Books you just cant find in the Wild 22 22

[RockMyAmadeus]

11 minutes ago, valiantman said:

The primary objections to these types of discussions of (or articles on another website about) direct editions and newsstands are that people often equate "in the marketplace" with "in existence" when they can't be interchanged like that.

Exactly correct. And trouble always comes when people use those two interchangeably, because it can be confusing to the novice and even the experienced. While it's true that "in the marketplace" CAN give us an indication of what exists, it is only in the broadest, most general of terms.

[paqart]

7 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

or be offended and reject it because you're offended

I'm not saying I rejected your information due to offense taken. I'm saying it was less credible at the outset because it looked like there was some kind of personal animus or emotion involved. I know someone else who loves to communicate using all caps and emotional language. He's a sharp guy, intelligent, and very observant. I trust him quite a lot and it's why I've hired him to troubleshoot some problems for me and why I handed him a $2,000,000 video game opportunity. That said, most of the people on the teams I've worked with cannot communicate with him effectively because they think he is too abrasive. On my end, I've more than once had to hold my phone a few feet away from my ear as he described some kind of technical problem. He's a great guy, worth the premium he charges, but I prefer him as a freelancer or consultant to being on staff. I do appreciate that I now understand the issues you brought up a bit better thanks to the fact you brought them up. Now I am telling you that the next time you run into someone on this board who seems to be polluted by a connection to Benjamin Nobel's blog that you could make your job of educating that person easier and more pleasant by approaching it differently.

[RockMyAmadeus]

16 minutes ago, paqart said:

In the end, it is fair to say that there are some inaccuracies on the site. There is no indication that any of it is malicious or less than innocent. Therefore, while I accept your contention that legitimate errors exist, I do not accept the idea that the site is dangerous or that Nobel has some kind of serious character flaw that makes him and everything he writes inherently untrustworthy.

Inaccuracies and errors, in and of themselves, do not indicate malicious or "less than innocent" motives. However...when someone making those inaccuracies and errors is approached, and their reaction is not only to dismiss said corrections, but actively work to silence the criticism and the critic on multiple platforms...which Mr. Nobel did...then the only conclusion one may come to is malicious and less than innocent motives. And that's true of anyone who engages in such activities and behavior. At the risk of belaboring that point, when you actively work to silence criticism and critics, you have crossed the line into malice and "not innocent."

There is much here of which you are clearly not aware. I recommend gathering all the information available before coming to your conclusions. 

[valiantman]

11 minutes ago, paqart said:

21 minutes ago, valiantman said:

Agreed, except, as mentioned, when the prices on particular books go up... the marketplace generally sees an influx of what was always in existence.  Spawn #1 newsstand vs. Spawn #1 direct is a really good example.  Original "in the marketplace" percentages for Spawn #1 newsstand were much lower than the current percentages "in the marketplace" while the "in existence" numbers for both haven't changed.

Agreed on Spawn #1, curious if this generalizes much beyond that. The reason is that Spawn #1 was a heavily collected mega-event in comics. Most comics don't have the attendant publicity that one did, had significantly lower print runs, and *probably* had lower survival rates. Inevitably, comics will trickle into the marketplace over time but will they do so in numbers significant enough to meaningfully alter the rarity of a newsstand comic? For instance, Wolverine V2 #67. That comic wasn't heavily promoted like Spawn #1 and is legitimately very hard to find in any condition. Is there any reason to believe it would suddenly become less rare if its price shoots up? While it is likely that dealers will become motivated to check their stock, most won't have any because most or all of their recent comics were bought through their distributor, who gave them direct editions. Everyone else, who bought at book stores or newsstands, are less likely to learn of the increase in value and thus, less likely to bring their comic to a shop. My guess on this is that you'd be looking at an increase in the number of newsstands in the market but not enough to alter their overall rarity more than a percentage point or two. What happened with the Star Wars #1 35 cent price variant? How many of those suddenly became available after the comic's rarity became established?

I think you've definitely got the points I'm making, so I don't think we're in disagreement there.  However, I do believe that a book like Wolverine V2 #67 newsstand would suddenly become less rare "in the marketplace" if the price shoots up. Obviously, nothing would change on the numbers "in existence", but the different ways books are selected to be auctioned would be impacted by a sudden change in price, and Ebay would show more copies of Wolverine V2 #67 newsstand relative to Wolverine V2 #67 "in the marketplace" vs. the current numbers you are seeing.  "In existence" always remains constant (and unknown).  "In the marketplace" does generally remain constant until there's a change in price... then I think it would be a fluke if nothing changed with percentages for newsstand vs. direct edition "in the marketplace".

Those dealers you mentioned checking their stock... "Most won't have any" is true, but if even a few did... those few copies would be enough to shift newsstand "in the marketplace" at 2% newsstand could jump to 5% easily.  Spawn #1 is a higher volume version of what will always happen, in my opinion, not an outlier in percentages... just an outlier in volumes.  In fact, the fewer copies of both newsstand and direct are on Ebay, the greater the jump will be when newsstand sees a price increase.  Spawn #1 is actually hard to "shift" because so many are sold in both versions.  Wolverine V2 #67 might be very easy to shift, if newsstand was suddenly "worth eBaying" and direct wasn't.

Edited October 10, 2019 by valiantman

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 minute ago, paqart said:

I'm not saying I rejected your information due to offense taken. I'm saying it was less credible at the outset because it looked like there was some kind of personal animus or emotion involved. I know someone else who loves to communicate using all caps and emotional language. He's a sharp guy, intelligent, and very observant. I trust him quite a lot and it's why I've hired him to troubleshoot some problems for me and why I handed him a $2,000,000 video game opportunity. That said, most of the people on the teams I've worked with cannot communicate with him effectively because they think he is too abrasive. On my end, I've more than once had to hold my phone a few feet away from my ear as he described some kind of technical problem. He's a great guy, worth the premium he charges, but I prefer him as a freelancer or consultant to being on staff. I do appreciate that I now understand the issues you brought up a bit better thanks to the fact you brought them up. Now I am telling you that the next time you run into someone on this board who seems to be polluted by a connection to Benjamin Nobel's blog that you could make your job of educating that person easier and more pleasant by approaching it differently.

If you're reading emotion into the selective capitalization of words, I would suggest you have a flawed understanding of the nuance of communicating in the English language.

Since you didn't answer, and since I'm curious, I'll ask again: have you been receiving private messages concerning our interaction...? Just wondering. 

[paqart]

11 minutes ago, valiantman said:

Yes, there are plenty of $0.01 comics on Ebay, but they don't represent as well as $20 books.

Fair enough. In the quest for best evidence in a convenient sample, ebay isn't a bad place to go, particularly when the data available on the site itself reflects a pattern of favoring direct versions despite newsstand versions being worth more. If I find 115 direct versions and 0 newsstand versions, that demonstrates that both versions are at the very least equally worthy of being posted. The fact that no newsstand editions appear is not an indication, therefore, that they are unworthy, but that the poster doesn't have any newsstand editions to offer. If they did, they would be there, following the logic that if the directs are worth posting, the newsstands are even more worthy of posting.

[paqart]

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Since you didn't answer, and since I'm curious, I'll ask again: have you been receiving private messages concerning our interaction...? Just wondering

They are called "private messages" for a reason.

[valiantman]

 

1 minute ago, paqart said:

15 minutes ago, valiantman said:

Yes, there are plenty of $0.01 comics on Ebay, but they don't represent as well as $20 books.

Fair enough. In the quest for best evidence in a convenient sample, ebay isn't a bad place to go, particularly when the data available on the site itself reflects a pattern of favoring direct versions despite newsstand versions being worth more. If I find 115 direct versions and 0 newsstand versions, that demonstrates that both versions are at the very least equally worthy of being posted. The fact that no newsstand editions appear is not an indication, therefore, that they are unworthy, but that the poster doesn't have any newsstand editions to offer. If they did, they would be there, following the logic that if the directs are worth posting, the newsstands are even more worthy of posting.

Agreed.  We can be fairly certain (with or without the exact statistics) that newsstands are quite unusual "in the marketplace" for a book with 115 direct versions and 0 newsstands when the books are worth the same otherwise (or even more so, if the newsstand is perceived to be worth more and still isn't showing up).

[paqart]

6 minutes ago, valiantman said:

at 2% newsstand could jump to 5% easily.

I can accept that possibility but doubt it would go much further. Keep in mind that at the same time the newsstand copies come out of storage, so will direct editions, thus diluting the effect.

[valiantman]

7 minutes ago, paqart said:

15 minutes ago, valiantman said:

at 2% newsstand could jump to 5% easily.

I can accept that possibility but doubt it would go much further. Keep in mind that at the same time the newsstand copies come out of storage, so will direct editions, thus diluting the effect.

If there has been no change in the prices for the direct editions, there shouldn't be any (or as much) reason the numbers would change for direct editions in the marketplace.  Assume 1 copy of newsstand for the most recent 50 auctions of Book X.  That's 2% newsstand (in the marketplace).  Assume that 1 copy of newsstand suddenly sold for four times the going rate for direct edition.  There's suddenly at least "four times" as much reason to list a newsstand for Book X.  If there's no new reason to list a copy of direct edition for Book X then you'd see 6% or 8% newsstand in the next 50 auctions for just 2 or 3 new copies of newsstand coming to market.  Even if the volume went from 50 auctions to 60 auctions, you'd have 3 or 4 newsstands for 60 auctions (with 5 or 6 additional direct editions, "diluting the effect", as you mentioned)... 3 or 4 out of 60 is still 5% to 7%, when 2% was normal.

Edited October 10, 2019 by valiantman

[Lazyboy]

38 minutes ago, paqart said:

Only interested in marketplace copies. The "in existence" copies may as well not exist if they aren't in the marketplace.

 What's available in the marketplace can vary wildly over time and what's available at any given time is only relevant if you absolutely "need"  to purchase a copy at that specific time. Not to mention that any single person can only see a small fraction of the marketplace, despite the relatively large amount of comics that are available online.

[RockMyAmadeus]

53 minutes ago, paqart said:

56 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Since you didn't answer, and since I'm curious, I'll ask again: have you been receiving private messages concerning our interaction...? Just wondering

They are called "private messages" for a reason.

I will assume, then, that the answer is "yes." You have given your opinion on how you wish to be addressed (and, frankly, you've been addressed very professionally thus far, by pretty much everyone), so I will give you mine: anyone receiving "private messages" from others containing attempts to negatively influence that person's attitude towards people with whom they are involved in a discussion ought to question, instead, the motives of the ones who are willing to "talk behind the back" of people. 

The recipient of such messages ought to be asking himself "why is this person sending this to me, attempting to influence my opinion? What is their motive? Why are they doing it in secret? Are they biased? Do I know their biases? Do they seem to be agreeing with me, and does that make ME more willing to agree with THEM? Is what they're telling me a fair and accurate assessment, or is it slanted and biased?"

After all...if they'll do that to one person, they'll do that to anyone, and you might someday be surprised to find yourself on the receiving end of such attempts to negatively influence others. If someone isn't willing to let you form your own opinions and conclusions, free of their influence...who, then, is acting with malice and lack of innocence...?

I know how difficult it can be to think in these terms; gossip, after all, fuels most melodrama...but it's something that, I think, would benefit you and everyone greatly if we all learned how to come to our conclusions on our own, free from influence from others. 

That all said, this conversation is beginning to wander inexorably towards the personal which...if you'll recall...is what I warned about at the very beginning of this discussion. I am not your father, and you are not mine; lecturing each other about how we can better deal with people isn't really appropriate for this message board.

Edited October 10, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[RockMyAmadeus]

29 minutes ago, paqart said:

37 minutes ago, valiantman said:

at 2% newsstand could jump to 5% easily.

I can accept that possibility but doubt it would go much further. Keep in mind that at the same time the newsstand copies come out of storage, so will direct editions, thus diluting the effect.

That's not necessarily true, because of the different channels into which those copies went, as explained before. It's not a solid correlation to make.

[Lazyboy]

43 minutes ago, paqart said:

In the end, it is fair to say that there are some inaccuracies on the site. There is no indication that any of it is malicious or less than innocent. Therefore, while I accept your contention that legitimate errors exist, I do not accept the idea that the site is dangerous or that Nobel has some kind of serious character flaw that makes him and everything he writes inherently untrustworthy.

If you want to ignore the legions of self-serving errors from somebody with a clear financial interest in what they're promoting, that's on you.

[porcupine48]

[RockMyAmadeus]

9 minutes ago, porcupine48 said:

 

 

[porcupine48]

4 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

 

 

Oskar Krause,I'm out  

[Lazyboy]

2 hours ago, paqart said:

A funny thing about all of this is that I have always felt that direct distribution effectively ruined American comics.

...

Because of the changes wrought by direct distribution, actual sales overall have gone down.

The indifference, if not outright contempt, from newsstand distributors and retailers nearly destroyed American comics. Multiple large publishers exited the market, not because of the rise of direct distribution, but because of plummeting sales in the 70s under the newsstand system. That's why Marvel and DC embraced direct distribution. Even DC almost gave up publishing due to how bad things had become.

Now, that doesn't mean that everything the direct market enabled is good, but without it, we might not be here right now.

[MR SigS]

1 hour ago, porcupine48 said:

I don't know  Look at the footwork of the kid on the left.

These guys are dancing.

[paqart]

2 hours ago, valiantman said:

If there has been no change in the prices for the direct editions, there shouldn't be any (or as much) reason the numbers would change for direct editions in the marketplace.  Assume 1 copy of newsstand for the most recent 50 auctions of Book X.  That's 2% newsstand (in the marketplace).  Assume that 1 copy of newsstand suddenly sold for four times the going rate for direct edition.  There's suddenly at least "four times" as much reason to list a newsstand for Book X.  If there's no new reason to list a copy of direct edition for Book X then you'd see 6% or 8% newsstand in the next 50 auctions for just 2 or 3 new copies of newsstand coming to market.  Even if the volume went from 50 auctions to 60 auctions, you'd have 3 or 4 newsstands for 60 auctions (with 5 or 6 additional direct editions, "diluting the effect", as you mentioned)... 3 or 4 out of 60 is still 5% to 7%, when 2% was normal.

That is something we’d have to see. It would be interesting to know how it worked with the Star Wars variants. The number that come out of hiding can’t go above the number that exist, and if we’re looking at less than 1:100 now, when over a hundred copies are put out for sale, likely the newsstand copies would be out there right now also, for the same reason the directs are out there. More would be looked for and more found as a consequence, but quite possibly in exactly the same proportions. If the direct version was worth putting out before, it would still be worth putting out, so as the newsstand copies are found, so will directs. More plausibly, people like you and I would be more willing to sell the copies we have but we are finding our copies in tiny quantities, and that presents a totally different scenario.

If the newsstand current rarity is 1% of the market and collectors like myself and others are removing these from the market, it is possible that before long, they make up substantially less than 1% of the market. Then when prices go up significantly, collectors like you and me would disgorge our copies, bringing levels back to around 1%. New copies may be found in the meantime, but of the group that exists today, there will be some attrition before the time when prices go up. Then they have to enter the market and be in decent condition to be interesting. At the same time, they were rare to begin with, thus limiting their potential to affect the number on the market.

with those two scenarios as options, where in version 1, new entries to the market after price increases cause the proportion of newsstand copies to go up as high as 5%, and version 2 is that copies disappear from the market until prices go up and they are returned to a 1% level, I think option two is slightly more convincing. That is because it matches what I am seeing right now. For instance, I have three copies of ASM v2#36 and four copies of ASM v2#30. A casual newsstand customer isn’t likely to buy so many copies of one comic. Therefore, it is possible that returning my copies to the market, and the same for other collectors, has a stronger impact than previously unknown copies. At that point the question becomes, at what stage of the newsstand hoarding process is the market in right now? For instance, at NYCC, I was told of a dealer there (who I didn’t get to meet) who was assembling a collection of ASM 500-600 in newsstand editions, just as I am (though I am going through to numbers above 700). According to the dealer I was talking to, the other dealer is not selling the newsstand copies he gets. How many other dealers are doing the same?