Get Marwood & I

I would like my winners prize to be a date with Terry, next Sunday please 

This lot is from 1953:

http://www.oldsundaycomics.com/pics9/S1430-0579.jpg

You can see the top left corner lamp to the far left of the second row down.

So it's 10-25-1953 @Garry Ghoul 

It can't be 1959, as this is dated 10-25-1959:

My money's on 1953.

On 5/15/2024 at 1:12 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Yours could be 25th October from around that time. 1947 to 1973 are the Wunder years, according to online sources, so you have 27 possibilities!

Only four possibilities:

@Garry Ghoul You could email this chap:

http://www.oldsundaycomics.com/sc1434.htm#terry pirates

On 5/14/2024 at 9:15 PM, Garry Ghoul said:

Just bought this undated Terry sunday by George Wunder. Any expert around to help me?

Thanks!

This one below is dated 1955, and Chopstick Joe looks very similar.

Yours could be 25th October from around that time. 1947 to 1973 are the Wunder years, according to online sources, so you have 27 possibilities!

On 5/14/2024 at 11:49 PM, Malacoda said:

And yet I loved them when I was little.

I can still read enjoy the early Spideys. There's something magical about them, regardless of how simple they seem today. I don't read much anymore, alas. Fell out of the habit. I liked ASM from BND up to the first Superior Spider-Man run. They were pretty good, but I stopped buying new comics shortly after. I keep meaning to try the current book again but never get around to it. It might be good, it might not. If you leave things too long though, you tend to die, so I suppose I should crack on with it. 

On 5/15/2024 at 4:38 AM, Yorick said:

And I don't want to lift the image and post it here or Barry will get mad.

On 5/14/2024 at 9:08 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Mike says it shoulda got to where it shoulda got to by 12 June

This time there's a LOC / arrival date match. And it's a 3 month on sale to cover date rule match 

On 5/14/2024 at 7:38 PM, Malacoda said:

@Get Marwood & I  Hang on.....I just.....I just told you something you didn't already know.  Can it be true?  And it only took 4 years. Ah well, I guess I can go now.  

That's it, I'm deposed 

Rich, I've always limited my research to what the comics tell me. You've heard me say that before. You know much more than me, because you read and devour everything that you can find. I never have. Loads of books on comics purchased. Haven't read any of them. If I'm honest, I'm only interested if there's an actual comic at the centre of it, telling me something that I didn't know. I've only ever dealt with what I can prove by holding the evidence in my hands. Comics are the exciting thing, for me. Other people writing about them? Less so. Let's face it, I'm odd. 

Not a brainfart then, clearly Rich!  If those 1960s Marvels followed the same rule, then yes, that ST #75 was on the shelf quite a while. Assuming no one bought it, of course.

On 5/14/2024 at 4:03 PM, Malacoda said:

Right, but if I've understood this, where we're saying April 28th is an outlier, we're still saying that we reckon that ST 75 started hitting the spinners as early as March 8th (or earlier) in some places and as late as April 28th (or later) in some places.  So assuming it was lifted off the shelves at some point in June (the cover dates being time-gentlemen-please dates rather than another-curtain-another-show dates), that means that Mr. March 8th copy was in the spinner for somewhere between 85 days and 114 days and Mr. April 28th copy was in the spinner for somewhere between 34 days and 63 days.   If true, this would mean our standard 3 month window has gone for a Burton (though clearly more Alec Leamas than John Morlar ) as this one is anywhere between 1 month and 4 months. 

Unless you're saying that April 28th is a complete rando in the middle of nowhere (then we're in the Night of the Iguana) 

 

I think we might be talking about different things Rich. In my studies, down the years, early 1960s books tended to have arrival dates around 3 months prior to the cover date. That's always worked out for me and I've spent a lot of time looking at them for various reasons. I'm not sure where you got the cover date being a 'remove from sale date' thing from - I'm not sure I've heard that before. I'm not saying it's wrong, it may well have been, but regardless, the 3 month thing has always chimed with my researching endeavours. I can say for a fact that ST #75 has a June cover date. And I can say for a fact that there are a few extant examples with arrival dates in the first half of March. This means I can reasonably say that there was an approximate 3 month gap between the book going on sale and it's cover date. The fact that that happens so often leads me to refer to it as a general rule and in this case the rule is Burton free.

I can't say when it was removed from sale though, as I currently have no evidence on which to make that claim. 

On 5/14/2024 at 5:55 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

What would help, if we could find enough of them, would be arrival dates on later than # 58 copies of JIM in 1960 and 1961.

Then, comparing them with arrival dates from the same cover months on TOS, TTA and Strange Tales would inform us whether the alleged 3 week gap in the on sale date was reflected in the arrival dates in bricks and mortar outlets Stateside.

And, if that turned out to be the case, it would make sense for the JIMs sent across to the UK to have been subject to a similar time lag.

I noticed back in 1961 that the late arrival of JIM was what was happening as I religiously focused on those four PHM titles, never missing an issue once I latched onto them, but have not followed up Mike's data further than the end of that year. Maybe it continued right up to # 125, or even beyond, retitled as Thor.

My arrival date studies are focussed elsewhere Albert. Someone else can have a go.

On 5/14/2024 at 6:03 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Any idea what this lot sold for?

The JIM UKPV AND stamp may make it unique!

On 5/12/2024 at 11:27 AM, Prince Namor said:

For those who DON'T believe there was affidavit fraud... Charlton's Cheyenne Kid outsold a Neal Adams Green Lantern...

 Well of course it bloody did 

Copy A not shown!

Copy H!

On 5/14/2024 at 1:10 AM, Malacoda said:

Steady on, Kev.  That's practically porn as far as Steve's concerned. 

 This is porn 

And I think I've added two more since I took that photo 

On 5/14/2024 at 1:10 AM, Malacoda said:

Those are some definitive ST 75 examples you've got there.  I've always thought it didn't make sense to expect all the distribution dates to align: the date they're registered with the LOC is really an admin date not a real distribution date and the dates from arrival at local wholesalers or retailers would have to be well spaced out (Waterbury to LA would take a week without any stops, I assume a distribution lorry would be stopping all over the place and that the comics would be making their way across country in multiple legs, probably with different distribution companies subcontracted by IND or ECP.   The copies that came off the press bound for NY, by contrast would be there in less than 2 hours). 

Yes, it's one of the reasons I've always flagged caution when using those 'on sale' dates on Mike's site to try to prove things. There's no substitute for a gaggle of consistent pencilled arrival dates and, as you say, you wouldn't expect them all to be the same given the different distances travelled. 

On 5/14/2024 at 1:10 AM, Malacoda said:

However, those dates you've got there span from March 8th to April 24th, if I'm reading correctly, which is huge gap.  That said, according to Mike,  ST 75 was on sale in January with a cover date of June, so our 3 month rule has gone for a complete Burton. 

Would that be a Richard Burton, Rich? Not sure I understand that last point. The April pencil date is an outlier, the other three are in the first half of March. Three months forward is June, so the three month rule is supported by the arrival dates. In this instance Mike's 'on sale dates' - the LOC ones - are clearly not the dates that the books went on sale so they can be discounted.

On 5/13/2024 at 7:06 PM, Ken Aldred said:

”Gan” sounds quite Geordie, as well.

Wasn't he in Blake's 7?

On 5/13/2024 at 7:00 PM, CGC Mike said:

So, what do I do with all of the people that are making their first post a WTB post?  I guess the best answer would be to:

  Approve, move out of public view and notify the person of our policy for the WTB forum.  (the reason for approval is they will then be able to post normally, and not have to wait for another approval.)

Yes, that's as good a process as any. If they're reasonable, they'll appreciate the heads up and proceed accordingly. 

On 5/13/2024 at 6:45 PM, CGC Mike said:

Well, our members that have over 50 posts are still protected as much as I currently can.  My proposal would give new members the same forum we had for 20 years.  It would not have the protection I put in place a year or so ago for our current forum.  

That's true, but it sort of sends the message that you're less concerned about newbies being scammed than those with post counts over 50. I'm not sure that's the message I'd want to promote. People are people, scamming is scamming. Protections should apply across the board, I think. The spirit of your thinking was good and noble, but the application proposed doesn't work. I would stick to the rule you brought in to limit scammers. It seems to have worked, as you said, and it's not unreasonable to ask those seeking to buy and sell here to be reasonably active community members. 

On 5/13/2024 at 6:34 PM, CGC Mike said:

That is a good point.  

Yes, sorry about that. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, it sort of invalidates the proposal, doesn't it. 

On 5/13/2024 at 5:31 PM, CGC Mike said:

The reason being, is there is a fair amount of users making their first post as a WTB post.  

Mike, where do they make this first post if the WTB forum is invisible to them, and what do you do with them assuming they are posted in a forum other than WTB?

If you create the sub forum, what is to stop a scammer joining up to scam the newbie in the same way as they did the regular forum?

On 5/11/2024 at 8:28 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

The on sale date of Strange Tales # 75 is also 29 January,

Albert, I don't have access to my files, but a quick scan of Heritage and I see three copies of ST #75 with pencilled March arrival dates and one April. Mike's site is invaluable but often the LOC dates don't match those found on physical examples. I don't have time now, but will do the same for the two May 58s at some point and see if they're March too. I've a feeling I've already done this, and likely have a file at home. 

On 5/11/2024 at 8:28 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

The on sale date of Strange Tales # 75 is also 29 January, which tells me that it would have been sent with the two May issues

I think we might have discussed this possibility before Albert. When I get time, I'll dig about and check some actual on sale dates. I'm sure I have some saved. If they align with Mike's dates, the argument could be justified, if not proven.