shadroch

Not so fast. Stans comic company was distributed by Atlas News, which also delivered Goodman's magazines. One of the under-researched aspects of comics in the 1950s was the relationship between mobbed up distributors and comics. People look at Wertham and the comics code for driving companies out of business, but at the same time the US Government was starting to look into the mob and where they laundered their money. It might be a coincidence that within two years of the House investigations into money laundering that 90% of magazine distributors went under, but I don't think so. Goodman's publishing companies all faced the same problem that his comic division faced- No distributors. With everything we know, or think we know , about Martin Goodman, does it make sense to think he would carry a comic division that was losing money? i'm sure the comic division was just one cog in his vast empire but do you really think he would allow it to continue if it wasn't making him some money? Does it make sense that he would lose money on an operation just to keep a very distant relative in a job? He could just as easily put Stan in charge of crossword puzzle books if all he was worried about was keeping him employed. I'm pretty sure Stan would have been just as good selling crosswords as comics.

Funny you should say that. In the 1940's, there were many dozen comic publishers. In the 1950's, that number declined to a precious few. Companies that had been huge all faded away. Yet somehow, the company formerly known as Timely kept plugging away. Crestwood failed, Simon and Kirby failed, Quality failed, EC failed, MLJ failed, Gleason failed, but somehow Stan kept his little company going, even after it distributors closed. Was Stan producing great stuff? Not at all, but his job wasn't to produce great stuff, it was to sell comics and that's what he did. By the late 50s, there were only a handful of companies left, and I suppose it might have been a coincidence but one of them was Stan's. It was a third rate company, but it sold comics and kept it's doors open. That's something very few of his competing editors could say

I wonder if you could press charges in a case like that.

You are mixing back issue sections with dreck boxes. My first store did very well with back issues, they were well more than 50% of my sales. A three month old Marvel title would get bagged and a small premium put on it. Most books with 50 or 60 cent books were 75 cents as a back issue. I still had a 3/$1 section that was mostly beat up back issues in VG or less, or a sprinkling of recent books I had over-bought. As prices climbed for new books, stores got better at ordering. Having 12 books left over at thirty cents a piece stung a bit but when each mistake cost you a dollar or more you learn not to do this. As stores ordered to sell out, back issue sections shrunk. Eventually, the shops junk section rose from 3/$1 to $1. When it cost the store $3 to buy a new comic that it sells for $5.99, most shops would rather sell out than have leftovers. The better the store gets at ordering, the less fodder it ends up with. Selling your new books for $5.99 but having a large selection of dollar books doesn't make sense to me.

The short answer is Yes. A longer answer would be absolutely.

You can go down one size for about 95% of books.

There are tens of thousands of unsold copies of many books from the 90s. It was a time when inexperienced card dealers bought cases of books thinking they would increase in value, and all they did was create a glut. Without knowing what titles you have, it would be silly to speculate but as a rule, most books from that era are easily available in high grade. I bought an unopened case of Shadow of the Bat #2s a year or so ago and used them for Halloween treats.

When I was renting storage units in Las Vegas, I'd ask about cameras and most places had numerous blind spots. There were several large thefts of comics while I was renting, including a guy who claimed to have lost a half million dollar Batman collection. I don't know the hows and whys, but thieves don't seem to be bothered by gate codes and cameras. On the other hand, someone stole my phone off a cart when I went back inside for a minute and the cameras lead us right to the guy. Let's not blame the victim. Checking a storage locker in the middle of a pandemic may not have been a priority. On the other hand, the place I used in Las Vegas would do a walk thru twice a day and check each lock and locker. If someone clipped my lock, I'd know about that day.

KIrby didn't start Crestwood. He started Mainline, which lasted about two years and where he actually reprinted a story he had sold to Crestwood. That is and was outright theft.. The credits on FF read Stan Lee&Jack Kirby. Other early issues say story by Lee, art by Kirby. In 1967, the Fantastic Four cartoon says by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. Neither one of them made money off it, as far as I know. Growing up reading Stan's Soapbox and the letters pages, I had the impression the non-existent was a lovefest and the koolest place to work in the world. How great would it be to work for a guy who sings the praises of just about everyone and loves his job. When Joe Simon sued Marvel over Captain America, did his former partner stand with him? Nope. He testified for Marvel. All he ever seemingly cared about was his next paycheck.

Ask about the pressers insurance information

Marvel used a method that was different than the normal assignments in the industry. They still do. I just saw an interview with JRJR and he still prefers to work under that method. I personally think having an artist work from a fully scripted plot wastes the artists natural talents. Artist can usually visualize better than writers. Who was it that nicknamed Kirby "The King"? If it was Stan, does that seem like he was trying to steal his credit?

Stan often wrote about the Marvel Method and how the artist was so invovled. The Marvel Method was widely discussed. Anyone who actually reads SA Marvels can see how the credits were shared. Jack sucked at being interviewed and Ditko didn't want to be, so somehow this was Stan stealing the spotlight? Stan's job was to sell comics, something he did better than anyone else. In a half dozen years he lead the team that turned a formerly obscure third rate company into a worldwide phenomena. Without looking at the numbers, I suspect Spider-Man sales increased in the years after Ditko and when Kirby left Marvel, it wasn't as if there was a huge decline in sales.

On the other hand, Kirby in the 50s : formed his own comic company which rather quickly went bankrupt. worked on a newspaper strip that never took off and ended up in a lawsuit alienated the editors at DC to the point that he had to return to Marvel to feed his family. How exactly does one measure success? Kirby was offered a ground floor opportunity to go into advertising with his long time partner Joe Simon. It involved taking a chance and going without a paycheck until the business took off. Kirby couldn't or wouldn't take the chance. In a short while, Simon was producing industrial comics, used to train and educate workers. His studio had more work than they could fill. In the mid-50s, Jack and Joe lived across the street from each other in my hometown. Joe moved his family into a mansion in Old Westury and then a few years later bought a compound overlooking Port Jefferson Harbor in a very exclusive neighborhood. Jack stayed in the same house until he moved to California around 1970. While it isn't the only sign of success, continuously moving up in your living situation is generally a pretty good sign of it. Simon and Kirby = greatness Lee and Kirby=greatness Simon, Lee and or Kirby alone= eeeh. Kirby,alone, created Darksied but it took other writers to even begin to use his potential. Kirby was happy using him in children's comics to sell toys. Scott Free? Big Barda? Granny Goodness? Moonboy? All interesting characters he created and utterly misused, imo. BTW- most people credit Wood for at least co-creating the Challengers and some sources say Joe Simon was involved,as well.

I recently tried to pay a boardie for a book and since it wasn't much tried to go the friends and family route, only to discover the person was barred from gtting such payments. I guess someone was a naughty boy and played fast and loose with it.

why would he need a presser for mint books?

Everyone has a plan. Then they get hit with a dose of reality.

Daredevil 7 and 16

Buy sheep, sell veal.

They are worth good money. Hundreds of dollars today, but if you don't need the money , I'd wait. The market is nuts right now and they might be worth much more in a few months.

Why do want them graded? Before you do, can you put a few thousand dollars to better use? I can understand if you want them checked for restoration, but if you aren't going to sell them, why bother?

Roller coaster rides are wild, but the only people who get hurt are those who try to exit mid-ride. It's true at Great Flags, on Wall Street and with comics.

I don't recall nice FF 48s selling for that, but perhaps it was regional. I do recall trading a nice X-Men 201 to another dealer for a crappy FF 48 that I graded VG- at the time but would call it a 2.0-2.5 these days. The guy was certain that #201 was going to be a super hot mega key. That was maybe the mid-90s.

If you are a Bronze Age Marvel collector, like myself, it's an absolute key. If you are chasing 9.8 variants of last months Birdboy, not so much.

I'm mostly selling but have been stockpiling three books whenever I find them at a price I think is right. The problem is it seems everyone is chasing two of the books and prices are nuts.