Get Marwood & I

...and minus half the black plate from the looks of it

Spot the difference! Alan gives you more!

Hello I've posted about the UK overprinted Marvel Classics Comics a few times over the years - here's a copy of #7, which I picked up at a shop on Sunday that wasn't the Notting Hill Comic Exchange (owing to it being shut again): It's always puzzled me what happened here, and why #5 and 7 only were selected for a 20p overprint (printed 20p prices from issue #9 to the runs conclusion): One of my previous posts on the subject highlighted the fact that the overprint's position on the cover moved from copy to copy, indicating that it may have been applied by hand. One other thing I noticed with this copy above is that the black block goes around to the spine (it's a square-bound issue) which itself is an indication that the overprinted price was applied before the cover was attached, laying flat, in the US. Ink's running out there a bit. I wonder what lead to this happening, and why the amended copies were so crudely amended? We may never care know....

Which is handy, as I've only got one. And the other stuff?

Thanks for checking and testing. Way of the world, I suppose. I don't follow Mike? You'll answer them there, or want me to raise them there?

Thanks, I'll check with them. If they don't respond, it will either be because you are wrong, and they can't reply, or they don't like me anymore (get you jokes in now). I've had several members tell me over recent years that they thought that they were blocked, or had done something wrong, as a result of the policies governing new members and first time posting. Could you check to see whether it is made clear to new members what to expect in respect of their visibility, initial posts and sending personal messaging please? I'm not sure that it is made clear, and it could drive people away if they get the wrong idea. One thing that grates on them is their post being hidden until approved while the conversation carries on without them and others repeat their point. Two other things Mike, if I may. Firstly, I've noticed that threads have started to be archived now, presumably when they reach a certain criteria. Here is an example from as recent as 2014, and it appears to apply to all inactive threads of ten years or greater as far as I can see: Was this announced? If not, what is the criteria for threads being archived and could you establish whether archived threads are in scope for Google indexing please? (remember our discussion about Google having to 'catch up' now that the location of the site has moved). Thirdly, last year you canvassed the members on technical issues with the forum. Many contributed and a list of, if I recall correctly, ten issues were put forward to the technical team. I can find no trace of any of it now - I think you hid them all. What happened to all those posts and suggestions, and what is the status of that work? Has anything on the top ten list been fixed yet? The journals link still doesn't work and I am still hassled by that newsletter sign up pop up every time I visit.

Thanks Panpe Only one? I don't think anyone knows the precise answer to that one, and perhaps never will. I've certainly never seen anything concrete on it. The overall print run will have varied over the 20 year period that UKPVs were in existence of course, and the suggestion has always been that the pence component may have been anything between two and five percent of the whole. I suspect that percentage started very low, and perhaps increased as the process bedded in, but that is just a gut feel based on my many years of looking for and at them.

Mike, a fellow enthusiast has been in touch with me by PM to discuss certain variants. They have not posted publicly. Does your action mean that they will no longer be able to reply, even if a PM stream is already in course?

Contact details for Dez are on his website: Dezskinn1@yahoo.co.uk This from the Recalled Comics website: "The print run on the standard version of Miracleman #1 was around 135,000 world-wide and these are easy to come by. However, there was a U.K. variant produced with a small print run of 1,000-2,000 making it pretty rare (CGC only have thirty graded in May 2016). Note that the standard version was also imported into the U.K. so there was a mixed distribution in Blighty. The U.K. variant has a distinctive yellow back cover with an advert for Quality comics (standard cover has a Zot! advert)"

Cheers Reggie, that's kind of you to say. I've given up on the possibility of CGC ever being a permanent home for this kind of research now so I'm exploring other opportunities. STL did indeed have the right idea and it's a real shame that we lost that site.

Two more finds this morning - one expected, one not. First up, Barbie Fashion #21: That one was expected - and there are still some more Barbies to be found I believe - but this second one I had given up hope on - Spider-Man Classics #10: I had actually marked that set as complete at issues 1-9 given the time elapsed. And it is only the fifth book with an (AUS) April 1994 cover date: Perhaps there are more out there after all.... These two bring us to 1,329 confirmed Marvel APVs now.

See you all in 2022

Just a quick MERRY CHRISTMAS from I to the pence brethren Marwood said you can all shove it. See you all in 2022!

It is much harder to collect comic books today, I think, yes. But it's not just down to price increases. Comics are in my DNA, and I can't imagine a life in which they do not play a significant part. I am a collector, because I love the damn things, but I am also a researcher, because I love the damn things. I find myself in trouble in both camps, currently. The books I would love to collect - mostly Marvel - are mostly out of reach financially now. What a drag. So what about the other stuff? Overall, there are two sorts of book out there. The ones the majority love and want, and the ones the majority don't. So, priced out of the books that the majority want, I now concentrate on the ones that the majority don't. They tend to be cheaper, if a little harder to find (because hardly anyone cares about them). Up until recently, there were fairly good pickings to be had online, at fairs and even in the few, ever dwindling UK shops that stock back issues that don't have the words Marvel or DC on them. But, and foolishly some might say, I have researched and posted all about them here. In doing so, I have picked up competition from the tiny minority of like minded collectors who now outbid me on the books that I would almost always have been the only bidder on. So I've shot myself in the foot, so to speak, by alerting that tiny minority with a love of the the off grid books to the presence of the variants that exist for them. Silly me. I now have US sellers snagging Charlton 15c variants for a few dollars, then offering them to me for $200. I have stiff competition now for Miller indicia Marvels. And I got outbid on a King pence Popeye when I bid £70. Pre-research value - a couple of quid. Ditto Archie, ditto Gold Key. Currently, I am researching and collecting around five separate groups of books which no one knows exist yet, because I haven't told them. I don't mean that to sound big headed, but it's the truth. Ordinarily, I would start a thread here heralding their existence and outlining what I have found to exist. I love doing that. The downside if I do though, is a few off worlders then get enthused about them and then start outbidding me as I try to collect them. So I keep quiet, but the researcher in me is longing to bring them to wider attention. So what is better? Keep shtum, and carry on quietly collecting, gathering. Or, publish, enjoy the interaction that follows, but accept that someone may want to start to try collecting them too. A conundrum, for sure. Thing is, if you don't post about new finds here anymore, then what's the point of being here at all?

Two of the three missing Barkers have just turned up finally: Hokum & Hex #4: And Saint Sinner #3: I've seen a few sets of AUS Hyperkind 1-3's online, so maybe #4 doesn't exist? Anyway, that brings us up to 1,327 confirmed Australian Price Variants now.

Again, thanks. A formal requirement to disclose rule could only help then, wouldn't you say?

Repaired that for you. SCS pending, of course.

Aren't all those things moderation offences though Dr Love? If there is no rule broken, can't the seller complain to the mods? And won't they be obliged to act in the seller's favour? On a separate point, I love that Dr Love is a proponent of dog piling, thread krapping and serious sarcasm

Thanks Crassus. For the sake of argument, and to clarify the current position, if a seller put a book up for sale that they didn't have in hand, and did not disclose that fact, would any subsequent buyer be in a position to nominate them to be 'dragged through the muck', claiming deception, if the seller could not then fulfil the deal for reasons beyond their control? And if so, what would that dragging through the muck actually constitute? I'm thinking of two scenarios Seller secures x copies of a variant from, say, Metropolis. Advertises on the boards without disclosing that they are not in hand. Buyer buys, Metropolis fails, seller refunds buyer. Buyer not happy, as could have secured elsewhere if they had known the copy wasn't in hand Seller secures x copies of a variant from, say, Metropolis. Advertises on the boards but discloses that they are not in hand. Buyer buys, Metropolis fails, seller refunds buyer. Buyer cannot complain as they knew the risks

If it had support from the community, would you be averse to making a rule that compels sellers to confirm when books are not in hand? As you say, you can't read minds, but if a dissatisfied buyer subsequently complains that a seller did not advise a book was not in hand, which they would not have bought if they had known, the community could at least police the seller via the probation / HOS against that rule. If there is no rule, then any seller can effectively lie about the status / whereabouts of a book and suffer no recourse. Unless I'm missing something?

I agree. If a buyer is happy to buy from a seller, knowing that the book is not in hand, then it is no ones business but theirs. It should be disclosed though, I think, as there are many possible scenarios where things could go wrong, leaving the seller unable to fulfil the order. As long as it is clear, both buyer and seller know the additional potential risks. If a buyer nominated a seller for failing to deliver when it was clear that the book was not in hand, and the book then got damaged, lost or cancelled at the sellers end, then I would say 'tough' to that buyer because that will always be a possibility when buying books that aren't in the sellers hands.

It's a killer isn't it. You'd just have to hope that they went to someone who would know what to do with them, and who would share any findings. Maybe that chap who puts old fanzines online.