Get Marwood & I

Two more... Ridiculous Green Goblin in #178!? Alert the Tribal Elders! ....better.

Can't bloody see it can I. We'll have to wait for Kevin's trouble and strife to get moving. Be funny if it had a Miller stamp though, wouldn't it

Not trying to be antagonistic, but maybe we have a scenario here where that rule needs a little finessing? Few things in life are 'no matter what' are they? Anyway, I'm off out Donna. A trip to the pub with the wife.

It's a fair point Matt. He was late to pull the book that he'd indicated by PM to Miraclemet that he was intending to. If someone else had bought it in the thread during that window, and agamoto had refused to sell to them, then that would have been a more telling infringement I think, perhaps worthy of all this debate. But it's done now. I just agreed with the sentiment Bababooey posted earlier and didn't want to leave him standing alone in the circle of that opinion.

That'll do Kevin, don't go mad mate. Any book from the time with a stamp will be cool to see, especially if it predates anything we've captured so far. Post what you've got, in your own time, and I'll tie them in to what we've done so far I've got the magnifying glass on that Supes 132 and....

Because they were MAD. Goody. I like stamp rants Albert. Let's be having it then.

I think I'm in your camp too Bababooey. On the rare occasions I comment on matters like this I'm often pulled up by someone for 'not knowing the full facts' or something like that, sometimes correctly. But if there is nothing salient that I'm missing buried in the various thread details, the pm exchange is straightforward to me. The seller quite clearly indicated he was withdrawing the book. If the matter had ended there privately with the "oh well, I should have just bought it" we wouldn't be here now. I find that the airing of dirty laundry often ends in rancour all round and relatively small disagreements end up magnified with otherwise decent people being branded negatively out of all proportion to the actual original event. The seller is clearly intelligent, can put a rational argument forward and squeeze in some Columbo humour with it. I feel sad that he will likely leave the forum now just for saying "Actually, I think I'll hang on to this one" in response to a pressing question - itself sounding out hidden value - before anyone had legitimately claimed it. The would be buyers lesson for next time - buy the book, if you think it represents value / could make you a buck The would be sellers lesson - check your books carefully before listing them to avoid leaving money on the table scenarios The lesson for me (probably) - stick to pence threads See, always end with a joke. I doubt it will ever happen, but wouldn't it be nice just for once if the two boardies made up, drew a line under it and both walked down the mountain that their molehill became.

Me too. I'll see if I can find anymore - a positive one would be nice!

That it do.

It is, using Mike's Comic Newsstand's 'on sale dates' but it's a time consuming exercise and, whilst it has worked for me in other areas (see DC UKPV thread!), I wonder how helpful it would be here given the likely wide variance in timings of any fledgling US returns process. I may have a go anyway though Albert Here's a sample of October books from Mike's Comic Newsstand, in 'on sale' date order: Superman #132 - 6 August 1959 - no stamped copy as yet Challengers #10 - 18 August 1959 - no stamped copy as yet The Flash #109 - 20 August 1959 - three 9 stamped examples Superboy #76 - 20 August 1959 - no stamped copy as yet Batman #127 - 25 August 1959 - two 9 stamped examples Brave & The Bold #26 - 25 August 1959 - one 6 stamped example Detective Comics #272 - 25 August 1959 - no stamped copy as yet Action Comics #257 - 27 August 1959 - no stamped copy as yet It doesn't help much does it

Nice lot. The ASM's at least will appeal to completists I think. ASM #694 was commanding several hundred dollar bounties at one point in newsstand as it was uncommonly hard to find - shame you missed it by one issue.

Don't get me wrong, I usually avoid these things like the plague, especially as I don't sell here. And I'm not condoning anything. But I just caught sight of the last comment and couldn't help but laugh at its unexpected brutality.

Nicely put. Quite often it's the attempt to avoid responsibility that is worse than the original event isn't it. And rarely does anything good come from having an ongoing online disagreement for the crowds to enjoy. Perhaps he kept escalating because he thought he had right on his side though. Either way, it looks like he's decided to leave the forum so it's a moo point as Joey would say. His final comment over in the now locked thread made me laugh though if I'm honest. I doubt Miraclemet will be taking him up on the kind offer.

I agree. I think cover dates in isolation are a red herring in this exercise. If we want to form a meaningful list of the first books to be distributed in the UK perhaps we need to be guided by cover stamps principally (our 8's and 9's) backed by cover dates that are in the right ball-park to have them (and not obvious date outliers). Yes, October Batman made the first cut as he has a first cycle 9 stamp to back the recollections of those collectors experiences of the time. Boone October is out as he has a 6 stamp and, therefore, likely came over in a subsequent cycle shipment. We're getting there Albert...

So maybe Adventure #265 and Superboy #76 are out there and those and our lone Batman 127 and Boone #1 Octobers were just late? It is, using Mike's Comic Newsstand's 'on sale dates' but it's a time consuming exercise and, whilst it has worked for me in other areas (see DC UKPV thread!), I wonder how helpful it would be here given the likely wide variance in timings of any fledgling US returns process. I may have a go anyway though Albert

Here's an example of what I mean. On the CBPG UK regarding Superman #132 we have two references: The first is the inclusion in the list of First Distribution comics - note no picture, which is odd given the presence of the other mainstays (Flash, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern): The second reference is here, mentioning Batman #127 and Superman #132 as having small quantities: I've seen quite a few stamped Batman #127's in my online searches down the years, but not one Superman #132. There are 6 Superman 132's on eBay UK at present, of which one even states it's the first UK distributed book: But note it's not a stamped copy. Nor are any of the others. All the main UK online dealers have no copies or copies without stamps. I've carried a list of the alleged 'first UK distributed' DCs with me to fairs for some years now and have never seen one in the wild. So it makes you wonder if this issue did actually ever come over doesn't it? Maybe Duncan added it to the list because he reasoned that if Batman #127 was present.... Now I've been proven wrong many times and I'm sure I will be again, but if a copy does show - and it probably will now - what's the betting that it has a number 8 or 9? @Kevin.J - have you gone through your collection yet? Find us one mate

He does look rather chilled, yes The more I look at it, the more I like it...

I'm not sure I follow you Albert? Ignoring the 6's (as probably second cycle stamped books) we only have 8's and 9's tabled so far and each has a mix of cover dates covering 2-3 months. When you say 'October would have had a 7 stamp' why do you think that? The examples of the 8 stamp in my table are predominantly December cover dates. The 9's are predominantly Decembers and Januarys. Why do you think October needs to be in the mix? Is it because of Duncan's site references and the handful of actual October cover dated books that we've seen (of which Batman #127 is a 9 and the Boone #1's are probable second wave 6 stamps)? I note you say 'probably' - if you're recollection is correct and they were stamped, could they not have been stamped with an 8 or a 9? The only reason I challenge is that I have periodically looked for earlier examples than those posted on Duncan's site for many years and I have rarely seen anything stamped earlier than the four pictured examples below - and no Superboy 76 has ever materialised in my searches: The key point for me is identifying which was the first stamp, not cover date. If our theory of stamps matching sequential calendar shipment events is correct, then the first UK arrivals would be the 8's and their cover dates may be anything from October all the way to February 1960. So if a Flash 108 or a Showcase 22 did exist, the chances are their stamps would be an 8. What do you think? I haven't seen one yet myself. It's one of the things I'd like to drive out of this exercise though - a more expansive, evidence based list of the first known DC copies to arrive officially in the UK. Duncan's site shows four pictorial examples plus a list of other possible candidates (unless there is something else available on the site which you only get from being a member, which I'm not). Our table shows many more examples and also fine tunes them to a specific shipment - 8 or 9. There are two ways of looking at this I suppose - earliest stamped cover dates / issue numbers, or earliest numbered stamp regardless of cover date (being the 8, if our research here holds true). The fly in the overall ointment of course is the fact that any given stamped issue could be a late comer from a second cycle!

From a 1974 fanzine - see Marvel 'Distribution Cons':

Clip from an early 1970's UK Fanzine - see 'Distribution Pros & Cons':

That's a nice neat '14' in the H there: It's amazing how many times you see that when the comic doesn't have the number on the cover isn't it

I looked at the other publishers who have 1958 / 1959 stamped books by the way - ACG and Archie - and concluded that I don't have enough examples to justify adding them in. A lot of the Archies are stamped with a 6 though, regardless of cover dates, so they either are second cycle bulk late comers, or they maybe make up the DC '6' compliment and make that stamp number the 'first ever' UK comic shipment lot. While we wait, does anyone have any thoughts on my 'number 8 was the first ever comic shipment' theory? Albert?

That's interesting Gary. It does seem to be the case at the moment that the number sequencing holds true for DC but less so for the other publishers. I wonder if the arrangement of US returns being imported to the UK was an 'agreed' sequential arrangement for DC only, and the other publisher books sort of came along for the ride if you like. Maybe the position for Marvel was only strict in relation to the solicitation of printed price UKPVs - a manifestly formal arrangement - but unstructured when it came to the importation of cents copies - they just came over 'as and when'. I've not studied the Marvel stamps in any depth at all as the focus of this thread was the 'early distribution' in 1959/1960 and, clearly, Marvel were only in the game in respect of their printed UKPV arrangement which started in May 1960 with cents stamped copies not appearing until much later. I'm intrigued to see what your spreadsheet shows.