The Distribution of US Published Comics in the UK (1959~1982) 15 15

[Albert Tatlock]

Ditto Dirk and the Legion.

Printed 1 shilling, stamped 1/-.

Number is to indicate end of shelf life.

[Garystar]

7 hours ago, Get Marwood & I said:

Does this mean I wonder that there were only 9 annual shipments? Why else have that number? 

Perhaps simply the stamps had a roller or interchangeable block which had space for only one digit?

[Albert Tatlock]

Which intrepid explorer will track down the earliest T & P stamp.

It will obviously be a number 1.

[Get Marwood & I]

4 minutes ago, Garystar said:

Perhaps simply the stamps had a roller or interchangeable block which had space for only one digit?

It wouldn't surprise me if it was that basic 

1 minute ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Which intrepid explorer will track down the earliest T & P stamp.

It will obviously be a number 1.

How will we know for sure that it was the first though? 

[Get Marwood & I]

8 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Ditto Dirk and the Legion.

Printed 1 shilling, stamped 1/-.

Number is to indicate end of shelf life.

 

Nah. I still don't buy that aspect Albert.

[Albert Tatlock]

2 minutes ago, Get Marwood & I said:

How will we know for sure that it was the first though? 

Simple. It will have the earliest date on the cover or inside.

Any farthing versions from Victorian times, I wonder?

[Albert Tatlock]

Or 1 groat from Regency publications.

[Get Marwood & I]

2 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Simple. It will have the earliest date on the cover or inside.

Any farthing versions from Victorian times, I wonder?

But as our T&P stamped 1958 cover dated Charltons show, books clearly came over much later than their cover dates. So there could be no guarantee that the 'first' 1 wasn't actually a very late subsequent years 1.

[Get Marwood & I]

14 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Ditto Dirk and the Legion.

Printed 1 shilling, stamped 1/-.

Number is to indicate end of shelf life.

I have lots of examples of printed price UKPV books with T&P stamps - operator error seems just as likely a reason to me. 

[Albert Tatlock]

But the earliest number 1 would presumably not be on a comic at all, but on another type of periodical.

When did T & P begin importing US magazines?

[Get Marwood & I]

2 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Or 1 groat from Regency publications.

Sesterces?

Certes! 

[Albert Tatlock]

1 minute ago, Get Marwood & I said:

I have lots of examples of printed price UKPV books with T&P stamps - operator error seems just as likely a reason to me.

Operator could make an occasional mistake, but if he or she were instructed to stamp ALL of a stack of items, that would mean that a shelf life indicator was intended.

[Get Marwood & I]

2 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

But the earliest number 1 would presumably not be on a comic at all, but on another type of periodical.

Unless there's a Charlton '1' out there, waiting to be found that is the 'first' '1', followed by the Feb 1959  '2's' below (the shown '1' being the subsequent 1960 '1')...

2 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

When did T & P begin importing US magazines?

Dunno. Hoping you might.

[Get Marwood & I]

2 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Operator could make an occasional mistake, but if he or she were instructed to stamp ALL of a stack of items, that would mean that a shelf life indicator was intended.

You and your effin shelf life indicator theory! 

[Get Marwood & I]

Just now, Get Marwood & I said:

3 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Operator could make an occasional mistake, but if he or she were instructed to stamp ALL of a stack of items, that would mean that a shelf life indicator was intended.

You and your effin shelf life indicator theory! 

Spoiler

 

[Get Marwood & I]

4 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Operator could make an occasional mistake, but if he or she were instructed to stamp ALL of a stack of items, that would mean that a shelf life indicator was intended.

If a newsagent didn't need a shelf life indicator for a printed 9d or 10d price variant, why would he need one for a stamped US copy?

[Albert Tatlock]

Here is a thought - what if the early Marvels were not SOR?

If no returns would be entertained, no need to stamp expiry dates.

That could explain why the early imported Marvels are so scarce compared to DC.

If T & P had to pay more for the Marvels, printed to their own specifications with a pence cover price, than they did for the remaindered DCs, they would order less, and also need to make sure that the increased per item outlay was offset by guarantee that retailers could not return them. Only DC, Charlton, etc would be eligible for a credit.

That would also explain why the Marvels, fewer in number as they were, lingered on the newsstands for longer that the DCs, which were freshened up periodically by the removal of out of date material.

Later, as T & P realised they were onto a winner with Marvels, they would be willing to accept returns, and at that point began to stamp them.

When are the earliest stamped Marvels?

[Get Marwood & I]

Albert, Gary, Eric if you're still there I've got to go. I really enjoyed this debate today - it's so unusual for me to have this kind of debate here and I loved it. I couldn't give a monkey's armchair about being right as long as we get to what we think is the truth.

Albert - you're a genius

Great stuff 

[Get Marwood & I]

4 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Here is a thought - what if the early Marvels were not SOR?

I might have the answer to this - or someone I know does

Quote

When are the earliest stamped Marvels?

See earlier post below in this thread for my helicopter findings on Marvel:

 

Gotta go - see you tomorrow hopefully....

[Get Marwood & I]

Afternoon 

I had a quick go at overlaying the 1959 cover dated DC, Charlton and the only two examples of 1959 Famous Monsters onto the same grid to see if I could show that the sequential Charlton's (Feb 59 onwards) were the starting point, i.e. the first wave use of the numbered T&P stamp. Here's what came out.

• Charlton in black
• Famous Monsters in bold
• DC in purple

My thinking was that maybe the Charltons were the first use of the stamp - we have lots of stamped copies date sequentially starting from the Feb 1959 cover dates.  So I split them as shown then added in the DC and two Monsters. Alas, it doesn't seem to fit, with the 8's, 9's and proposed second use 1's having clear gaps month-wise between the DC and Charlton examples. I was thinking maybe the Famous Monsters #1 and #2 may be the elusive first use of the 1 stamp but there are no US copies that I can find with a stamp - only the 1959 UK indicia reprint which, either way, you can't make out the number of.

If we look at all the 8's in the table, the Charltons are cover dated March to June, the DC's November & December - no cover date 'fit' as a group. And yet both sets have an 8 stamp. It's difficult to see how either set could have come over in a different #8 shipment however given how relatively close their cover dates are. So it's a puzzle isn't it?

The 1959 Archie's that I have more or less mirror the DC placements / date configuration. As usual, Charlton sticks out as an anomaly. Could Charlton have had a completely different returns process / cycle, that would explain the variation in months compared to the DC groupings?

Hmmmm