Get Marwood & I

Given his seated position, and choice of shorts, could she be saying "Balls Showing, Dave"? .

Spotted this online - a T&P distributed 1971 DC with an 'original insert' advertising the 1970 Top Sellers Bumper Book range:

Same here. Comics have never been a money making endeavour for me. Making money on books today that you bought years ago at market rates is nice of course, but I have always felt uncomfortable with making money now off of other collectors inexperience, bad judgement or bad luck. Whether he deserves it or not, I feel sorry for the old guy in Shad's opening post. He did all the work, out of love, over all those years and then other people take all the profit. No one helped him, it seems. I remember going to the London Comic fair years back, and there was this nice old couple faffing about in a panic with loads of comic boxes the contents of which they clearly had no idea what to do with. I picked out some Spideys, asked a price, it was low to the point of robbery, and I bought them. I felt lousy about it, afterwards, imagining that the collection may have been their son's, who had died, or some equally unlikely scenario. Now, when I see 'the right person' offering something for the wrong price, I point it out. It's amazing how much better you feel about doing that, especially when they appreciate it. A small act of kindness. A work colleague told me once that I was an idiot for doing things like that. He said I had earned the right, acquiring years of pricing knowledge, to use that experience to make money. He had a point, but it's just not in my nature. It's probably why I have never made meaningful money in comics (my timing is also useless), and would be a lousy dealer. Fortunately, my love is for the items, and making money is incidental. I buy what makes me happy and am lucky enough to be able to do so, within reason. I hope the old soldier guy in the OP's post had a ball collecting his figures down the years and I hope he never gets to fret unduly over his failure to liquidate the collection to his own advantage.

I love reading blogs about comic distribution in the UK

Well, you put the effort in so I like to at least give some reaction as I know what it's like to be left hanging after spending so long studying something. You won the argument hands down by the way, Rich.

Wouldn't we all die laughing if.....

That was infinity.

So you're saying you agree with me? How many number 9s are there?

Eh? If the logic of that concept was applied to the overall cover month output that included SS#10, the end of the run US scenario wouldn't apply as the van would be departing mid way through - wouldn't it? And again, even if every Marvel comic cover dated September 1969 apart from SS#10 was printed and put on the van, and the van didn't wait for it, why wouldn't it have just have been the first pile to go on the next months van - thereby creating your UK 'half this month, half the other' scenario? And why Whitechapel!

Ok, let me see.... I'm not 100% sure...but I see CGC is involved... Is it a holy f up?

You know the old saying, Domo: "You can please some of the people, some of the time, But you can't please anyone on the CGC forum because they're all opinionated, self-satisfied tosspots" Or something like that.

They are very different. I did a poll four years ago. Is was almost as bad as that one Domo did the other month.

Now that's dedication, Gary. It's not on your arse, is it?

Another September 16th date stamp

Brilliant

My input is here, as you know, but I'm posting the link for others to see as the viewing figures for the Chat Board Usage & Support forum are always low: You could rename it "Stu's Box"?

I don't know, long detailed posts, facts and speculation, self-deprecation, tables with OS dates, a dab of humour and a "one will turn up now" sign off. I could be reading one of my own posts! Nicely done Richmond, as usual. A few thoughts / observations, if only to show we're awake. The actual dates on these comic examples imply the lead in time might not have been as strict as the OS dates imply: 16th Sep 16th Sep 18th Sep Or, indeed, the suggested order of printing. Some interesting distribution comments in this blog that I stumbled on, while looking for SS#10 stuff: https://kidr77.blogspot.com/2019/02/silver-surfer-14-facsimile-edition.html It's fairly recent, so there may be some knowledgeable contacts you can tap up. If I'm understanding you right - it's early, and I haven't had much coffee yet - why would SS#10 being printed last in the title batch have any bearing on UK ND status anyway? I could understand a comic not being printed in a certain way if the instruction from the bosses came prior to its printing - say, mid-way through a given cover months production. But wouldn't the SS#10 just go in the next shipment? I've used On Sale dates to good effect when trying to establish a cut off point for the production of price variants, but SS #10 is a just a title in scope for sending to the UK as a cents copy. If it missed a van / boat, wouldn't it just go in the next one? Sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick. Here's another theory. Silver Surfer #10 was distributed in the UK, but T&P forgot to stamp it. If you look at some original owner collections, there it often is, unstamped among it's stamped / UKPV cousins and looking just as shabby: T&P stamped millions of comics. Is it likely, in all that activity, over all those years, that one operational muck up could lead to a pile of the same issue going out unstamped? Hugely likely, I would have thought. How did this chap's apparently of the time bound volume get its #10? Every other copy in that 1-18 book is either a UKPV or stamped copy (link below). It could have been made up at any point of course, but it looks to me like an original owners run, lovingly bound. https://www.excaliburauctions.com/auction/lot/lot-105---silver-surfer-lot---196970---a-hard-back/?lot=20792&so=4&st=silver surfer 10&sto=0&au=&ef=&et=&ic=False&sd=1&pp=48&pn=1&g=1 Another theory is the batch could have got lost, stolen or damaged at any one of the many points it would have made on its journey from the printers to T&P. Another theory is the bloke who's job it was to load the books on the van forgot to put the last batch on. That last batch was SS#10. Panicking that he might lose his job (he was new, you see), he took the batch to the incinerator / pulping room and no one was any the wiser. When T&P queried it's absence, Ethel spotted it, they blamed the blokes on the boat. They denied it of course, and accused T&P of..... How many actual collector recollections do we rely on that a book like this was 'ND' in the UK by the way? A handful? What if it was just not available in their area, and they were the only ones taking notice? What if they are misremembering? It was 50 years ago. Duncan McA has loads of books noted as ND on his site, which were most definitely D. I've not been able to find a single stamped SS#10. But can we say with certainty that that means it didn't come? And if it didn't come - which, notwithstanding my arguing for the sake of it counter arguments is almost certainly right - are there not a plethora of other, more mundane reasons why that might have been the case? Anyway, great thought-provoking stuff as always. I used to post big long theories like this years ago, and often got nothing back. I still do today. At least you have me snapping at your heels, testing the theories Rich.

Nice original owner copy of this 'Double Double' compendium on eBay currently: I wonder what their nickname was at school.....

@themagicrobot https://themagicrobot.wordpress.com/2008/10/14/charlton-comic-book-guide-for-the-artist-writer-letterer/

And the bandless, fringeless hair. And the vaguely oriental look. And the general appearance of swagger.