Stan lee file copy? 1 1

[grayzr]

hey guys was browsing Heritage Auctions sold listings when i can across this insanity.

Only 5k?! 

I know it was a long time ago but still my god what a steal.

I don't buy sig books but this is crazy.

How many books did stan have saved as file copies?

 

[Spyder!]

Not sure, but I remember seeing a cool copy of ASM #3 in the old Heritage sales that was Stan Lee signed file copy too.  So awesome.

[BlowUpTheMoon]

I know there's a Fantastic Four #1 Stan Lee file copy that he auctioned off for charity many years ago.  It was a beater. 

[shadroch]

Stan, for years, said he regretted never saving any of the early Marvel stuff. He later said whatever books he had saved were damaged in a flood. Then CGC came along, prices skyrocketed and he suddenly remembered he had them all along. 

[kav]

7 minutes ago, shadroch said:

Stan, for years, said he regretted never saving any of the early Marvel stuff. He later said whatever books he had saved were damaged in a flood. Then CGC came along, prices skyrocketed and he suddenly remembered he had them all along. 

Dang I just remembered Steve Ditko signed a bunch of my books-

[NoMan]

5 minutes ago, shadroch said:

Stan, for years, said he regretted never saving any of the early Marvel stuff. He later said whatever books he had saved were damaged in a flood. Then CGC came along, prices skyrocketed and he suddenly remembered he had them all along. 

[grayzr]

I wonder if some where he has an off the press copy of AF 15?

[bluechip]

22 hours ago, shadroch said:

Stan, for years, said he regretted never saving any of the early Marvel stuff. He later said whatever books he had saved were damaged in a flood. Then CGC came along, prices skyrocketed and he suddenly remembered he had them all along. 

As I understand it that is not accurate.   The flood was specifically referred to in 1970 or 71 as happening in a house he had lived in years before (meaning the destruction of the books also occurre years before.   It was reportedly a "complete collection" of "all the books he worked on" from his earliest days at Timely dating from the early 40s to late 50s or early 60s (when the flood reportedly occurred).  The Heritage collection included no books from the 40s and I think, none from the 50s (even though any of those most valuable golden age books could have been obtained).   The books listed in the Heritage offerings were all from the time after he lived in the house which flooded, and were mostly low grade books, and the most represented keys in the collection, with the most duplicates, were not the early and most valuable silver age books but the later 1960s books.   And the most represented titles were Sgt. Fury and Millie the Model (in other words, not the kind of books that were skyrocketing the highest via CGC and not what one would assemble in order to take advantage of same.  What was said in the OP has been said before and corrected before, and perhaps it will continue to be said regardless of how well or how many times it's corrected.

 

 

Edited May 15, 2018 by bluechip

[grayzr]

My question is why did he want to sell them?

Did he need the money?

[Michelangelo]

i don't generally like signature series books, but this is a rare exception.

Stan's file copy signed by the man himself.

nice

[Captain Canuck]

3 minutes ago, Michelangelo said:

i don't generally like signature series books, but this is a rare exception.

Stan's file copy signed by the man himself.

nice

I prefer them at times. No different than getting a novel signed by the author. 

[shadroch]

54 minutes ago, bluechip said:

As I understand it that is not accurate.   The flood was specifically referred to in 1970 or 71 as happening in a house he had lived in years before (meaning the destruction of the books also occurre years before.   It was reportedly a "complete collection" of "all the books he worked on" from his earliest days at Timely dating from the early 40s to late 50s or early 60s (when the flood reportedly occurred).  The Heritage collection included no books from the 40s and I think, none from the 50s (even though any of those most valuable golden age books could have been obtained).   The books listed in the Heritage offerings were all from the time after he lived in the house which flooded, and were mostly low grade books, and the most represented keys in the collection, with the most duplicates, were not the early and most valuable silver age books but the later 1960s books.   And the most represented titles were Sgt. Fury and Millie the Model (in other words, not the kind of books that were skyrocketing the highest via CGC and not what one would assemble in order to take advantage of same.  What was said in the OP has been said before and corrected before, and perhaps it will continue to be said regardless of how well or how many times it's corrected.

 

 

A simple look at the prices these books got when offered seems to show how the prices skyrocketed. Stan repeated that he had not saved any books on many occasions. It seemed like it came up every Q/A session he did. It's a great story. I own  file copy myself, but I believe it's a work of fiction.

[bluechip]

Just now, shadroch said:

A simple look at the prices these books got when offered seems to show how the prices skyrocketed. Stan repeated that he had not saved any books on many occasions. It seemed like it came up every Q/A session he did. It's a great story. I own  file copy myself, but I believe it's a work of fiction.

Or bad memory.   The quotes that he didn't save them can be found after the sale which you believe was calculate and "faked", which tends to support the definition of the books not as a collection acquired in the traditional sense but as reference copies, which is how they were described.   But you will believe what you will and apparently also strive without relent to make others believe the same, regardless of contradictions.   You believe he did save books but that they were "destroyed in a flood" until it's indicated that would not have affected the silver age books, and then you switch to not believing he ever saved them.   So it seems your conclusion has come first and will be the same in any case.  

[shadroch]

The stories of him not saving his books go back to the mid to late 60s.  People wanted to know about his Marvel books, not stuff from the past and he said he didn't save them. 

Do you think he pulled out a reference comic when he wrote Bob Banner instead of Bruce, as one example. 

I do believe what I believe and will express it whenever it comes up. I personally don't care if you believe it or not. If one chooses to believe, good for them. 

My conclusion comes from twenty years of Stan regretting he didn't save his books and then suddenly remembering that he had, just when they would be at peak value.  Not unlike how Chuck said for years that the MH2 collection was either all sold or had been mixed into his regular stock, yet somehow two pallets of the stuff sat unnoticed for twenty plus years until he got to slab them and try and get ridiculous money for them..

People do strange things for money. 

[tv horror]

I read somewhere he sent a nephew copies and they have their own listing is that true?

[shadroch]

There were some "Uncle Stan" books for sale on ebay a few years back. I'm not sure if anyone verified the story or not. I had a friend on LI that had a distant relative that worked for some company and Marvel and Dc sent them free copies, most of which ended up in his hands. 

[bluechip]

On 5/15/2018 at 12:29 PM, shadroch said:

The stories of him not saving his books go back to the mid to late 60s.  People wanted to know about his Marvel books, not stuff from the past and he said he didn't save them. 

Do you think he pulled out a reference comic when he wrote Bob Banner instead of Bruce, as one example. 

I do believe what I believe and will express it whenever it comes up. I personally don't care if you believe it or not. If one chooses to believe, good for them. 

My conclusion comes from twenty years of Stan regretting he didn't save his books and then suddenly remembering that he had, just when they would be at peak value.  Not unlike how Chuck said for years that the MH2 collection was either all sold or had been mixed into his regular stock, yet somehow two pallets of the stuff sat unnoticed for twenty plus years until he got to slab them and try and get ridiculous money for them..

People do strange things for money. 

"Peak value" was hardly achieved with an AF15 selling for 5K (roughly what Lee was getting at the time in a little over a single day -- from just one of many sources of income).    Nor was "peak value" achieved with the bulk of the collection because it was overwhelmingly low grade as in used and read and even incomplete books, most of them with very distinctive low grade defects and markings, or even panels cut out of the cover -- all of which, if they were fake, would have carried very high risk of being "outed" by prior owners  if Stan wanted to commit fraud by pretending to "find" books but choosing to do so, for some insane reason, predominately in poor to mid grades. 

It's this simple:   You don't like the idea of the books, in general, and so you say Stan set out to deceive people by pretending to find books in order to make money in a market fixated on high grade books and you will continue to say it no matter how intensely it flies in the face of logic that he would do so, and do so in such an extremely careless manner to achieve close to the smallest value he could achieve, all at great risk to his reputation as well as Heritage's.

You simultaneously embrace the contradictory notion that he just decided not to (or somehow failed) to fake-find a multiples of high grade keys or even a nice set of ASM books (or even a large number of ASM books; the vast majority were missing).   You say that as if you don't know, or you're hoping the people reading do not know, that finding such books was and still is so indescribably easy for any good dealer that "fake finding" such a collection could be achieved on a regular if not a daily basis. 

And now you're actually cherry picking some mistake in the Hulk's name as somehow proof that he never kept any copies around for reference, even though it's just the sort of mistake that would make any person think they should have copies around for reference (as was and is the industry standard).   

Yes, you will beat this drum but you dodge any information to the contrary of your assertions, not addressing at all for example, why anybody let alone Stan would try to do such a scam and then would fake-find more low grade Sgt. Fury and copies of Millie the Model than he would, say, the most desirable books, and why not some golden age while he was at it?   But because you're working backward from a conclusion you want to push you will not address it unless and until you come up with some explanation that fits with your predetermined conclusion /agenda.

Saving books for reference or just having them accumulate in the office or on shelves after publication is not the same as "collecting" books and saving them thinking they will be worth money some day.  It's always been clear that when fans ask Stan about "collecting" books, that is how they mean it.  

William Gaines is the only comic related person I know of who did both those things -- kept copies for reference and/or files while at the same time carefully wrapping and preserving pristine copies.   Bill Gaines did, therefore, "collect" comic books while Stan Lee (and apparently every other creator until recently), did not.   If somebody were to claim they found early Marvel keys wrapped and preserved by Stan the way Gaines did, I would be skeptical (or, in other words, not looking for every possible thing, however incidental, inconsequential, shaky or contradictory, to back them up because I started with "they must be real" and would accept no other conclusion)

 

Edited May 18, 2018 by bluechip

[bluechip]

Stan Lee worked for Marvel between the time he was hired in December of 1940 and the 1970s, when he scaled back his writing and editing chores to be the publisher and focus on other media.  In that time, he wrote and/or edited literally thousands of comicbooks.  But, when Heritage acquired Stan Lee’s “file copies” for auctions in 2002 and 2003, he had only a few hundred books for them. 

Stan said at the time the books were the only copies he’d kept “all these years.”  Stan has said in other interviews that he “never really collected” the comics he made, and wished he’d had the foresight to collect copies for later resale, because they increased so much in value.

According to a friend of Lee’s, who was quoted in a Rolling Stone article in 1971. Stan had initially kept a copy of “every book he’d worked on” -- but they were all destroyed years earlier, by a leak in the wall.   It makes sense to think that as a young man he might have routinely saved each book (or that his wife did).   And it makes sense that the destruction of all those books might have caused Lee (or his wife) to give up on saving a copy of every book.   It makes even more sense when you consider that during the 1950s Lee became disillusioned with his work in comics, and had almost quit prior to creating the Fantastic Four in 1961, which led to much unexpected, and unprecedented, success. 

While all that makes sense, some old school collectors have seized on Lee’s comments that he “didn’t collect” comics (and/or the Rolling Stone report that Lee’s collection was destroyed) to assert that Stan Lee must not have had any copies to give to Heritage in 2002.   And that, therefore, Lee must have “faked” a collection in order to “cash in”.

Coincidentally, the people who make that assertion also happen to be the same people who’ve made it clear they don’t like the notion that creator-owned copies should have any added value.   But let’s consider their assertions, anyway.

The person quoted in the Rolling Stone in 1971 said the destruction of Lee’s collection took place “in the house he used to have...” (emphasis added).  That would explain why Lee had no books from the “golden age,” which would have been worth a fortune, even in 1971 – a time when you could still find Amazing Fantasy 15 for a few dollars (or even a few cents, if you found the right store).  It gives no credence at all, however, to the notion that Lee – who still had an office at Marvel in 2002 -- couldn’t possibly have had any books on hand from the 1960s and 70s, for reference or for any other reason.

That doesn’t stop the detractors, who say that Stan Lee must have faked a collection to cash in.  But the facts just don’t support the notion of a “money grab.”  This was before the MCU movies, and Stan Lee was not yet a household name.  The standards of the old school comics collecting market in 2002 meant that Stan’s copy of Amazing Fantasy 15 sold for only one-fifth of what a higher-graded copy had sold for.   And Stan’s share of that after commissions was approximately what Stan made under his Marvel contract in a single day.  Yet the conspiracy theorist collectors insist that others believe Stan must have been willing to risk ruining his reputation and even committing fraud, for that money.  They further insist you must also believe that Lee was willing to do so in just about the stupidest and riskiest and least rewarding manner.

The books that Stan had to offer were not what a “collector” would accumulate if he or she were saving them for eventual resale.   They were, instead, copies like what a professional might have that were kept around for reference or just because they accumulated in the natural course of the business of making and publishing comics. 

Nearly all the books were in lower grades, and the only titles he had in complete sets were the short run series “The Silver Surfer”, “Not Brand Ecch” and “Bible Tales for Young Folk”.  (The handful of “Bible Tales” books were the only ones Stan had which were dated prior to 1960).  

There were only two early Avengers books, one X-Men book and about 25 Spider-man books.  By contrast there were a little over 50 copies each of “Millie the Model” and “Sgt. Fury and his Howling Commandos.”

Some books were not just low grade but even incomplete and had very distinctive defects and markings, or even panels cut out of the cover.   Why would anyone buy second hand books like that to sell as his own, when it would be easy, less risky, and far more rewarding financially, to accumulate nice, complete sets of all the key titles in about very fine condition.  Silver age Marvels in that condition are numerous and look, essentially, the same.  Unlike low grade books with defects that are unique and highly identifiable, and would carry a much higher risk of being "outed" by a prior owner.  (chances are very slight that anyone would spot a “fine” copy of a book as one they used to own. But they would instantly recognize a low grade “Strange Tales” with a panel they had personally cut from the cover).  

Finding really nice copies of all Marvel silver age books is not, and never was, difficult to do.  In fact, Silver Age marvel keys in nice condition are still so easy for any good dealer to uncover that "fake finding" such a collection could be achieved on a daily basis. 

So, It makes no sense at all that Lee would seek out low grade copies.  Just as it makes no sense that Lee would neglect to buy easily obtainable copies of highly collected titles like Spider-man, and instead put more attention and money into buying and faking ownership of nicer copies of “Millie the Model”, “Not Brand Ecch” and even more obscure titles like “Our Love” and “My Love” (He gave Heritage about twice as many copies of “My Love” as he did copies of Avengers, X-Men, Hulk and Daredevil, combined) 

So why do some collectors leap into any online discussion of Lee’s file copies to denigrate them or accuse them of being “fake”?   Well, as pointed out, some collectors simply don't like the idea of creator-owned books having any value beyond their condition.  While we should assume most collectors come by their opinions honestly and rationally, some may be seen as veering into the irrational, or even the downright silly. Some collectors believe the only true “stars” in their hobby can be collectors such as themselves and that “pedigrees”, therefore, can only be books from the collection of a true collector.  Others are, simply, offended by the use of the term “file copy” which they believe should be reserved for unread copies, kept on file, by the publisher.  Some old school collectors traditionally valued condition above all else and believed that anything not in high grade copy was for “readers” only, not for “collecting,” and, above all, not for “investment.” 

Most of those old school collectors will be honest about Lee’s books and say they believe the books were genuinely Stan’s, but they just don’t want them.   Only a very few take it to the absurd extreme, but they are very vocal and very insistent.  Any mention of the “Stan Lee file copies” will bring them out to insist the books have little or no added value.  Depending on how people do or not respond, they will veer between insisting the books aren’t “real” and insisting that even if the books are real they still don’t have added value.   Which argument you get depends on how much you believe they are real.  They will insist that Lee never saved any books, and if you don’t believe that they will pivot to saying Lee did save books but they were all destroyed.   If you point out that it would seem only his golden age books were destroyed, they’ll go back to saying he never collected anything.   Basically, they don’t mind embracing contradictions and don’t care which argument you believe, so long as you believe any one of them and – most importantly – you agree the books have no added value.

Saving books for reference or just having them accumulate in the office or on shelves after publication is not the same as "collecting" books and saving them with the idea they will be worth a lot of money some day.  It's always been clear that when fans ask Stan about "collecting" books, that is what they mean, and it’s clear that Stan understands what they are saying, and responds accordingly. 

William Gaines is the only comic related person I know of who did both those things -- kept copies for reference and/or files while at the same time carefully wrapping and preserving pristine copies.   Bill Gaines did, therefore, "collect" comic books while Stan Lee (and apparently every other creator until recently), did not.  

If, in the future, some collectibles dealer who had sidled up to Stan in his later years somehow “discovers” that Stan had, in fact, complete sets of all the Marvel books with multiple copies of the keys in high grade condition, then any sensible person should be inclined to think some chicanery may be involved.  But the idea that in 2002 Stan risked his reputation, and even, theoretically, his freedom, to buy and resell a few hundred low grade books as his own, and somehow couldn’t do that with any degree of intelligence or planning?   It just doesn’t wash. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by bluechip

[bluechip]

Some clarification about the "flood" that destroyed Stan's comic collection came to light in a recent article in a Long Island paper.    

The background:  It was reported in a Rolling Stone article in early 1971 that Stan Lee had saved "all the comics he'd worked on" from his earliest days at Timely but they were destroyed in a flood in the basement of the "house he used to have on Long Island" 

 

https://www.newsday.com/entertainment/celebrities/stan-lee-marvel-danny-fingeroth-cinema-arts-1.38552623

 The most pertinent quote is here:

Lee, who died a year ago Nov. 12, lived with his wife Joan and daughter J.C. in two homes on Long Island — first on West Broadway in Woodmere from 1949 to 1952, then on Richards Lane in Hewlett Harbor until about 1980, including the 1960s period in which Marvel introduced its superheroes-in-the-real-world approach that revolutionized comics. (They later had a Hamptons weekend home, on Cutler Lane in Remsenburg.)

 

Stan was actually living in Manhattan as of the late 1960s, but according to the article he kept the house in Hewlett Harbor until 1980. 

There's no question that, as of 1971, the house being described as "the one he used to have" was the house that he vacated after 1952.  

Nearly all of Stan's file copies (or "personal copies" or "reference copies" depending on which term you prefer) came from the 1960s, with only a smattering in the 1950s and none, apparently, dated earlier than 1953), all of which fits with the comics-destroying flood occurring at the house he and Joan shared from 1949-1952.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 26, 2019 by bluechip

[SpideyFein]

Thanks for posting this. I didn’t know he had such a background on LI, along with King Kirby. I’m just a little frustrated that I missed the engagement on the 20th at the Cinema Arts Center!!!! That must have been a great presentation.