Lazyboy

No, no. Your credibility was gone long ago. All that's left is endless proof of why.

Of course not, but you took an unprovoked shot at me over it because, yet again, you don't understand something. feeBay is not a random sample. Maybe it was 25 years ago. Maybe. Great! Then you don't need to make up ridiculous numbers or spread ridiculous numbers made up by others! It's enough to know they're harder to find. Sure, even if we didn't already realize that. No, it is not. Yeah, that matters... only if you desperately need to buy something right now and you live in a bad area where your options are limited. I'm not really concerned about hoards surfacing. You completely missed the point that those copies simply still exist despite that fact that they shouldn't. Prices are always determined by supply and demand. I do understand your point, but that's not an accurate way to state it. Well, it is definitely not almost every comic. I think it's a majority, but I'm not sure by how much. Personally, almost 15% of my collection from the dual-distribution era is Direct-only. No, there are lots of those comics that only have a less common version, but nowhere near rare. Plus all the comics that only have one version, including quite a few with high demand. Unopened boxes of SA keys? That's very interesting, mostly since comics were not distributed in boxes back then.

Here are some actual numbers presented: 12345 67890 68 5798 453 36547244537 5375 7588888 2353778890 89785346350 52752145 554 5837235752 Random gibberish? Of course not. All numbers are true and meaningful. 1393181549311 919 16120852093 2315182081251919 18520118454 198920 More very useful, absolutely not random numbers. 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 Okay, these are actually something, but don't mean anything here. 100000000000 One hundred billion! (dollars?) 4815162342 At least these were on a comic book cover. 9 781632 159175 51499 Again, some connection to comics (from the bar code of a TPB that was sitting beside me). All just as relevant to this thread as the fake numbers you love so much.

Do you understand bias? Do you understand how the entire comics market is generally biased? Because it's a very real thing. I'm not saying specific Newsstands are really easy to find. I am saying that they do pop up all over the place and what is available varies wildly by time and venue. The same is true for many Direct editions that aren't from super common top titles. Still, none of that tells us anything about total extant copies. I realize this post I'm responding to was not specifically about survival rates, but I am still waiting for that proof. I do it for two reasons. Yes, because it sucks, but mostly because of the affiliate-link-replacement -script on the boards.

I don't have a copy of that issue, but I do have multiple other Newsstands with that insert.

Oh, you're in for it now. But which one of them will be the first to respond/attack?

Because I already know where you get your irrelevant data. And yes, I know it's very slightly more than just feeBay. Not even 1% accurately, so no, there is not a way to do it. Give a number and then show me even a single shred of proof of that number. Actual proof. No, I was responding to the "while information about print runs, or estimates of them, are interesting" part of what I quoted. You were suggesting that numbers other than whatever you want are not relevant, but you're wrong. No kidding. That's the problem!

Based on the available numbers, the ASM newsstand distribution percentage for 2011 could easily have been a single digit, but that isn't the claim that was made. Chuck was already down to single digits when he claimed that the newsstand distribution percentage for 2000 (you know, 11 years earlier) was 5%. Considering how bad the overall market was then, I guarantee Marvel would have immediately dropped newsstand distribution then rather than waiting another 13 years. The other issue is that the chart was never claimed to be applicable to any or every individual title or issue, though it is very often misused as though it were. Different titles could have significantly different numbers and, of course, some titles weren't distributed through the newsstand system at all. Also, the newsstand percentage for the entire comics market didn't even approach, let alone reach, 5% until after Marvel's exit.

1. Once again, feeBay is NOT the market, so just looking there tells you very little about market availability. 2. There is no way to quantify survival rates of sold/distributed copies and suggesting they're low only illustrates your agenda. Plus, again, the survival rate of "returns" is above 0%. 3. People keep touting Chuck's numbers as gospel. Since those numbers are (alleged) distribution (percentage) numbers, real distribution numbers need to be used to debunk them. 4. There is absolutely not enough data to make the claims that have been repeated over and over in this thread and others by people like you.

As stated on every relevant page, it is "Estimated Comics Shipped to North American Comics Shops" that is covered. But just to clarify, that page contains Statement of Ownership information, which is different than the monthly Direct sales estimates for which the site is primarily known.

As stated on every relevant page, it is "Estimated Comics Shipped to North American Comics Shops" that is covered.

"Dealers" are everybody who sells comics, not Direct market comic shops. So everything after that is necessarily incorrect.

You understand that the main problem with Chuck's chart is not the years during which Shooter was in charge at Marvel, right? Not that I believe the earliest numbers are perfect, either. The problem with Nobel's site is that it is full of terrible assumptions and faulty logic. There is also some basic information there that is good, but it is dwarfed by the bad.

We already did that last year here. I'm still not sure how Greg was apparently unaware of Statements of Ownership (a significant source of the comic book numbers that are publicly available) before that, but we cleared up that part.

The first time I broke it down (over six years ago ) was in your thread! Well, one of the million. Starting here and continuing for most of that page. I really should organize all the information and analysis I've posted over the years and create something I can copy/paste every time this topic comes up.

Because there are so many other people who understand the topic and try to correct the misconceptions.

Well, when somebody believes that newsstand distribution was only 5% of the total sales for an issue when the Direct estimates from reputable sources like Comichron only account for 60% of sales...

That's hilarious, because I own relatively few comics purchased new from comic shops and about 15% of the comics that I bought off the racks are Newsstands. Also, as I've mentioned before, I have thousands of Newsstands that I acquired as back issues, including random junk like these: So rare that I have more than one and it's not even a superultramegarare regular Newsstand, but an even rarer oddball error. I'll gladly profit from selling Newsstands, I'm just not going to deceive people to do so.

So you support cheating gullible fools out of their money? Because the foolish belief in the ridiculous numbers spread by charlatans is the reason for the inflated prices. Those prices did not exist before the massive spread of misinformation.

What do you think is the thrust of the debate? Also, last I saw, they still haven't properly executed that plan. There are factually different versions of most issues from the past 4+ decades and there is no reason they should not be properly identified and differentiated. There was never any reason, despite CGC's lateness to the party on some versions. But that's very different than making up ridiculous numbers to cheat gullible fools out of their money.

So you don't like it when you think numbers are being exaggerated? Well, I guess that proves my point. Thanks! Still, I guarantee that 50% in 2000, 20% in 2005, and 10% in 2013 for Newsstands are much, much, much closer to reality than Chuck's numbers. There is a difference between what you can easily find and buy while sitting on the couch in your underwear, what is available for purchase somewhere, and what exists but is not currently available. Easy and possible are different things. Also, what is available in the market changes constantly. These are simple facts. I'm not sure why a collector Newsstand buyer who isn't serious would go to the trouble of selling a bunch of comics on feeBay when they decided to get rid of them. Or how they would have a collection to sell since they read their comics on the way out the door of the store where they purchased them and threw them away before they even got home... or so some people would have me believe. I'm not sure what would make a "better" collector. Collecting is an individual pursuit.

The Newsstand print numbers are factually orders of magnitude above Chuck's ludicrous numbers. Distribution, in this case, means copies sold to end users, not the process run by distributors. You can make some rough estimations based on the marketplace, but you have to look at as much of the marketplace (of which feeBay is only a tiny, though highly visible, part) as possible. I've seen more post-2000 Newsstands in person in the last few months than you claim your LCS has overall (of any era) and I didn't need to look at anywhere near 150,000 comics. Not to mention a ton of earlier Newsstands, including Canadian Newsstands. 1. 2. Prove it (I know you couldn't prove it even if it were true, but let's pretend for a second or two). 3. If I had $1 for every non-HG Copper Direct edition I've seen, I'd be rich. Attrition is reality. Copper comics have had decades to suffer damage and destruction.

That's the other thing that some people try to avoid discussing in regards to this topic. There have always been copies around that were supposed to be destroyed after going unsold during their window. But post-Silver Age (basically), covers were rarely stripped, in whole or part. So it's impossible to distinguish between a copy that was sold to an individual at time of release and one that was sitting somewhere untouched - and possibly never even distributed to a retailer - for years, since it was released. It's also impossible to know just how many copies escaped their fate.

Yeah, the newsstand distribution system has never been efficient as far as sell-through goes. That had nothing specifically to do with comics and has not changed since comics left that system.

No, they are not even close. Well, okay, 1979-1986 might be pretty close. But they aren't print run numbers, they're claimed to be distribution numbers. If they were supposed to be print run numbers, they would (somehow) be even further beyond absurd.