1:10, 1:25, 1:50, 1:100 are DISTRIBUTION numbers, not PRINT RUN numbers. 0

[jreezy]

 

Question:

 

I have a lady death variant, non incentive. . Only 25 made serially numbered . Mine is #23.

 

 

So there may be thousands of copies of #23/25 in a warehouse? Perhaps. But realistically what are the chances?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

also, this only applies to marvel and DC ?

 

No, but DC and Marvel are the main culprits.

[jreezy]

also, this only applies to marvel and DC ?

 

No, but DC and Marvel are the main culprits.

 

gotcha.

 

I know Image was anti variants a few months ago but they released an incentive variant recently which i found hilarious.

[Lonzilla]

As long as there's a correlation between the numbers (1:25, 1:50, etc.) and rarity they'll always be sought after.

 

There is no correlation between the numbers and rarity. They don't have anything to do with each other. That people use them because they "sound" impressive doesn't make it so. There are 1:100 books that are ultra common, and there are 1:10s that are pretty rare.

 

You're right if you're comparing books that aren't the same (ie. a 1:25 Spiderman vs 1:25 Avengers...or whatever).

 

However, if the books are the "same" there is a correlation to rarity. Take for example Old Man Logan #66 Turner Variant. There are two of them...the color version (1:50) and the sketch version (1:100).

 

The sketch version is more rare no matter how you do the math. You buy 100 comics you'll get two color version and one sketch version...and so on...

 

 

***Rare is subject to interpretation (in this case I'm just saying there are less sketch versions)

 

Your reasoning sounds logical, but it is based on an assumption that cannot be proven, which is, 1:50 of the same book are printed to the tune of twice the 1:100s.

 

You don't know. Nobody knows. It appears that that's the case, that the 1:50 is more common than the 1:100, and it probably is the case...but you don't know for sure. No one but Marvel and the printer does.

 

People casually look at it and assume, as you have, that a 1:50 is twice as common as a 1:100.

 

And that might be true, in an absolute sense. But it's not something that can be proven. Marvel could have printed the same amount of both. They could have printed MORE of the 1:100s than the 1:50s.

 

We don't know. What's important is that those ratios mean nothing other than telling a retailer how many regular copies he/she has to order to qualify for an incentive. Otherwise, they are absolutely meaningless.

If Marvel / DC give comp copies to the artists, wouldn't it make sense that they get the equal amount of each version. That's an "if" because I don't know.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Question:

 

I have a lady death variant, non incentive. . Only 25 made serially numbered . Mine is #23.

 

 

So there may be thousands of copies of #23/25 in a warehouse? Perhaps. But realistically what are the chances?

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. No one has suggested anything of the sort, and you're being silly.

 

2. This situation doesn't apply to variants like this. Those aren't retailer incentives, and they don't go through Diamond. The one has nothing to do with the other.

 

3. Yes, there ARE probably 5-15 copies of the book that Pulido has that aren't numbered. Pulido is a big fan of these types of variants.

[RockMyAmadeus]

As long as there's a correlation between the numbers (1:25, 1:50, etc.) and rarity they'll always be sought after.

 

There is no correlation between the numbers and rarity. They don't have anything to do with each other. That people use them because they "sound" impressive doesn't make it so. There are 1:100 books that are ultra common, and there are 1:10s that are pretty rare.

 

You're right if you're comparing books that aren't the same (ie. a 1:25 Spiderman vs 1:25 Avengers...or whatever).

 

However, if the books are the "same" there is a correlation to rarity. Take for example Old Man Logan #66 Turner Variant. There are two of them...the color version (1:50) and the sketch version (1:100).

 

The sketch version is more rare no matter how you do the math. You buy 100 comics you'll get two color version and one sketch version...and so on...

 

 

***Rare is subject to interpretation (in this case I'm just saying there are less sketch versions)

 

I think the point RMA is trying to make (now or any of the dozen other times)

 

 

Why, I NEVER...!

 

(Maybe if you had, you wouldn't be so uptight...)

 

But seriously, there are a few...persistent...people who keep repeating misinformation, for their own purposes, and it gets tiresome. There are a lot of people repeating things they have no way of knowing, but saying them as if they're established fact.

 

Plus, it IS an appealing sounding argument, with "easy to apply" numbers, so it makes sense why it's so widespread.

[RockMyAmadeus]

People finding "rare" variants in 3 and 4 dollar grab bags is proof that more of these are printed than given out to retailers. The companies make reasonable assumptions of overall sales on any given book, plus some overage on all print runs. Variants are no different. There are more copies than were sent to stores, and there are more copies than most collects actually want there to be.

 

Like I said earlier... if book X sells 80,000 copies and there is a 1:100 variant why not print the 800 variants in order to fill orders, back ups for damages and to have a fire sale in three packs or their monthly variant blowout.

 

It's certainly possible that they do that, but not at all probable, for the reasons mentioned above. Those numbers are simply too simplistic, and don't take into account multiple unknown factors that have a material affect on the outcome.

 

We just don't know, but we DO know that it's not related, in any way other than establishing a minimum necessary to fulfill orders, to the print runs of the incentives.

 

Keep in mind that those 80,000 copies are only those that are sold in North America (as opposed to printed.) There's an entire world market of English comic books, exactly the same as the North Am, printed at the same time, that isn't included in those numbers.

 

Remember, they're not flying blind, here. Diamond and the publishers know exactly how many copies. I said earlier that they could have "leftovers", which is not technically accurate. They would not NEED leftovers (outside of potential damages), because they know, before the books are even printed, exactly how many they will need.

 

What we don't know:

 

1. The actual print runs of the regular copies.

 

2. The amount of orders that qualified for the incentive (that is, "how many copies do we actually need, as opposed to want, to print?")

 

3,.The actual print runs of the incentives.

 

4. Which portion of the Comichron sales numbers are regular copies, and which is/are variant(s).

 

5. The total number allocated to Diamond after their orders are fulfilled.

 

6. How print runs for incentives are determined.

 

7. What publishers do with their incentives beyond fulfilling initial orders.

 

For example...DC and Marvel are fond of giving out "1:X" variants to retailers at various seminars. Where did those come from...?

 

It's like guessing the price of gas based on the amount of crude oil being pumped out of the ground by a single rig. Too many variables unknown.

[RockMyAmadeus]

As long as there's a correlation between the numbers (1:25, 1:50, etc.) and rarity they'll always be sought after.

 

There is no correlation between the numbers and rarity. They don't have anything to do with each other. That people use them because they "sound" impressive doesn't make it so. There are 1:100 books that are ultra common, and there are 1:10s that are pretty rare.

 

I've never really tracked variants, but this post makes me think that even the "rare" variants can be plentiful. If that's the case, where do these variants go? Are they printed in mass quantities and sent into the secondary market later? Shipped to stores on the cheap months/years later?

 

This line of thought has me wondering how one could educate himself on how plentiful a particular variant might be. When a variant hits, there's a mad rush to secure a copy on eBay. That's when I dive in, figuring that even if I'm paying a premium, I'd rather have the book in my possession than risk it being too hard to find later. So assuming I learn to wait, how long before there's enough data to know if a particular book is actually "rare" or not?

 

That, unfortunately, is a big part of the problem. You don't. No one does. There are books that are extremely rare, but no one cares. There are books that are very common, but have high demand.

 

The interesting thing about variants is that, for the first time since they became a real "thing" in the very early 90's, it's starting to make more sense to pounce on some variants now. For 20+ years, you only needed to wait, and every single variant....every one...would be cheaper than it was at its peak.

 

Now, in the last 5 years or so, that's starting to not be the case, for a decent handful of books.

 

So, it's hard to say. Before 2015, I would have told you to wait it out, that it will eventually show up when everyone else has moved on, and almost certainly for far less.

 

And, on the off-chance that you ran into a weird one, a la Wolvie #145 Nabisco, it was more than offset by the swaths of variants which became $5 or less that you could obtain after the fact.

[Jaydogrules]

So....just to clear things up a little...

 

1) The numbers reported on Comichron are North American sales- Diamond UK reports for the UK and panini handles most of the foreign language reprints. Those are different markets (and different books) and aren't supposed to be reported by Comichron.

And even if the UK (and foreign language markets) received all of the same variants that we do (they don't ) , those figures, at best , would add 10-15% over the Comichron totals (but for the regular cover only).

 

2) Comichron is reporting ORDERS received from dealers by the final-order-cut-off ("FOC"), which is usually about three weeks prior to the book's projected release.

 

3) The entire purpose of the FOC is to tell the publishers how many copies of a particular book to print. Which means, no they are not blindly printing in a vacuum, in advance , say 100,000 copies of a book that only ultimately has 47,000 copies ordered. Doing so would obviously negate the entire purpose of having an FOC and would be spectacularly pointless and wasteful.

 

4) This would also ( obviously) apply to variants as well (incentive , and otherwise ). Therefore , no, publishers do not deliberately print to waste , nor do they make it a habit of printing thousands of books that retailers have not ordered.

 

5) Yes, most orders will have a small percentage of overages printed (as little as 5-10%, give or take) to account for damages, creator and courtesy copies, etc., rounded up to the nearest case pack, which are typically 150-250 books per case (sorry, RMA, them's the facts , whether "you" choose to believe them or not). Those damages and courtesy copies are absolutely NOT deliberately held back for release onto the secondary market through five below packs , three packs and variant burn off sales at a later date. To even suggest such preposterous nonsense is to suggest that publishers are deliberately TRYING to waste money, and in any event , the vast majority of variants offered through those channels are NOT even incentive based variants.

 

6) The excess inventory that you do see in five below packs, variant burn off sales, etc. (representing an infinitiessimal amount of variants actually printed in a single year) is just that - excess inventory. Sometimes a publisher will over order on an "event book" (like a new "#1", new character intro, etc) that doesn't meet the expected demand. Sometimes they will have virtually an entire case pack left over. The publishing industry is not an exact science, and with the exception of UF 4 Djuedjevic (first Miles Morales event) and ASM 4 Ramos (first Silk event), all that is ever offered in those variant burn off sales or found in those multi-packs is the exact same sort of DREK that you would expect to find being blown out at under cost.

 

But it is very possible and very reasonable to make educated estimates based on the information that we do know.

 

7) Hence , it is very reasonable to estimate an approximate amount of copies of most ratio variants based on the data that we do know. Since Comichron reports books "ordered", and since publishers do not make it a habit of printing thousands of books that no retailer has ordered , we can indeed use the numbers reported by it (Comichron) to guesstimate how many ratio variants were produced and circulated.

 

8) No, it will not be an exact number. It doesn't have to be. That is "RMA's Rule", and, all due respect to him, he is wrong. Indeed , using the Comichron based way of calculating the amount of copies produced (rounded up to the nearest case pack) is the BEST way to calculate "the most" copies produced as even that is assuming that all orders qualified for incentives , when it is common knowledge that many (if not most) will not, especially on the higher ratio incentives.

 

I know that RMA means well, and most of his points , if taken individually , are actually quite accurate.

 

However, taken in whole they allude to (if not stating outright ) a widespread publisher conspiracy that would involve both lying and fraud in the incentive program by publishers. So he should really stop grinding this little axe of his against variants until there is actual real and credible evidence of that.

 

Again , yes, sometimes a very small amount incentives end up on the secondary market through discount channels.

 

However this is a result of the occasional gaffes that result from the inexact nature of the publishing business, not rampant and epidemic fraud and deceit.

 

-J.

[Gunnz]

I like incentive and retailer variants, but I always assume publishers keep a number of all incentive books because if demand and to be released on the market later .

[RockMyAmadeus]

So....just to clear things up a little...

 

1) The numbers reported on Comichron are North American sales- Diamond UK reports for the UK and panini handles most of the foreign language reprints. Those are different markets (and different books) and aren't supposed to be reported by Comichron.

And even if the UK (and foreign language markets) received all of the same variants that we do (they don't ) , those figures, at best , would add 10-15% over the Comichron totals (but for the regular cover only).

 

Not sure why this wasn't clear to you. It's been said from the start. Also not relevant, as those numbers have nothing to do with the print runs of the incentive variants, and never have. It's not relevant, and is only mentioned to make clear that it's not relevant.

 

2) Comichron is reporting ORDERS received from dealers by the final-order-cut-off ("FOC"), which is usually about three weeks prior to the book's projected release.

 

Comichron is passing along what Diamond tells them, but there's no reason to doubt this information.

 

3) The entire purpose of the FOC is to tell the publishers how many copies of a particular book to print. Which means, no they are not blindly printing in a vacuum, in advance , say 100,000 copies of a book that only ultimately has 47,000 copies printed. Doing so would obviously negate the entire purpose of having an FOC and would be spectacularly pointless and wasteful.

 

No one said, at any time, at any point, ever, that printing is "blindly done in a vacuum." You cannot set up straw men, knock them down, and then claim you've made a point. You haven't.

 

This is also not relevant to this discussion. It is not in dispute, and never has been.

 

4) This would also ( obviously) apply to variants as well (incentive , and otherwise ). Therefore , no, publishers do not deliberately print to waste , nor do they make it a habit of printing thousands of books that retailers have not ordered.

 

You've brought up this claim before, and it is just as invalid now as it was then. It is a straw man claim. No one said publishers "print to waste" (though, in fact, some publishers do, and have...but that's a WHOLLLLE different discussion).

 

That is not in dispute.

 

No one said that publishers are printing "thousands of books that retailers have no ordered", either (although, AGAIN, that is not entirely true EITHER.)

 

That is not in dispute.

 

However....

 

Your claim that "this would also ( obviously ) apply to incentives" is NOT accurate. It does NOT apply to incentives, documentably so (again: Diamond has ROUTINELY sold incentive variants beyond their initial distribution, and will almost certainly do so again. I sat and watched Chuck Gower order a 1:25 variant a YEAR after it was published.) Why? Because the publishers print what they want, without regard to how many qualifying orders they receive, aside from meeting the minimum required.

 

Incentives ARE NOT like regular books, and do not behave like regular books. Publishers, but particularly Marvel and DC, have used incentives as PROMOTIONAL materials, as well as to incentivize initial orders. Why?

 

Because printing a few hundred or a few thousand extra copies of an INCENTIVE is NOT the same as printing tens or hundreds of thousands more of a REGULAR book.

 

5) Yes, most orders will have a small percentage of overages printed (as little as 5-10%, give or take) to account for damages, creator and courtesy copies, etc., rounded up to the nearest case pack, which are typically 150-250 books per case (sorry, RMA, them's the facts , whether "you" choose to believe them or not).

 

Fair enough.

 

Now prove that.

 

I don't mean prove that that's the case for regular books. I mean prove that's the case for incentives.

 

With documents. I'll take on-the-record quotes from Marvel/DC/other circulation depts., printer's affidavits, anything that is documented properly.

 

I'll wait.

 

 

Those damages and courtesy copies are absolutely NOT deliberately held back for release onto the secondary market through five below packs , three packs and variant burn off sales at a later date.

 

Not in dispute.

 

To even suggest such preposterous nonsense is to suggest that publishers are deliberately TRYING to waste money,

 

To deliberately suggest what...? No one suggested what you're saying someone suggested.

 

You can't make things up, attribute them to others, and then rail against those things. That's called a "straw man argument."

 

and in any event , the vast majority of variants offered through those channels are NOT even incentive based variants.

 

Not in dispute, so not relevant.

 

6) The excess inventory that you do see in five below packs, variant burn off sales, etc. (representing an infinitiessimal amount of variants actually printed in a single year)

 

Enough qualified claims, Jay. Let's make with the quantification. How much is an "infinitesimal amount"...? Hard numbers.

 

Don't ignore this. Hard numbers, please.

 

Do you know?

 

Do you have any?

 

is just that - excess inventory. Sometimes a publisher will over order on an "event book" that doesn't meet the expected demand. Sometimes they will have virtually an entire case pack left over. The publishing industry is not an exact science, and with the exception of UF 4 Djuedjevic (first Miles Morales event) and ASM 4 Ramos (first Silk event), all that is ever offered in those variant burn off sales or found in those multi-packs is the exact same sort of DREK that you would expect to find being blown out at under cost.

 

You mean, Diamond sells off stuff that DID NOT SELL at a discount...?

 

You don't say!

 

But it is very possible and very reasonable to make educated estimates based on the information that we do know.

 

Ok.

 

Go for it.

 

Make an educated estimate based on the information we do know.

 

7) Hence , it is very reasonable to estimate an approximate amount of copies of most ratio variants based on the data that we do know. Since Comichron reports books "ordered", and since publishers do not make it a habit of printing thousands of books that no retailer has ordered ,

 

Marvel printed 10,000 copies...or so...of Spiderman #1 Platinum.

 

No one ordered those.

 

Valiant printed 5,000 each of their various gold books.

 

No one ordered those.

 

DC printed 10,000 or so copies of Superman #75 Platinum.

 

No one ordered those.

 

Too old...?

 

DC printed 200-600 copies of Batman #608 promotional.

 

No one ordered those.

 

Marvel printed a boatload of "white" variants from 1999-2001-ish.

 

No one ordered those.

 

DC printed 500+ copies of the Suicide Squad Rebirth #1 sketch variant, to give out at the Diamond Retailer Summit in Baltimore this year.

 

No one ordered those.

 

Are you getting the picture....?

 

Publishers routinely print hundreds and thousands of copies of books that no one ordered, for their own purposes.

 

we can indeed use the numbers reported by it (Comichron) to guesstimate how many ratio variants were produced and circulated.

 

No, you cannot. You cannot for all the reasons I have explained ad nauseum. You cannot "guesstimate" when the ratios have nothing whatsoever to do with the print runs. Repeat: the ratios have nothing whatsoever to do with the print runs.

 

One more time: the ratios have nothing whatsoever to do with the print runs.

 

Never have.

 

Never will.

 

Those ratios are a MARKETING tool, and only mean ONE THING: the amount a retailer has to order of the REGULAR book to get A copy of the INCENTIVE book.

 

Period.

 

Them's the FACTS, Jaydog, whether "you" choose to believe them or not.

 

And BECAUSE they have no relevance other than ORDERING, they cannot be applied to Comichron numbers to come up with a "guesstimate"...because the Comichron numbers are, THEMSELVES, estimates, the Comichron numbers only represent SALES, not PRINT RUNS, and the Comichron numbers only represent sales in NORTH AMERICA.

 

Too. Many. Unknown. Variables. To. Make. A. Guess.

 

8) No, it will not be an exact number. It doesn't have to be. That is "RMA's Rule",

 

You're doing it again.

 

Stop making things up, and then attributing them to others. Even coming up with cute names and quotation marks and everything, as if it's true. It's not. So stop doing it.

 

It's poor form.

 

Estimates, by their nature, are INexact. That's why they are called "estimates" and not "hard numbers."

 

There is a difference...and this is the very crux of this discussion...between EDUCATED, REASONABLE estimates, and made up guesses.

 

and, all due respect to him, he is wrong. Indeed , using the Comichron based way of calculating the amount of copies produced (rounded up to the nearest case pack) is the BEST way to calculate "the most" copies produced as even that is assuming that all orders qualified for incentives , when it is common knowledge that many (if not most) will not, especially oon the higher ratio incentives.

 

Yes, and eating tiny bits of Arsenic is the BEST way to eat it, because maybe it won't kill you, and maybe you'll build up a resistance to it, but you're still eating Arsenic.

 

You can't help but contradict yourself. Look what you said: "as even that is assuming that all orders qualified for incentives."

 

(emphasis added)

 

See that? You recognize that there are variables we don't know, that skew the numbers.

 

So, you were saying about "accurate estimates"...?

 

I know that RMA means well, and most of his points , if taken individually , are actually quite accurate.

 

I don't "mean well", Jay, for misinformation, lies, and half-truths.

 

However, taken in whole they allude to (if not stating outright ) a widespread publisher conspiracy that involves both lying and fraud in the incentive program by publishers.

 

Wrong again. What lying? What fraud?

 

What you're saying is an invention of your own making, Jay.

 

How can something be "lying" and "fraud" when publishers have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER made any claims about how the incentive program is run...?

 

What is the lie, Jay? That publishers claim one thing, and do another? What's the claim? Show me a publisher who has said "we only printed X amount of books" (documented, not hearsay) and it was proven that they, in fact, printed "thousands", or even "hundreds", more.

 

You can't, because it does not exist.

 

If it does not exist, they can't therefore be "lying" about it.

 

It is fiction that you have, for whatever reason, bought into and insist on repeating, but it is still fiction. The publishers MAKE NO CLAIMS. If they MAKE NO CLAIMS, they can't then LIE about those claims, can they...?

 

So he should really stop grinding this little axe grinding of his against variants until there is actual real and credible evidence of that.

 

Wrong again. My "axe grinding" is against people, such as yourself, who invent things and spread misinformation as if it was fact, to people who don't know any better and don't have the time, energy, patience, and/or ability to learn these things for themselves.

 

Again , yes, sometimes a very small amount incentives end up on the secondary market through discount channels.

 

Define "very small."

 

Here, I'll define "routine."

 

I sat next to Chuck Gower at the Diamond Retailer Summit in Baltimore, and watched him order a heavily discounted incentive variant.

 

Chuck has posted, on more than one occasion THIS YEAR, incentive variant sales.

 

Also, there were 500+ incentive variants given out by DC at various retailer seminars during the year.

 

Multiple times in a YEAR...or even on an ongoing, REGULAR basis...is ROUTINE.

 

"Very small amount"...?

 

However this is a result of the occasional gaffes that result from inexact nature of the publishing business, not rampant and epdidemic fraud and deceit.

 

-J.

 

No one said anything...except you...about "rampant and epdidemic (sic) fraud and deceit" except you.

 

"Fraud and deceit" aren't even close to being the issue. There's no fraud and deceit involved. For there to be fraud and deceit, there would have to be claims made. There are no claims made. Publishers make no claims about incentive variants (for the most part.)

 

No claims = no lying about said "claims."

 

Publisher print what they want...they always have...for their own purposes. Trying to use the "ratios", which are nothing but ordering tools, to determine print runs of incentives is so flawed as to be essentially useless.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I like incentive and retailer variants, but I always assume publishers keep a number of all incentive books because if demand and to be released on the market later .

 

Publishers don't care about things like "after market demand" for their products. They really don't. I'm sure, if anyone thinks about it at all, they say "cool"...and move on to what's coming out NEXT.

 

Publishers make their money on new material, not back issues.

 

They keep incentives and the like for promotional purposes, to give out at conventions, or retailer summits, or the like. I doubt any publisher has any organized way to dispose of these books through after-market channels...and if they did, I suspect they'd be roundly criticized for it.

 

Not that they don't sell them for a markup directly...they do, certainly, at cons and the like. But they certainly don't hold on to them "because they might be worth something."

[Jaydogrules]

RMA, you need to understand that the entire premise of your belief system - that "publishers print whatever they want" is in fact even more speculative-based than the foundation a person who is making reasonable estimates based on actual retailer orders as reported by Comichron is.

 

The biggest difference being , one is based on publishing standards and publicly reported data, and the other (yours) is based largely on fear -mongering and anecdotes extrapolated from an infinitesimal sample size that, again , is simply a product of the inexact nature of the publishing industry.

 

And by the way, none of the books you mention , Bats 608RRP, Spider-Man Platinum , etc were ratio variants , so I don't see the relevance of brining them up in this conversation. And I think you know the difference between a publisher printing up a couple of cases of a special book as a promotional giveaway or reward to retailers versus the silly notion of them deliberately over printing ratio variants that no one has ordered just to store in a warehouse and later sell for pennies on the dollar.

 

-J.

[Aweandlorder]

So....just to clear things up a little...

 

1) The numbers reported on Comichron are North American sales- Diamond UK reports for the UK and panini handles most of the foreign language reprints. Those are different markets (and different books) and aren't supposed to be reported by Comichron.

And even if the UK (and foreign language markets) received all of the same variants that we do (they don't ) , those figures, at best , would add 10-15% over the Comichron totals (but for the regular cover only).

 

2) Comichron is reporting ORDERS received from dealers by the final-order-cut-off ("FOC"), which is usually about three weeks prior to the book's projected release.

 

3) The entire purpose of the FOC is to tell the publishers how many copies of a particular book to print. Which means, no they are not blindly printing in a vacuum, in advance , say 100,000 copies of a book that only ultimately has 47,000 copies printed. Doing so would obviously negate the entire purpose of having an FOC and would be spectacularly pointless and wasteful.

 

4) This would also ( obviously) apply to variants as well (incentive , and otherwise ). Therefore , no, publishers do not deliberately print to waste , nor do they make it a habit of printing thousands of books that retailers have not ordered.

 

5) Yes, most orders will have a small percentage of overages printed (as little as 5-10%, give or take) to account for damages, creator and courtesy copies, etc., rounded up to the nearest case pack, which are typically 150-250 books per case (sorry, RMA, them's the facts , whether "you" choose to believe them or not). Those damages and courtesy copies are absolutely NOT deliberately held back for release onto the secondary market through five below packs , three packs and variant burn off sales at a later date. To even suggest such preposterous nonsense is to suggest that publishers are deliberately TRYING to waste money, and in any event , the vast majority of variants offered through those channels are NOT even incentive based variants.

 

6) The excess inventory that you do see in five below packs, variant burn off sales, etc. (representing an infinitiessimal amount of variants actually printed in a single year) is just that - excess inventory. Sometimes a publisher will over order on an "event book" (like a new "#1", new character intro, etc) that doesn't meet the expected demand. Sometimes they will have virtually an entire case pack left over. The publishing industry is not an exact science, and with the exception of UF 4 Djuedjevic (first Miles Morales event) and ASM 4 Ramos (first Silk event), all that is ever offered in those variant burn off sales or found in those multi-packs is the exact same sort of DREK that you would expect to find being blown out at under cost.

 

But it is very possible and very reasonable to make educated estimates based on the information that we do know.

 

7) Hence , it is very reasonable to estimate an approximate amount of copies of most ratio variants based on the data that we do know. Since Comichron reports books "ordered", and since publishers do not make it a habit of printing thousands of books that no retailer has ordered , we can indeed use the numbers reported by it (Comichron) to guesstimate how many ratio variants were produced and circulated.

 

8) No, it will not be an exact number. It doesn't have to be. That is "RMA's Rule", and, all due respect to him, he is wrong. Indeed , using the Comichron based way of calculating the amount of copies produced (rounded up to the nearest case pack) is the BEST way to calculate "the most" copies produced as even that is assuming that all orders qualified for incentives , when it is common knowledge that many (if not most) will not, especially on the higher ratio incentives.

 

I know that RMA means well, and most of his points , if taken individually , are actually quite accurate.

 

However, taken in whole they allude to (if not stating outright ) a widespread publisher conspiracy that would involve both lying and fraud in the incentive program by publishers. So he should really stop grinding this little axe of his against variants until there is actual real and credible evidence of that.

 

Again , yes, sometimes a very small amount incentives end up on the secondary market through discount channels.

 

However this is a result of the occasional gaffes that result from the inexact nature of the publishing business, not rampant and epidemic fraud and deceit.

 

-J.

 

You should start using spoiler tags bro

 

 

[Guardian Comics]

So....just to clear things up a little...

 

1) The numbers reported on Comichron are North American sales- Diamond UK reports for the UK and panini handles most of the foreign language reprints. Those are different markets (and different books) and aren't supposed to be reported by Comichron.

And even if the UK (and foreign language markets) received all of the same variants that we do (they don't ) , those figures, at best , would add 10-15% over the Comichron totals (but for the regular cover only).

 

2) Comichron is reporting ORDERS received from dealers by the final-order-cut-off ("FOC"), which is usually about three weeks prior to the book's projected release.

 

3) The entire purpose of the FOC is to tell the publishers how many copies of a particular book to print. Which means, no they are not blindly printing in a vacuum, in advance , say 100,000 copies of a book that only ultimately has 47,000 copies printed. Doing so would obviously negate the entire purpose of having an FOC and would be spectacularly pointless and wasteful.

 

4) This would also ( obviously) apply to variants as well (incentive , and otherwise ). Therefore , no, publishers do not deliberately print to waste , nor do they make it a habit of printing thousands of books that retailers have not ordered.

 

5) Yes, most orders will have a small percentage of overages printed (as little as 5-10%, give or take) to account for damages, creator and courtesy copies, etc., rounded up to the nearest case pack, which are typically 150-250 books per case (sorry, RMA, them's the facts , whether "you" choose to believe them or not). Those damages and courtesy copies are absolutely NOT deliberately held back for release onto the secondary market through five below packs , three packs and variant burn off sales at a later date. To even suggest such preposterous nonsense is to suggest that publishers are deliberately TRYING to waste money, and in any event , the vast majority of variants offered through those channels are NOT even incentive based variants.

 

6) The excess inventory that you do see in five below packs, variant burn off sales, etc. (representing an infinitiessimal amount of variants actually printed in a single year) is just that - excess inventory. Sometimes a publisher will over order on an "event book" (like a new "#1", new character intro, etc) that doesn't meet the expected demand. Sometimes they will have virtually an entire case pack left over. The publishing industry is not an exact science, and with the exception of UF 4 Djuedjevic (first Miles Morales event) and ASM 4 Ramos (first Silk event), all that is ever offered in those variant burn off sales or found in those multi-packs is the exact same sort of DREK that you would expect to find being blown out at under cost.

 

But it is very possible and very reasonable to make educated estimates based on the information that we do know.

 

7) Hence , it is very reasonable to estimate an approximate amount of copies of most ratio variants based on the data that we do know. Since Comichron reports books "ordered", and since publishers do not make it a habit of printing thousands of books that no retailer has ordered , we can indeed use the numbers reported by it (Comichron) to guesstimate how many ratio variants were produced and circulated.

 

8) No, it will not be an exact number. It doesn't have to be. That is "RMA's Rule", and, all due respect to him, he is wrong. Indeed , using the Comichron based way of calculating the amount of copies produced (rounded up to the nearest case pack) is the BEST way to calculate "the most" copies produced as even that is assuming that all orders qualified for incentives , when it is common knowledge that many (if not most) will not, especially on the higher ratio incentives.

 

I know that RMA means well, and most of his points , if taken individually , are actually quite accurate.

 

However, taken in whole they allude to (if not stating outright ) a widespread publisher conspiracy that would involve both lying and fraud in the incentive program by publishers. So he should really stop grinding this little axe of his against variants until there is actual real and credible evidence of that.

 

Again , yes, sometimes a very small amount incentives end up on the secondary market through discount channels.

 

However this is a result of the occasional gaffes that result from the inexact nature of the publishing business, not rampant and epidemic fraud and deceit.

 

-J.

 

You should start using spoiler tags bro

 

 

Or just stop posting the same drivel ad nauseum, over and over and over again. He doesn't know he is right for a 100% fact, yet continues to post like he does.

 

Jim

[Bird]

I think "retailer incentive ratios" is a better term than "distribution numbers" as clearly the books are neither printed nor distributed according to these numbers.

Edited October 15, 2016 by Bird

[drotto]

Another question I have (and I think I know the answer), is when the Diamond sales numbers are reported that includes all versions of the book? So when you have 50,000 reported sales that number includes all the variant covers?

 

I know that still means nothing when it comes to actual print runs as we have already determined that there are many copies distributed either to the artists, as special store runs, or Marvel keeps for various reasons that do not show up in the Diamond numbers.

Edited October 15, 2016 by drotto

[BarryAllen]

[Buzzetta]

There is a difference between print run and distribution run. Some don't want to admit that.

[mysterio]

RMA, you need to understand that the entire premise of your belief system - that "publishers print whatever they want" is in fact even more speculative-based than the foundation a person who is making reasonable estimates based on actual retailer orders as reported by Comichron is.

 

The biggest difference being , one is based on publishing standards and publicly reported data, and the other (yours) is based largely on fear -mongering and anecdotes extrapolated from an infinitesimal sample size that, again , is simply a product of the inexact nature of the publishing industry.

 

And by the way, none of the books you mention , Bats 608RRP, Spider-Man Platinum , etc were ratio variants , so I don't see the relevance of brining them up in this conversation. And I think you know the difference between a publisher printing up a couple of cases of a special book as a promotional giveaway or reward to retailers versus the silly notion of them deliberately over printing ratio variants that no one has ordered just to store in a warehouse and later sell for pennies on the dollar.

 

-J.

 

Can you quantify how much more speculative his speculation is than your speculation? If not, then he has made his point.