Saint_Doyle

I've made a comment in another thread about this discovery, but now a second copy has been un-earthed by androolx so it's time to officially announce it.

There exists an ultra-rare variant of Marvel Star Thundercats #2: M-Logo Direct Edition 75¢ price error variant.  Previously (incorrectly) thought to be a rare Third Print, it was later discovered that it is likely a First Print as it contains the exact same ads, subscription info, and editor's pages as the other Thundercats #2 Frist Prints.  Below are my 5 identified variations of Thundercats #2.  (I've also got a Dutch language printing that I acquired since snapping this pic.)

Fun notes about this error price variant:

• All ads (including the back cover, interior covers, subscription offer, and Marvel checklist) are all the identical and on the same page as in the 1st print DM/US Newsstand/CAN Newsstand editions.
• This issue was dated Feb. 1986.  Regular Marvel titles had increased in cover price to the 75¢ / 50p / 95¢ shown on this printing in this month, however Marvel Star titles (including Thundercats) would remain at the previous Marvel pricing structure of 65¢ / 30p / 75¢ in Feb. '86 until changing along with the rest of Marvel the following month in Mar. '86.  
• The 75¢ / 50p / 95¢ Thundercats #2 M-Logo error variant does not state that it is a reprint in the Indica.  This is not concrete proof of anything, as this was commonly omitted in reprints of this era, but is still worth a mention.

Given these facts, it seems likely that the person setting up the printing press accidentally ran a few 75¢ / 50p / 95¢ Thundercats #2 Direct Market (M-Logo) covers before catching the error (Star comics are still at the old price this month) and running the rest of the copies at the 65¢ / 30p / 75¢ price.  This seems like an error printing similar to the Captain America #212 35¢ "no Marvel Comics Group banner" error printing, or the Marvel Spotlight #1 "no issue number" error printing, as opposed to the more common error printings where one color of ink was low for a fraction of the run.

Here's a graphic I made a while back identifying the 5 versions of Thundercats #1 that I am aware of.

As far as I'm aware there is not a version that states it is a Second Printing in the indicia, though I would love to be wrong about this.

2nd print: does not state it is a reprint on the indicia

3rd print: does state "THIRD PRINTING" on indicia

On 4/1/2017 at 12:02 PM, Saint_Doyle said:

A few people mentioned the Thundercats #1 2nd print, but as that is my niche I feel qualified to comment on that series.  The Marvel Star Thundercats series actually featured 5 4 separate reprints in issues 1, 2, and 4 (plus a bonus error printing of #2).  Each reprint has completely different ads and ad placement than their 1st print counterparts.  The error printing of #2 features the same ads in the same places throughout as the 1st printings, including same back cover, interior covers, subscription offers, and Marvel monthly checklists.

And to relate this post to the original topic, I propose Thundercats #2 3rd print as the rarest Copper Age reprint.  (I know believe it to be an error 1st rinting and not a reprint.)  I've only ever seen one copy of the 3rd print of issue 2.  (Update: a second copy has been found!)

Thundercats #2 3rd print ERROR 1st print (not stated in indica) - Marvel "M" price box, 75¢ cover price

I need to update my original post concerning the Marvel Star Thundercats reprints. Originally I had claimed there existed a very rare 3rd print of Thundercats #2.  Fellow boardie androolx located a second copy of the elusive "Third Print Thundercats #2."  After a bit of investigation we now believe this to be an ERROR printing of the 1st print, as opposed to a 3rd print.  Here is the evidence:

• All ads (including the back cover, interior covers, subscription offer, and Marvel checklist) are all the identical and on the same page as in the 1st print DM/US Newsstand/CAN Newsstand editions.
• This issue was dated Feb. 1986.  Regular Marvel titles had increased in cover price to the 75¢ / 50p / 95¢ shown on this printing in this month, however Marvel Star titles (including Thundercats) would remain at the previous Marvel pricing structure of 65¢ / 30p / 75¢ in Feb. '86 until changing along with the rest of Marvel the following month in Mar. '86.  
• The 75¢ / 50p / 95¢ Thundercats #2 does not state that it is a reprint in the Indica.  This is not concrete proof of anything, as this was commonly omitted in reprints of this era, but is still worth a mention.

These facts lead us to believe that this 75¢ / 50p / 95¢ Thundercats #2 is not a 3rd Printing as previously believed, but is instead an ERROR printing of the 1st Print Direct Market edition.  Androolx proposed a situation where the person assembling the cover for print forgot to use old price box and accidentally printed a few copies with the new price box before catching the error and correcting it for the rest of the run.  This is complete speculation, but seems plausible.   

Do you see any reason to believe this 75¢ / 50p / 95¢ Thundercats #2 is actually a 3rd Print?  I feel confident it is an ERROR 1st printing, given the evidence.  Anything else I should look for?  

This seems like an error printing similar to the Captain America #212 35¢ "no Marvel Comics Group banner" error printing, or the Marvel Spotlight #1 "no issue number" error printing, as opposed to the more common error printings where one color of ink was low for a fraction of the run.

3 hours ago, Antarcticajoe said:

I am the author of this article about GIJoe #21 2nd printing.

So did the 2nd print end up being the Black Spidey Head version with no indication that it is a "Second Printing" on the indicia?  That's my guess.  Thundercats #1 Second Print and Thundercats #2 Third Print don't actually have a mention of them being a reprint on the indicia.  Marvel wasn't super consistent with indicia labelings for reprints in this era.

18 minutes ago, bellrules said:

Interesting that 22 has two versions of direct first print. Are all the ads the same inside? I know that’s how the printing differences are identified in the Smurfs reprints from the same era.

I wondered this as well.  Same ads means the mystery is afoot (probably?), but different ads means it's just a different printing.  We really need verification of this.

19 hours ago, bellrules said:

Here a sealed Thundercats pack I found along the way. 

 

 

The #4 and #6 look like standard Direct Edition 1st prints, but what's up with that #5 (assuming it is #5 between issues 4 and 6)?  Is there no number in the number block or is the picture just cut a bit short?

There is a 2nd print to Thundercats #4 (Marvel "M" box, no month under the date).  I do not believe there to be a 2nd print of either Thundercats 5 or 6 but would love to be wrong.

After much time and tears I have finally noticed the word "Apparent" above the number, meaning that this comic NOW (after restoration) appears to be a 6.0 book.  Thank you all for helping me to reach Grief Stage 5: very reluctant acceptance.

1 hour ago, Ride the Tiger said:

Without a better explanation from the experts themselves we can only come up with ideas.

How does one go about getting a better explanation from the experts?

How does the Restored purple label grade work?  If I have a 6.0 Restored comic does that mean it is in 6.0 condition despite (before) the restoration applied, or is it brought up to a 6.0 because of the restoration?

Stated another way: if I have a Restored 6.0 and I could magically remove all of the restoration would it then grade at a Blue 6.0, or would it more likely be a Blue 5.0?

I realize this is a super basic question, but I just spent 30 minutes reading CGC info pages and couldn't find a clear answer.

22 hours ago, Philflound said:

I was thinking about putting together a list of reprint comics from the 1980s Marvel. This list would explain whether the "second print", "third print" is listed in the indicia and also the ads on the back cover and interior covers to identify them without even opening them up. This would also include when the books were released (month/yr)...

I already have a spreadsheet started with this information for the Thundercats reprints and would be eager to share it for this project.

The back cover ad of all the 1st printing issues of Thundercats 3 (direct market, US newsstand, and Canadian newsstand) all feature this Care Bears ad.  It's possible that a potential later printing also features this same back cover ad, but I wouldn't go cracking anything just yet.  

...And sorry Silver Surfer, that's just a boring old Canadian Newsstand Edition you have there in your second post (easily the rarest printing of Thundercats #3 I am currently aware of).  

The fact that there are no identifiable differences on the cover between the 1st and 2nd printings of Smurfs #1 makes me think I need to go through several copies of Thundercats #3 and make sure that a reprint of that issue doesn't exist.  It seems odd that issues #1, 2, and 4 would have multiple printings but #3 would not.

Ah yeah, I remember the JC Penney reprints.  I've actually run across your write up before.  Very nice work.

That X-Men 268 second print brings a question to mind: how many reprints are there that have very subtle cover differences  (such as X-Men 268's lack of Curtis routing number under the cover date being the only noticeable change)?  I am used to Copper Age reprints having a different colored background or logo, or possibly no date listed under the issue number.  The X-Men 268 second print has neither of those.

Comiconxion is correct, that 3-pack shows a SECOND Print of #1 and a FIRST print of #3.  I have never seen a reprint of #3, but that doesn't mean they aren't out there.  

And I have never seen a premium paid for any of the Thundercats reprints, but up until 2 days ago I am pretty sure I was the only person on the planet who cared.  Now there are two of us!  (How do I input the cloud nine emoji from the old boards???)

As a rule a Canadian Newsstand Edition MUST have a bar code.  

It's a common mistake.  I've seen 2nd Prints mistakenly slabbed with a "Canadian Edition" note on it.  (Not my book, I just found the image online while researching the topic.)

A few people mentioned the Thundercats #1 2nd print, but as that is my niche I feel qualified to comment on that series.  The Marvel Star Thundercats series actually featured 5 separate reprints in issues 1, 2, and 4.  Each reprint has completely different ads and ad placement than their 1st print counterparts.

I suspect that the reprints were made to fill out grocery store 3-packs.  The 3-packs exist with issues 1-3 and issues 4-6.  No reprint exists of issue 3 because I suspect they over printed it to meet expected demand for the grocery store 3 packs of issues 1-3.  

And to relate this post to the original topic, I propose Thundercats #2 3rd print as the rarest Copper Age reprint.  (Okay, original post specifies "2nd Print," but still...)  I've only ever seen one copy of the 3rd print of issue 2.

Thundercats #1 2nd print (not stated in indica) - square price box, 75¢ cover price

Thundercats #1 3rd print (as stated in indica) - Marvel "M" price box, 75¢ cover price, no month

Thundercats #2 2nd print (as stated in indica) - square price box, 75¢ cover price

Thundercats #2 3rd print (not stated in indica) - Marvel "M" price box, 75¢ cover price

Thundercats #4 2nd print (as stated in indica) - Marvel "M" price box, 75¢ cover price, no month

Anyone want to weigh in on the validity of this eBay auction of supposedly original Dave Stevens art?

The description has red flags all over it, and I'm fairly certain that most Stevens art remains in his estate... but I also believe there are a few pages that have leaked out into the public. Could this be one?

Finished up this set of Canadian newsstand Thundercats (Marvel Star) today.

They ain't the highest grade, but they're the only grade I got!

looks like planet 1 to me; but I'm not sure I buy that theory because there is a GA issue of planet that has the planet 1 vehicle and to me that's Dave's inspiration for the vehicle he went with. I suppose its possible he used elements of both the GA planet and the toy.

 

You may be thinking of 3d zone 16 but that's basically the same vehicle as the planet 1 (similar anyways)

 

 

I recently discovered this Adam Hughes tribute to the classic Planet Comics 1/58 cover. At least I think it's a tribute....

There are Canadian Editions that don't get the CGC note, and then there are 2nd prints erroneously mislabeled as Canadian Editions. Oopsie.

(This is not my book, I just found this image while researching the topic.)

Thanks, Divad. Know I know!

Rookie question: What exactly is "foxing?" It looks like mold on this book. Is it just discoloration due to dirt, or is it a permanent water-based discoloration.

I took a picture (but now cannot find it) of the Rocketeer spinning the popcorn at Disney World this last summer (in Magic Kingdom, Future World, 2012). Here is a video of it that claims this was removed from Disneyland in 2006. Maybe it was just moved over to Disney World?

(I can't figure out how to embed this video in the post.)

...and why would Disney bring back the Poppeteer, unless... Wild Speculative Rumors!!!!

This thread just destroyed any productivity I was going to achieve this morning.

I have the same sick feeling in my stomach that I got when my Dad told me about how he used to put his Mickey Mantle baseball cards in the spokes of his bicycle tires because the better players made louder sounds.