Lazyboy

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.

No, the terms were the same: lower cost per unit but no returns.

Well, what it's worth is absolutely nothing. You've been seriously misled, not that you're alone. That may or may not be true, but that's not what they're claimed to be.

Competition is banned on the boards. Jokes are not banned on the boards.

I know what you mean, but the direct market was created in the early 70s and different versions of the same issue, with different distribution, did exist in 1977. But, yeah, the mere presence of a bar code does not automatically make a comic a Newsstand edition.

It's really not that hard to tell the difference between opinion, relevant fact, and irrelevant, limited data. I mean, assuming you actually know and understand the topic.

But it's actually not. It's very misleading. Sure, the trend since the early 70s was the slow decline of the newsstand market and the direct market generally grew over time (at least relative to the newsstand market), but you don't need nonsensical numbers to understand that.

Yeah. The general concept is mostly correct, but the actual numbers used are complete and utter bull.

Um... You caused a piece (however small) to be torn off. Now you can either restore it or not restore it. Those are your options.

Maybe at some point in the past, but today is the present. The last few sales on feeBay are nowhere near that.

https://www.comics.org/issue/351296/

Huh. I know the Essentials line is , but I wonder why nobody has properly indexed that issue (as well as half of the other Spideys) on the GCD.