The New Mutants Marvel Graphic Novel #4 Stumped 0

[BFA1971]

I need your help folksI have this issue of New Mutants in the Graphic Novel series (First appearance).It seems there was a reprint of this. However mine is neither the reprint at $6.95 or the original at $4.95. The cover says $5.95! what gives? Anybody know what I have here (pic attached)? Thank you so much for shedding any light on this and what it might be worth in NM?

 

Edited May 11, 2019 by Ghazi

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

I can't vouch for the info here, but I found this:

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2016/12/14/marvel-graphic-novel-4-5-95-cover-price-variant-1st-new-mutants-appearance/

[Lazyboy]

11 minutes ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

I can't vouch for the info here, but I found this:

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2016/12/14/marvel-graphic-novel-4-5-95-cover-price-variant-1st-new-mutants-appearance/

Please don't link to that misinformation-riddled hype site.

There was a discussion here without all the B.S. (at least until a certain poster showed up).

[BFA1971]

1 hour ago, Lazyboy said:

Please don't link to that misinformation-riddled hype site.

There was a discussion here without all the B.S. (at least until a certain poster showed up).

Thank you so much Lazyboy

[BFA1971]

1 hour ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

I can't vouch for the info here, but I found this:

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2016/12/14/marvel-graphic-novel-4-5-95-cover-price-variant-1st-new-mutants-appearance/

I really appreciate your reply GeeksAreMyPeeps. Thank you!

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

Please don't link to that misinformation-riddled hype site.

There was a discussion here without all the B.S. (at least until a certain poster showed up).

There are a few posters who have such a radically different perspective on reality that attempting to discuss anything with them is like trying to discuss Shakespeare with a person who speaks, reads, and writes solely in Mandarin. That is one such example. Discussion is not only totally pointless, as there is absolutely no common ground to be found, but always devolves into hostility.

But yes, that site is functionally useless, which is sad, because of all the effort that's clearly been put into it.

[RockMyAmadeus]

4 hours ago, Ghazi said:

5 hours ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

I can't vouch for the info here, but I found this:

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2016/12/14/marvel-graphic-novel-4-5-95-cover-price-variant-1st-new-mutants-appearance/

I really appreciate your reply GeeksAreMyPeeps. Thank you!

Here is an example of the multitude of errors that the author of that blog post makes:

"Because Canada is a dramatically smaller market by population size.  In the 1980’s, Canada’s population represented about 9.8% of the total North American market for Marvel’s English language comic books (the USA being the other 90.2% of that market).  So when they sized the different print run batches, they had this market size discrepancy in mind — along with the fact that part of that Canadian market would be purchasing the direct edition version (the kind sold in comic shops), so the newsstand demand was only a portion of that 9.8%…"

It's an example of the manipulation and misinterpretation of statistical data to arrive at a pre-determined conclusion, rather than letting the data dictate the conclusion.

1. (And most important): the proportion of the overall population of Canada with the US at the time cannot be used to determine the proportion of comic book sales. It is a start...but it is only a start, and the broadest of starts. Just because the total population of Canada at the time was 9.8% of the US population does not therefore mean that the number of comics sold in Canada was also 9.8% of the number of comics sold in the US...or anywhere near that. So what was it? No one knows.

We can conclude nothing of the proportional size of the Canadian market to the US market, because no one has those numbers and, as far as I have seen, those numbers don't even exist (if they ever did in the first place.)

The only reasonable theory anyone can come up with is that the Canadian comic market was smaller than the US market. How much smaller? No idea. 

For example: Canada...specifically Quebec...produces roughly 75% of the total worldwide consumption of maple syrup. But Canada only has .48% (that's point four eight, or roughly 1:200) of the world's population. Obviously, in such an extreme case, the proportion of the population isn't even in the same universe as the proportion of a single product...maple syrup...that it produces. So how many comic books were being sold in Canada at this time? No one outside of the publishers (and printers) knows, because that information has never been made public.

The second sentence: "In the 1980's, Canada's population represented about 9.8% of the total North American market for Marvel's English language comic books" is completely inaccurate, because it confuses a known number: the proportion of Canadian total population to US total population...with an entirely unknown number: the proportion of Canadian comic book buyers to the proportion of US comic book buyers. From the start, the premise is inaccurate, and anything built on that premise is, therefore, also inaccurate.

So, suggesting that just because 9.8% was an accurate representation of the proportional populations of Canada to the US at the time does not mean that the proportion of comic books sold in Canada to the US was also 9.8%, or anything remotely near it.

2. Marvel's English language comic books were also sold in Mexico, so 90.2%...a made-up number based on another made-up number...does not represent the balance of the "North American market."

Here is another exceptionally egregious violation of citation rules from that article:

"(the newsstand model called for unsold copies to be returned to the publisher for a refund), and the fate of the newsstand returns (often they were recycled/pulped, but other times the publisher re-sold the returns into a secondary market, such as Whitman packs, or test-marketing US reaction to a higher cover-price-point —"

It is true that Marvel had, in the then-recent past, indeed produced "test market" prices, in 1976 and 1977, to test resistance to higher prices. However...there's nothing anywhere that suggests that Canadian newsstand versions were also used to "test market US reaction to a higher cover price point." The 1976 and 1977 test prices were sent to specific cities in the United States, so that sales could be closely tracked; Canadian newsstand versions were distributed throughout Canada, and no doubt, because of the porous border that has always existed between the two nations, they would have naturally filtered into the US as part of the after-market. Therefore, publishers would have no idea where such a copy was sold, other than in Canada (see below), and using them for "test purposes" would be meaningless.

But worse is that the "citation" that the author uses to cite his claim is a comment on his blog from an anonymous person named "nicholos" who, himself, makes a claim with no supporting evidence, and, in the same comment, makes serious errors demonstrating a lack of understanding of how the distribution market worked: 

"Most 75 cent price variants were distributed in both Canada and US. If a Canadian store had too many issues of a title, then they would redistribute where the demand was. A lot of times they just shipped them to a different American or Canadian store. You would find Canadian priced comics in the US, and US copies in Canada. I know this for an absolute fact… I myself bought on both sides of the border at that time. Thx"

He (I assume it's a he) states that "a lot of times they just shipped them to a different American or Canadian store", but makes no effort to identify who "they" were, or what kind of "store" he is referring to, or where such stores were located. As mentioned above, I have no doubt that, due to cross-contamination by dealers and collectors, that copies of both the US and Canadian newsstand versions filtered their way across the border, but that does not therefore mean that they were distributed that way. Now...I'm no expert on the regulations for distribution of periodicals to Canada, but I do believe that there would NOT be, in the normal course of distribution, cross-distribution from distributors (as opposed to after-market "distribution") to BOTH US AND Canadian markets. That is, even if distributors handled both Canadian and US newsstand accounts (unlikely, I imagine), that they could simply send whatever they wanted to whatever newsstand they felt like. Any time a a US newsstand version would show up in Canada, and vice versa, it was incidental, not because it was distributed that way.

Just because this "nicholos" persons "knows for an absolute fact" that he bought US versions in Canada, and vice versa, does not therefore mean they would...or COULD...have been distributed that way.

And, rightfully, the author questions if "Nicholos" has a source/link for this idea...but then, in the above blog post, claims it as a foregone conclusion, citing the very anecdotal comment of "Nicholos" as the "evidence"! You cannot cite your own claims and anecdotes, or the claims and anecdotes of others that are unverifiable. 

That is bad scholarship. 

Also...it is completely untrue that Canadian newsstand versions that were "returned" were later sold in "Whitman Packs", as the author claims. At this point in newsstand distribution, comic books weren't returned whole for credit, and hadn't been for a couple of decades. They were either "stripped", wherein all or a portion of the cover was torn off and THAT was returned to the publisher, or the distributors simply filled out an affidavit and the publisher issued a credit, while the vendor was responsible for destroying the remainder. They DID NOT return "whole books" for credit, and the publishers CERTAINLY did not then take those non-existent "whole copies" and try to "resell them" on the secondary market.

So how did a Canadian newsstand version end up in a Whitman bag....? Who knows? Whitman had been buying comics from Marvel through the Direct market for nearly a decade at this point; it's entirely possible that a handful (or even just 1!) copy was inadvertently sent to them for their collector pack program from Sparta, since that's where they were all printed in the first place. 

The author merely presents unverified claims as fact, making no effort to identify them as unverified. And worse, if you challenge him on any of it, no matter how politely, he'll simply block you from being able to reply. He's even gone so far as to gather up his friends and launch a campaign of falsely accusing people who challenge him of "cyber bullying", and getting them silenced by banning. 

That's not the work of a scholar. That's the work of a hack, motivated by self-interest. And sadly, he has sycophants even among members here, who defend his terrible scholarship and attack the character of those who challenge his work, claiming he's a "good guy" and "sincere", ignoring the fact that people can be, and have been, sincerely wrong, and "sincerity" doesn't make up for the purposeful misleading of anyone with the misfortune of stumbling onto his blog.

And that's truly a shame, because there's clearly been a lot of effort put into it. When and if he shows any interest in changing his methods and motivations, I'm sure many would be happy to help him, but heretofore, I've never seen even a modicum of effort in that direction.

Edited May 11, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[RockMyAmadeus]

https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2017/04/25/95-cent-and-1-dollar-dc-price-variants-how-do-we-know-what-they-are/

This article is particularly painful to read, in its sing-songy, insulting-the-readers'-intelligence, tortured and contradictory "logic."

Ugh.

Except we can reasonably conclude that they are, both by anecdotal evidence AND direct evidence.

And he extensively (as he does everywhere on his blog) quotes Rozanski's "made up out of thin air" numbers as fact. Chuck Rozanski who, it must be remembered, stopped dealing in newsstand distribution in the early to mid 70s, and would only be in a position to know and understand that distribution market secondarily...just like the rest of us.

[RockMyAmadeus]

6 hours ago, Ghazi said:

I need your help folksI have this issue of New Mutants in the Graphic Novel series (First appearance).It seems there was a reprint of this. However mine is neither the reprint at $6.95 or the original at $4.95. The cover says $5.95! what gives? Anybody know what I have here (pic attached)? Thank you so much for shedding any light on this and what it might be worth in NM?

 

To answer your question directly, this is almost certainly (since we have no direct evidence to prove it) a Canadian price version, made at just about the time when parity between the US and Canadian dollar was being lost, and the publishers decided to sell comics in the Canadian market at a higher price to reflect this. This book was published right in that transition period, and, more than likely, is that Canadian version. Starting with issue #5, the books (nearly always) carried a dual US/Canadian price on the covers.

 

[BFA1971]

13 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

To answer your question directly, this is almost certainly (since we have no direct evidence to prove it) a Canadian price version, made at just about the time when parity between the US and Canadian dollar was being lost, and the publishers decided to sell comics in the Canadian market at a higher price to reflect this. This book was published right in that transition period, and, more than likely, is that Canadian version. Starting with issue #5, the books (nearly always) carried a dual US/Canadian price on the covers.

 

Gosh RockMeAmadeus thank you ever so much for your expertise. I read and read all the posts and got more lost! Also sorry to everyone for the 2 copes in the post...still trying to delete one!

[BFA1971]

1 minute ago, Ghazi said:

Gosh RockMeAmadeus thank you ever so much for your expertise. I read and read all the posts and got more lost! Also sorry to everyone for the 2 copes in the post...still trying to delete one!

So would this edition be classified as a reprint? It does say 1982 inside.....or will that take us back on the merry go round!

[Catwomancomics]

21 minutes ago, Ghazi said:

So would this edition be classified as a reprint? It does say 1982 inside.....or will that take us back on the merry go round!

1982 = 1st print

[BFA1971]

21 minutes ago, Catwomancomics said:

1982 = 1st print

Thanks Catwomancomics   Phew... I will probably try to have this CGC'd now ...Just gotta figure out how to do it from here in the UK! Have a good day