Eerie Ashcan #1 1 1

[kingmob-migration]

Dig out my copy of the Eerie Ashcan #1 and was wondering if anyone here can help me identify whether it's original or a photocopy. It is printed on higher qulaity paper than normal photocopy paper otherwise it's hard to tell things. No blue staples or photocopy drift, everything is sharp and lovely. I scanned the cover and back if that helps but I really don't want to scan interior pages yet. But if that would help, I'll see what I can do. thanks for any assistance! -Jeff

 

 

[Moondog]

No one will be able to tell from this scan, King, and even if you scanned the interior, I don't believe anyone - including CGC - can definitively tell either. My copy (which I've since sold) was rejected by CGC as a reprint, photocopy, forgery, or whatever they're calling it nowadays. They may be right, but Overstreet's description of an original is so vague that it's really a crapshoot.

 

Does your copy come with a provenance?

[kingmob-migration]

Hmmm, I thought CGC wasn't accepting copies of this because so much about it is in question but that may be a another avenue to approach if they are. I was thinking the best way to tell is the type of paper it's printed on but other than a C14 test or something akin, I can see the difficulties. Provenance would certianly help answer some questions but sadly, I picked my copy up at a used bookstore in NYC about 10 years ago and they didn't remember where or whom it came from other than it came in with a full run Of Creepy and other similar magazines. But in researching it, I could find no tell-tale signs of it being a photocopy like the ones which popped up in the 70's but then again, there is no definitive answer out there. I guess they best way would be to compare it to an known original and a known photocopy. Anyone have one of either? it'd be cool if we could come up with some kind of guide to knowing a fake from an original.

[kingmob-migration]

Do you mind going into what CGC had to say about it or the process it went through? And do you have any idea where I could find info on what copies are going for these days? thanks!!

[Moondog]

CGC said they "believed" mine was a photcopy based on Overstreet's description. The only problem with that is when I apply Overstreet's description, I can't tell the difference. Now, I've been doing this for over 30 years and if I can't tell, then I know it's a difficult process.

 

The fact that your's came from NYC with complete runs of the mags is a positive.

 

This book is picking up considerable steam. I sold my photocopy/authentic issue for $300 in Chicago in August. It was a VF. Yours looks a bit nicer.

 

I've never seen a copy that is guaranteed authentic.

[kingmob-migration]

Never thought to look in Overstreet for info...does a specific year of Overstreet deal with this or is this something that is attended to in every year? Thanks!

[Moondog]

Same confusing listing every year.

 

Please understand, I'm not complaining about the listing - we need as much info as possible - but there needs to be definitive examples in order to make it useable.

 

For instance, take the authentic copy and show the differences in that and the reprint/fake/forgery. It may take a page or two, but it would be invaluable for collectors who care. Right now the writtend descriptions are so ambiguous that they're useless.

[The Troll King]

The following is James Warren's response to an interview question done almost ten years ago which asked, "How did you find out about the counterfeiting?"

 

This is the kind of story that put excitement into my otherwise dull life as a comic book publisher. One day my secretary, Liz, walks into my office and says, "There are two gentleman from the FBI here to see you." I knew from the tone in her voice this was no joke. (Actually I thought she said, "They are here to arrest you.") I said, "Before you send them in, offer them coffee and give them whatever they want but get on the phone and call my attorney." The two field agents came into my office. They were very cordial—not friendly but polite. We shook hands and I asked for their identification, which appeared to be okay. I asked, "Are you here because I took a towel out of that hotel room last week?" And one of them said, "Mr. Warren, do you recognize this?" and he whips out the ashcan edition of Eerie #1. I said, "Of course I do." They said, "Would you tell us the history behind this?" So I did, and they said, "Now we'll tell you why we're here: These are being counterfeited and sold across state lines. Because you copyrighted it in Washington, it becomes a federal matter under our jurisdiction." I sighed and laughed, saying, "I thought you were going to take me downtown!" However, it was a serious matter because the counterfeit copies were being sold for some outlandish figure. They asked if I had any indication who might be doing this. I told them I had a hunch, because it seemed to be someone close to the company. They had nothing else to go on and I said, "This is just a hunch, so I need your assurance that you're not going to accuse him without any real proof; but if you can prove it, will you tell me?" They gave me their assurance and said they would let me know if the counterfeiter was caught. At this point, I had to resist a wild thought that had just come into my head: I was going to give them the name of "Stan Lee." However, sanity returned to me and I told them the legitimate name of the person I suspected. I never heard from them again. If someone were apprehended and brought to trial I would have probably been called to testify so I assume they never found the perpetrator...

 

...The untrained eye couldn't tell. Only when it hit the Overstreet Price Guide, years later, did collectors find out about the blue staples and printing differences. It became a cause célèbre with the result that many fans and collectors were saved from the counterfeited copies. Still, I think J. Edgar Hoover should have worked harder on this.

 

 

I wish he would have explained more about this! As a collector of Warrens I'd love to find out how to honestly tell the difference.

Not to mention that I don't believe there to be a single web site anywhere that states the differences between the two. Side by side comparisons would be great!

 

There is a legitimate second printing to this issue though to further confuse what's real and what's not!

[kingmob-migration]

Well, can anyone who has a copy scan in the cover and back and maybe describe key points on their copy? Hell, we should be able to do this if no-one else is and there has to be more people here than I whom has a copy we can compare. Maybe we'll get nowhere but we can start cataloging copies and variants and such, yes? I'll do a better scan on mine today and try to find whatever text decripitions are out there and try to compare mine to those in the meantime.

[RedRaven]

I've always assumed that once the inconsistencies between the 'original' counterfeit and the ashcan became public it wouldn't have been long before someone produced new and improved counterfeits without the telltale mistakes.

[kingmob-migration]

I've never been a fan of keeping something a mystery just so others don't take advantage of it. Yeah, you run that risk but I think a lot of people would rather have some type of guide to determine a real copy from a fake than have it in limbo until someone decides to come by and do just what we are (hopefully) trying to do.

[kingmob-migration]

I got this reply from CGC concerning grading it:

 

 

"We cannot grade that book as it is printed in a manner that is easy to duplicate.

 

Gemma Adel

 

CGC Customer Service Supervisor"

 

 

So it sounds like it's up to us to get as much info as we can. Would setting up a myspace account or something to attend to this be advised? We may get more hits/info that way.

[RedRaven]

I've never been a fan of keeping something a mystery just so others don't take advantage of it. Yeah, you run that risk but I think a lot of people would rather have some type of guide to determine a real copy from a fake than have it in limbo until someone decides to come by and do just what we are (hopefully) trying to do.

 

There was a website as well as an old ebay sale that had image comparisons between a fake and the original. I googled for the website but couln't locate it (last visited the site about 2 years ago).

[RedRaven]

I've never been a fan of keeping something a mystery just so others don't take advantage of it. Yeah, you run that risk but I think a lot of people would rather have some type of guide to determine a real copy from a fake than have it in limbo until someone decides to come by and do just what we are (hopefully) trying to do.

 

I think the guide would only allow someone to determine that their issue was not the originally counterfeited copy. It would not allow them to determine their copy was authentic.

[kingmob-migration]

Right, everything I've read (which is not a lot) deals with copies, nowhere have I seen a description of an original or a side by side comparison. Guess we need to find someone with an authentic copy willing to send us scans of it. Still, it would be nice to see what other people have in regards to this even if they know it's a copy or second print (there is a second print, right? thought I read that somewhere in my research). How different copies differ from one another would be interesting to see whether or not a determination can be made one way or the other. Again, gathering this data is going to be key to figuring stuff out on our own, if we even can. It's an interesting project to start, hopefully.

[kingmob-migration]

I did set up a myspace account to try and track info as it comes in. I'm posting this info in the blog section. feel free to add any info you see fit. I found three different scans of different copies of eerie #1 so I posted those as well. No clue whether they are real or not but it's a start. thanks!

 

Oh, the link for it is:

http://www.myspace.com/eerieashcan1

[eccomic]

This.. UNDISPUTABLE PROVENANCE... 

[seanfingh]

That is some super cool provenance!!

[ADAMANTIUM]

That IS awesome  

[comicwiz]

2 hours ago, eccomic said:

This.. UNDISPUTABLE PROVENANCE... 

Cool. What's the story on this?

Reading the letter, I'm trying to understand why a second printing even happened if these were destroyed.