rookster

On 2/2/2024 at 2:03 AM, 50YrsCollctngCmcs said:

I missed your post when it was first on line. NIce collection of some fun Disney books. I like the variety of items you have collected. Great stuff!

@50YrsCollctngCmcs Thanks a bunch.  I can say the same for your collection, too.  You have some items I have never seen before

On 1/31/2024 at 11:30 PM, Chip Cataldo said:

Recently acquired this and am looking for more information on it. Any MMM collectors have any knowledge of it?

Thanks in advance.

This is a gift subscription form which was sent to current subscribers of Mickey Mouse Magazine.  These are somewhat rare to find with the original mailing envelope and there are different versions for each of the years they were used. Hake's Auction has sold a few of these.

On 11/2/2023 at 12:23 AM, Drgoldage said:

These are awesome.  I have been searching for a couple of Hostess D53 cards associated with Mickey Mouse Magazine.  There are 12 total in the set and I need uncut Donald Duck and Clara Cluck.  I have a set, but these two I mentioned have the coupons clipped

Thought I might add these for interest:

MMM dairy giveaways, paint books, 1st anywhere appearance of donald duck in "The Wise Little Hen" and the gigantic punchbooks (shown with the gigantic Dell Giants Peter Pan for scale)

I hope everyone enjoys

On 9/3/2023 at 5:26 PM, MrMadly said:

I recently acquired a small collection of early run MMMs. I was surprised at their condition.

So Nice!  I can't help but admire the #9 with Mickey and Minnie......it is the only issue I need to complete the entire run.

>>>to hoffitmus prime "Sadly it was missing a few pages most importantly the Snow White centerfold."

If you were to submit this to CGC, it would possibly come back as "I" for incomplete and "0.5" for Poor in blue label.  It would also have the possibility of coming back as green label "Q" for qualified.  The qualified values for comics are VERY subjective.  A qualified grade can be for the cover loose at one staple.  In your case, several missing pages, it would certainly be much less desireable and less valuable as a result.  The qualified grade would be for the books current condition if the defect was otherwise not there.  Another MMM vol 1 number 5 is listed on ebay with missing pages.  Its apparent condition would likely grade at 6.0-7.0 (Overstreet PG for a 6.0 is $477, which is ridiculously low) and has only 1 bid for the opening price of $75 and was listed 3 days ago, 3 days left to bid.  This is the closest example I can find which fits your situation.  It is assured if the listing on ebay was for a complete copy, the price would be in the hundreds by now and likely soar during the final seconds of bidding.  There are other examples of qualified graded MMM's which have languished for weeks with defects such as loose covers or holes punched and the buy-it-now prices are between 10-20% of the non-qualified prices.

I am now more convinced the "Little Mickey" logo had high significance when originally printed.  

I have seen a copy of the 100-page issue Volume 2 Number 3,  with the "Little Mickey" located near the "E" in "Mouse" in the title instead of near the "M" in "Mickey".  The cover layout had to be rearranged since the normal location of the "Little Mickey" was printed with a black background on this issue, which would have obviously obscured the "Little Mickey" printed in black like the previous issues.  If this logo had little importance, it would have been omitted or the color changed to something other than black and kept in the same spot as the previous and subsequent issues.  However, the "Little Mickey" logo was kept in black ink but moved to another spot on this issue.  

In other words, this demonstrates the "Little Mickey" logo was likely required to be printed on some issues with black ink........sounds like a legal/contract item.

I suppose the notion of having the variant editions to complete the MMM run could cause the obsessive collector to reassess what an entire run of MMM's really is now. Let the search begin???

Great thread. Got me to look at one of mine and it has the little Mickey. Yay

 

Ameri.... :)

Thanks a lot for the information, rookster, this is news to me. To support pooroldman's observation, the earliest variant issue, I have seen, is also from late V1. What is known from reliable sources is that Hal Horne left after V1#5 despite Kay Kamen and Walt and Roy Disney trying hard to keep him. Further, Horne suffered heavy losses from his involvement in the magazine ($50,000 if I remember correctly?).

 

From my own observations, the paper quality of the next few issues is dramatically lower, making these the most difficult of the entire run to find in collectible condition. What I have been guessing so far is that those issues reflect a period of flux as Kay Kamen may have been trying to salvage the title, eventually leading to some kind of change that resulted in 1. the variant edition and 2. significantly better production quality, from around V1#12. The input from your source would actually fit very nicely with that theory.

 

To me, the most burning question is why Kamen (or perhaps even the Disneys?) chose to continue, and seemingly even invest(?), in a title that seemed doomed for failure with the resignation of Horne. V2 was an explosion of bold initiatives: first (and only) 100 page issue, first color Sunday reprints, several cover layout changes, first covers promoting/leveraging Silly Symphony characters, and so on. I wish more was known about who (Kamen and/or Disney?) and why all this effort was put into a failing magazine at a time when Kamen must have been overloaded and some Disney childrens' books already had reached circulations of several million copies. Clearly, these decisions turned out to be extremely smart and profitable, but they can't have been easy back in those critical months of the summer of 1936. Someone at Disney must have had the foresight to understand the potential of the comic book format.

tb,

Let me first express my thanks to you for starting this thread. I know I have gone askew with it somewhat. I do hope my questions about the 12-card set and the variant covers has been appreciated by everyone.

I agree with your assessment of Disney's forsight about the comic book format. I think pooroldman had the right idea about the relentlessness of MMM for pushing Disney products. They advertised everything.....toothpaste, typewriters, desks, sweatshirts, etc, etc. I suppose the magazine could have been a loss-leader by itself, for a short time, but I imagine its ability to sell related material was enormous. If the children's books were already being sold in the millions, those children's books wouldn't have the best format to sell extra material compared to a large-sized magazine with snazzy covers and slick paper packed with ads with everyone's favorite characters in them. Disney and his team were obviously talented about entertainment.....but I think ol' Walt was obviously talented at making money, too.

tb...I do still look forward to seeing more images of your MMM's. Thanks for sharing some already . Truly remarkable!

That certainly makes sense-- I would love to buy your correspondent a cup of coffee and hear the many stories that he could tell about Western.

 

I wonder why my Racine file copy from April, 1938 has the Mickey logo but the file copy from January, 1940 does not. I was curious enough to look thru my own copies and also did a quick review of the images on the Heritage website. The earliest Mickey logo I could find was V.I #12 Sept 1936, and the latest was V.3 #12 Sept 1938. While my review is admittedly unscientific, I wonder if the logo was added for a specific time and then discontinued. Also, whether it's possible the logo was added to the Racine copies instead of the Poughkeepsies. This might explain why the earlier file copy has it and the later one does not.

pooroldman,

I have forwarded your message....unfortunately, he/she did not give me their name and they were speaking from memory from over 40 years ago. It appears he/she may not have been a Western employee for long before being bought by Mattel but was responsible to review current and past contracts for compliance.

Looking at the timeline for Western's expansion, the Poughkeepsie facility was established in 1934. The deal to establish K.K. Publishing was in 1933 for the Disney related material. My theory is initial demand for MMM could be handled at a single facility. When demand increased, the other facility was necessary to meet production. The reporting requirements to ABC may have created the need to report circulation numbers, in aggregate, but the contract may have required the logo to be added to differentiate facilities.

I would bet file copies would be sent from each facility to a central location, some with the logo, and some without.

Here is an example of my other question previously about variant covers. These are both from MMM vol. 3 number 4. Neither of these particular copies is subscription. Notice the Mickey logo difference above the "M"

 

Info on the variant covers anyone??

 

First time I noticed the difference.

 

Might tie into the current thread on Marvel 1: Some GA books went back for second (and maybe more) printings. A fact that collectors have not always recognized. For the most part it's difficult, I think, to distinguish a first printing from later printings because not enough info has survived.

 

Sqeggs,

 

I wondered about that, too. I looked for any other reprint/2nd printings for other Disney pseudo-comic books such as Big Little Books, Dell, Whitman. What I have found, so far, is subsequent printings were typically noted as being later editions.

 

Metropolis offered another idea of printings being done at two different facilities....but said it was only speculation

 

I think it's unlikely that the logo denotes printings at different facilities. Here are two Racine file copies-- both, one would assume, printed in Racine-- one with the Mickey logo and one without:

 

 

The logo might differentiate first and second printings. I've looked at some unslabbed MMMs that I have and there's no apparent difference between logo/nonlogo, and of course no notation in the indicia or elsewhere. There are enough of both that it doesn't seem that either logos or nonlogos are particularly rare or unusual.

 

 

pooroldman and Sqeggs

 

I don't know about the circulation for each issue or typical practices for the time period. Would Western Publishing send subscribers 2nd printings? The reason I ask is because I have copies which have the subscribers name and address printed directly on the back cover of the individual issues. Some of these have the Mickey logo and some do not.

 

Good point. You would think subscribers would receive the first printing.

 

I'm not so certain. I suspect that you have to get your comics to the distributor on time or face penalties. Miss mailing your subscribers by a day? No one really cares because there are no adverse consequences.

Got a message today. Person says they were former Mattel employee and were rolled into Mattel when they bought Western/Dell but closed the Poughkeepsie, NY facility in the early 80's. But he/she indicates the theory of two different publishing locations is correct. Said they worked in the contracts division and there was an older contract with Western and Kay Kamen to publish Disney but the contract payouts were different for Racine and Poughkeepsie, so in order to differentiate, the Mickey logo was added to the Poughkeepsie editions. He/she also mentioned circulation numbers being reported to ABC.....which I assume is the old Audit Bureau of Circulations.

Not sure if this would stand in-depth scrutiny, but it seems plausible, at a minimum.

Here is an example of my other question previously about variant covers. These are both from MMM vol. 3 number 4. Neither of these particular copies is subscription. Notice the Mickey logo difference above the "M"

 

Info on the variant covers anyone??

 

First time I noticed the difference.

 

Might tie into the current thread on Marvel 1: Some GA books went back for second (and maybe more) printings. A fact that collectors have not always recognized. For the most part it's difficult, I think, to distinguish a first printing from later printings because not enough info has survived.

 

Sqeggs,

 

I wondered about that, too. I looked for any other reprint/2nd printings for other Disney pseudo-comic books such as Big Little Books, Dell, Whitman. What I have found, so far, is subsequent printings were typically noted as being later editions.

 

Metropolis offered another idea of printings being done at two different facilities....but said it was only speculation

 

I think it's unlikely that the logo denotes printings at different facilities. Here are two Racine file copies-- both, one would assume, printed in Racine-- one with the Mickey logo and one without:

 

 

The logo might differentiate first and second printings. I've looked at some unslabbed MMMs that I have and there's no apparent difference between logo/nonlogo, and of course no notation in the indicia or elsewhere. There are enough of both that it doesn't seem that either logos or nonlogos are particularly rare or unusual.

 

pooroldman and Sqeggs

I don't know about the circulation for each issue or typical practices for the time period. Would Western Publishing send subscribers 2nd printings? The reason I ask is because I have copies which have the subscribers name and address printed directly on the back cover of the individual issues. Some of these have the Mickey logo and some do not.

Here they are: Two of the cards have the coupons clipped (so sad, I know). I didn't include pictures of the backs.....they are blank.

 

Thanks. I've never seen them before!

Moondog

You are most welcome. I wish I could find whole cards to replace the two which are missing their coupons. No luck yet but still trying

I thought I might share these pics, too. Adding to the marketing, history, etc. for those interested.

Here is a direct mail flyer and return envelope to give "gift subscriptions" for Mickey Mouse Magazine. I read a post from pooroldman earlier in this thread which reminded me I had these....

pooroldman: "there are still plenty of ads pushing various Snow White toys and whatnot-- MM Magazines were pretty relentless"

Postmarked Nov 1938

Here is an example of my other question previously about variant covers. These are both from MMM vol. 3 number 4. Neither of these particular copies is subscription. Notice the Mickey logo difference above the "M"

 

Info on the variant covers anyone??

 

First time I noticed the difference.

 

Might tie into the current thread on Marvel 1: Some GA books went back for second (and maybe more) printings. A fact that collectors have not always recognized. For the most part it's difficult, I think, to distinguish a first printing from later printings because not enough info has survived.

Sqeggs,

I wondered about that, too. I looked for any other reprint/2nd printings for other Disney pseudo-comic books such as Big Little Books, Dell, Whitman. What I have found, so far, is subsequent printings were typically noted as being later editions.

Metropolis offered another idea of printings being done at two different facilities....but said it was only speculation

Here is an example of my other question previously about variant covers. These are both from MMM vol. 3 number 4. Neither of these particular copies is subscription. Notice the Mickey logo difference above the "M"

Info on the variant covers anyone??

I estimate the date of the 12-card set in the previous pictures to approx. 1935. Goofy was known as "Dippy Dawg" in 1933 and "The Goof" into 1936. Also, there is a Disney "Old Maid" card game from 1935 which uses these same images but some with different colorization.