the printer didn't send Marvel a bill for X amount of copies, and Marvel didn't send Y amount of copies to the distributors, and the vendors all received Z amount of copies, and "returned" Z-A copies for credit (either directly, or through the later voucher program), and that all of these various entities did not practice generally accepted accounting principles.

 

I'm not saying that the publishers don't have a general idea of the newsstand copies that survived, just that it probably isn't as precise and accurate as most people seem to believe or claim.

 

When do you mean? Then, at the time of issuing credit, or now? Because attrition is reality. Nobody, but NOBODY, knows precisely how many extant copies of standard comic books of ANY issue there are, with some very, very rare exceptions.

 

Anyone with any experience in that type of sales and returns knows what I'm talking about. Nothing is exact when you work with machinery like a printing press, you have 2 sets of numbers that you go by, Efficiency and True Efficency. If you don't know what those are then I suggest that you step away from your keyboard, get some real world experience in the industry and then check back with me in about 10 or 15 years if you make it that long.

 

 

You keep saying that my statements are wrong and that my reasoning is flawed. Exactly what proof do you have that my statements aren't as accurate as yours?

 

I've already given you numerous citations. Just scroll up, and read this post, there are plenty.

 

Do you work for DC, Marvel or any other publisher? Exactly what and how much experience in this field? I only have 30+ years of experience dealing with comics, how much do you have?

 

Well....

 

I purchased my first comics as a collector in August of 1989. I worked for a comic book distributor from 1991-1993, and then again in 1999. I maintain an extensive collection of research material, including (almost) every Overstreet Price Guide and Update, (almost) every copy of Wizard, Comics Values Monthly (don't laugh), the Krause Standard Catalog of Comic Books, every issue of Previews from 1991-2002 or so, comics history books like "The Steranko History of Comics", "All In Color For A Dime", many of comics historian Les Daniel's works, including "Marvel: Five Fabulous Decades of the World's Greatest Comics", the Gerber Photojournals, numerous issues of the Comics' Buyer's Guide, the Comics Journal, etc, and whatever other industry research I can get my grubby little hands on (and I've actually red them!)

 

I have written on the subject of comics, and comics history, for nearly 20 years on various platforms (including this board.) I co-hosted a podcast about comics (Only The Valiant!) from 2009-2011. I am currently writing a guide to variant comics (and, much like the Pedigree book, it's never going to really be out. Hey, at least I'm honest.) I maintain a fairly extensive network of industry, retailer, and wholesaler contracts. And, I have amassed about 125,000 comics over the past nearly 27 years.

 

As far as Chuck goes, I've met the guy on several occasions at cons and we have some of the same friends and associates in the comics industry. I don't like him, never have and never will. The only difference between him and 90% of the other comic dealers that I know is that he got a lucky break and was smart enough to exploit it and take advantage of it.

 

What do your personal feelings about Chuck have to do with anything? Either what the man says is accurate, or it is not. Some of what he says is not accurate, and that can be dealt with. Much of it is, and is of value. Even the inaccurate information has value, if one can read between the lines.

 

And you have yet to answer any of my direct questions.

 

How do you know how efficient or inefficient recording keeping was X-Amount of years ago before technology advancements like computers were avaliable? Were you there X-Amount of years ago? Were you even involved in the industry in the 70's or 80's or are you just assuming?

 

Because of basic common sense, plus the IRS, plus the USPS. Accounting has been done for centuries, if not millennia. When you're dealing with competing interests, precise accounting is going to take place. That information may not be publicly available...but it absolutely exists, or existed at the time.

 

Otherwise, how would Diamond come up with its market analyses?

 

http://www.diamondcomics.com/Home/1/1/3/237

 

Please enlighten me on your experience in the comics industry and dealing with newsstand editions since I seem to know so little about it and you have all of the answers?!?

 

Can't the same be said of you? I am an open book here, a member for 10+ years, with many real-world contacts.

 

Who are you...?

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Does the UPC with the black line through it count as a "direct" variant? If so, these go back into the late Bronze Age. I was thinking this was pretty much an issue with the Copper years, so that's why I OP'd here.

 

Just to do a random check, I chose Spectacular Spider-Man and found that the earliest direct that I could find was #39 (Feb. 1980). The first issue with a line through the UPC that I could find was issue #31 (June 1979). Either one of these could line up with the direct market starting in the late 70s.

 

Does anyone know of an earlier direct issue?

 

The answer to your question was recently posted in the BA forum. The slashed UPCs are direct, not sure when that design was implemented but I'm pretty sure I've got an earlier issue of PPTSS with a slash through the UPC.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9090670#Post9090670

 

Thanks for digging that thread up for me. I guess it's pretty much settled

 

Indirect credit!

 

 

(Yes, the UPC with the slash through it is a Direct market version.)

[Prince Namor]

Machismo gets in the way of so much common sense.

[thecopperagekids]

2000 and on is very difficult to find some newsstands and even harder to find high grade.

 

Any newsstand I find in high grade I ask a small premium because I never know if I will ever find another one.

 

 

Yup.

 

1985-1990 newsstands were produced in higher amounts than post 2000 newsstands but they are still pretty tough books to find in CGC 9.8 slabs.

 

Look up any key book from those time periods on eBay and you'll see about a dozen CGC 9.8's....and maybe ONE newsstand copy.

 

Those newsstand 9.8's typically sell at a decent premium over CGC 9.8 direct markets......but the premium is much higher, on newsstands from the early 200's and on.

 

GPA does note newsstand sales on SOME books....Spawn #9 has newsstand sales at about 500% the price of direct markets for example.

 

Meanwhile, a Suicide Squad #1 CGC 9.8 3/1987 newsstand sold on 2/21/2016 via Heritage Auction at $359 PLUS a 19.5% buyer's premium.

 

That sale is not notated as a newsstand edition in GPA, nor did the 19.5% buyer's premium figured into the cost of the bid.....IOW, the buyer paid about $470 for that CGC 9.8 SS #1 1987 newsstand...plus shipping/insurance, bringing the total paid for that book to around $500, or thereabouts.

 

That SS 1 newsstand cgc 9.8 that sold on Heritage on the 21st also had very nice centering, as well.

 

GPA only notes newsstand sales when CGC notes newsstand editions on the label. Spawn #9 has a note about "newsstand edition" because it was printed without a poster (and it's not a flaw if a newsstand edition is missing the poster).

 

Generally speaking, CGC does not indicate newsstand books... and GPA doesn't identify it if CGC doesn't.

 

Well than, that would explain why I have only ever seen one book recorded in GPA, as a "newsstand edition".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[natevegas]

Machismo gets in the way of so much common sense.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Got an interesting PM a while ago...

 

 

Didn't even list the cons he/she will be attending! What good is that?

 

[rjrjr]

Got an interesting PM a while ago...

 

 

Didn't even list the cons he/she will be attending! What good is that?

 

 

[StuporMan]

Got an interesting PM a while ago...

 

 

Didn't even list the cons he/she will be attending! What good is that?

 

 

 

 

[Junkdrawer]

Got an interesting PM a while ago...

 

 

Didn't even list the cons he/she will be attending! What good is that?

 

 

 

22 yr olds

[Evenmorefun]

On February 24, 2016 at 12:42 PM, revat said:

Another thing I would add is that for your AVERAGE comic, the odds are pretty high that a comic shop or directly mailed copy would probably be in better condition that your average comic on a newsstand or the spinner rack at your drug store/grocery store (yes you GD millenials, that used to happen).

 

So SOME people think higher grades are more rare for newsstands.

 

As they say, choose your adventure, follow your heart, stay in school, see you next summer.

Are newsstands in better condition then the guy who bags his comics at the comic store? No that's not how it worked, sorry. See ya next summer