RockMyAmadeus

This is wonderful information, thank you for finding and reprinting it here. I'm tucking that one away in the notes.

Wow. How very, very interesting. I've heard of books having second printings ordered, but never arriving, the same day as the firsts. This might be an industry first. You'd think this might just be a logistics issue. Why aren't they printing overruns? The conspiratorial might suggest: marketing. Very interesting.

Absolutely. We've floated that letter from Sol around for 20 years now. Too bad Sol didn't inquire further, nor Mr. Lykins, nor the circulation dept. offer more information...you know, like mentioning it was company-wide. Would have addressed this a lot sooner.

Same in Northern California. I was aware of these...just not the extent. I was buying them if I could find them for $1 or less. This would have been 1990-1993. Should have been more aggressive. Off the top of my head, San Jose was also a test market. I have an issue with someone claiming they "discovered" something, when that something had already been published in the Overstreet Price Guide more than a decade earlier (speaking specifically of X-Men #98-100.) I truly do not understand why people are so wedded to being wrong that they're willing to publish it, in the face of obvious proof that totally negates their claims. And these people are "Senior Overstreet Advisors"...? Really...?

It depended entirely on the distributor. Since most comics were being printed at World Color in Sparta, Ill, all at the same time, they were available for transport as soon as they were ready. They'd sit on huge pallets in the Sparta warehouse, waiting to be picked up for distribution, every day. The Direct market folks only dealt with comics and comics related magazines. The newsstand distributors ("Independent Distributors") had a lot more than just comics to distribute; they had all sorts of other magazines and print material to deal with. That's why newsstand books had a lag time. However, sometimes, some of the newsstand distributors were a lot quicker on the ball, so they'd get the books quicker. It was just two different routes from the same place to the same place. By the time the Direct market came into its own in the mid-80's, the shipping had become a science, so that stores in Hayward, CA would get the same new books, on the same day or couple of days, as stores in Poughkeepsie, NY. But the newsstand distributors, because they had so much more to do, took their sweet time a lot of the time, sending giant shipments to local warehouses and hubs to be sub-distributed from there. Here is an AMAZING video from a tour in Sparta in 1977:

If someone knows why these books require a "2 month lead time", please feel free to share. "It's foil" isn't the the answer. Does anyone know what specifically is special about it being foil that would require that length of time. Doing some more research, apparently they ordered "second prints" before the first printing was even published, which would be quite revolutionary...but may be explained by the above....in which case, these aren't "second printings" but "regular variants"...and certainly looks to be a marketing gimmick. Anyone with info?

Check the indicia. Does it say second print? If not, it's just an error. They do that all the time. You are correct, it's coded as a second print, but it's unlikely that it is one.

Allegedly we're the same person though, so all of my liked posts are also your liked posts. So, I should not like your posts, because that's just self-promotion...? Whoa. Meta.

/plant tongue firmly in cheek There's shadroch, incessantly arguing about the meaning of other people's words again. The thread was fun while it lasted. Oh well. /remove tongue from cheek The point is, as you know, there were Direct market distributors outside of Western prior to that time period. To call these Direct books "Whitmans" is to not have a wholly accurate view of the situation as it existed.

What was preventing you from saying that, rather than taking a personal shot at me...? And yes, it's the "same I pull everytime someone posts something I don't agree with", because it's wrong. There's nothing to "admit"; the guy is shading the truth for...what? It's not true that he discovered them, and we know that because they were in the very same price guide published by the guy he claimed didn't know anything about it, and had been for nearly 20 years by the time McClure "discovered" them. If you claim to be the discoverer of something...it really ought not be about something that the industry-standard price guide had already been publishing for a couple of decades. Call me crazy! I've got a NEW DISCOVERY I'm going to mention, right here, for the very first time: Spiderman's first appearance is in Amazing Fantasy #15! You heard it here FIRST! So yes, I'm going to challenge it, because it's not true. Are you seriously suggesting that hype and BS is more important than the facts...?

Why do you say things like this...? Do you think it makes any discussion better, or worse...? Do you think everyone agrees with your assessment...?

Oh God. http://jonmcclurescomics.com/history.html There aren't enough face palms. Why does the serious scholarship, research, and quest for the facts get shoved aside in favor of hype, nonsense, and lies? Answer: $$$. I can't believe what I'm reading, here. It's just total nonsense. Here's an example from the above, of a call Mr. McClure claims to have had with no less than Bob Overstreet: "I told him I had discovered several hundred Marvel comics that nobody knows about. His response was immediate: Thats impossible! Marvel is the most heavily-researched comics company ever, he said. I offered to have proof on his desk the next day. I asked him if I was right, if I could join the team, and he said, Absolutely. When I called the next day he was genuinely surprised and I have been an advisor to the Overstreet Guide ever since." Except this isn't true. It's never been true. How do I know...? Because this information has appeared in the OPG since almost the time these books were published. MANY people knew these books existed, INCLUDING the very same Bob Overstreet who Mr. McClure claims he was talking to. What wasn't known was the SCOPE of these variants. What wasn't known was that these variants encompassed every single book Marvel published for standard distribution. THAT'S what wasn't known. Not that nobody knew about them AT ALL. And the way these people throw around their credentials, as if that makes them immune to error. Sadly, it works. Ever question your doctor...?

I take it back...as I did some more research, I find that Mr. McClure does, indeed, claim to be the "discoverer" of the 30/35 cent cover price variants. http://www.jonmcclurescomics.com/ ...which is odd, since Star Wars #1 35 cent has been known since almost the very beginning, and I'm not sure Mr. McClure discovered it. And since that one has been known since the very beginning, at least in theory, so have the rest.

By the way...now my comments at "Rare Comics" are all marked "awaiting moderation" aka "never going to be published"...including such racy comments as this one: " There are several inaccuracies in the sources you cited, such as Rozanski saying “different printings of monthly comics were first created by Ed Shukin, the Vice President of Marketing at at Marvel Comics, in the summer of 1979” is WRONG. Again: “different printings” began in late 1976, with the Feb, 1977 cover dated books. Shooter says he “didn’t believe”, but that’s anecdotal, not proof. There’s no doubt that the lion’s share of these early fat diamond (AND skinny diamond!) books went to Whitman. But there’s also no reason to think that they ONLY went to Whitman…they were, in fact, Direct market." This is not the hallmark of a scholar, but of a liar and a hype machine. It's one thing to be inaccurate. It's quite another to ignore corrections and mute those correcting you. That moves you from a being legitimate scholar and researcher to a liar and a fraud, attempting to misinform people for your own benefit, whatever that may be. I told Mr. Nobel he ought to be ashamed of himself, and he should be. And silencing people without even bothering to explain yourself makes you a coward which, sadly, far too many people don't seem to have a problem with being these days. I'll ask again @The_Investor: are you Benjamin Nobel? If not, are you connected with him in any way? "Rare Comics" is just another fraudulent blog, attempting to deceive people, no doubt to manipulate the market in his favor. Such a shame, all that effort for fraud.

Phew! All caught up!

This was happening in the EARLY to MID 70's...which is one of the catalysts for Marvel to create the different cover dress in late 1976. As C4F mentioned, by the 80's, it had been squashed.

I want this paperwork. Now I'm going to bug you for it next time I see you.

No, Jon McClure didn't discover the 30/35 cent cover price variants, as I'm sure he would say as well. They have been known almost from the beginning of their existence, starting with Star Wars #1, and into the 80's with other books. Just because the rest weren't recognized in general doesn't mean they weren't "discovered" until 1998. I knew about them from the very beginnings of my time as a collector, in 1990, when I saw 25 and 30 cent variations of the same book.

That's the reaction of 98.46% of the people reading that statement.

By the way...back in the late 80's/early 90's, there was a "75 cent New Mutants #2 Test Cover" theory run around OPG and the Updates. It wasn't. It was just a Canadian newsstand copy that someone found. Canadian newsstand editions exist for every single Marvel, DC, and probably Archie comic published between 1982 and Aug 86 (Marvel) Sep 88 (DC) and sometime in the 90's for Archie. Maybe they exist for others, too. But every single book printed for newsstand distribution has a corresponding Canadian newsstand edition. The Amethyst 35 cent variants, however...? Now THOSE are interesting cats, aren't they?

Yes. "Direct editions" are what they are, and the reason they were made. Calling them "Whitmans"...even if Whitman was the largest consumer of these books, and dictated the details...does a disservice to the other Direct market distributors which existed, and which were doing business, at the time.

Ha! I remember that site. It's link is in the pictures I posted earlier. You had a hand in that? Cool. So, the non-newsstand ASM issues from 165 up are direct editions. Not Whitmans, not diamonds, not early directs. Just 'direct editions'. Is that what you're saying? I didn't have a direct hand in BIP, no, but several paragraphs in that article are lifted from posts I made, probably at the Valiantfans board, over the years. Specifically, these paragraphs: "Diamond issues are the same printing as the newsstand issues but with modified covers to denote that these issues were sold directly for redistribution and not for newsstand sales (issues distributed by Curtis Circulation). The earliest distributor of these diamond cover issues was Western Publishing Company which sold these issues in their Whitman three-packs. Unlike newsstand issues which could be returned if unsold, diamond cover issues could not be returned and the cover modification was Marvel's way of marking these issues.From Marvel in "The Marvel Comics Guide to Collecting Comics" (page 6):The number, month and price in this diamond shape means the issue was not distributed by Curtis Circulation and, that you probably got it from a direct sales comic shop or other outlet. The two boxes (not shown here) with a little "cc" symbol means it was circulated by Curtis. It means nothing as far as value is concerned to collectors. Please Note: MARVEL has recently replaced the diamond shape with this newly designed symbol: [pictured is the M symbol mentioned below]While it is true Western Publishing was the largest distributor of these early diamond issues between 1977-1979 there is anecdotal evidence that indicates they were not the only distributor. Recollections of several dealers have indicated that they had received diamond issues at varying points in time prior to 1980. Regardless of these recollections, it is clear that Western Publishing was the driving force behind these early diamond cover print runs. Starting with comics cover dated June 1979, Marvel began sending diamond cover issues to subscribers and comic shops. At this point diamond cover issues became the de facto standard for Direct Sale destinations." ...are mine. Sounds like me, doesn't it. By the way...I also found my thank you letter from Arnold at Gemstone for my contribution to the OGG, 2nd edition. I'm famous!

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove by trying (there is no "www." in the address) to link to one of the hype/misinformation sources I referenced. That site is terrible. Just read through that site. Hype and misinformation everywhere. By the way...this is why I've been so relentless about getting a hold of every bit of research material possible and reading, reading, reading. The author...Benjamin Nobel...makes some careless mistakes that he wouldn't make if he were more dedicated to serious scholarship. For example, in this article: https://rarecomics.wordpress.com/2016/07/07/the-75-cent-price-puzzle-parallels-to-35-cent-variants/ ...in which the author tried to "parallel" to "35 cent variants" (there is NO parallel), he makes the mistake of quoting a mistake in CBM from 1998. To whit: "“Of the eight 35¢ variants and five 30¢ variants noted in Overstreet #27, four of them are Star Wars #1-4, three are X-Men #98-99, and #106, and the eighth is Iron Fist #15. That’s right, two out of three are popular, high visibility, high demand comics. Only four others have been noticed and referred to by Overstreet in the last 20 years!” (Jon McClure, Comic Book Marketplace issue #55, Jan 1998) Except that Mr. McClure was, himself, in error. Now, Mr. Nobel suggests Mr. McClure might be mistaken: "unless the article has a typo and 106 is meant to be 100 — similarly, I have to wonder if Iron Fist #15 was meant to say #14 as the 1st appearance of Sabretooth" ...but not for the right reasons. Again, here's where an understanding of the history of HISTORY...that is, how the past was perceived at different points in the nearer past...would make these things clearer. For example, for a very long time, almost from the time of publication, Iron Fist #15 was a key issue, and the most valuable book in the run, because it was an early John Byrne X-Men story. Far and away, for over a decade, #15 was THE key issue. However, since the early 90's, IF #15 has faded away, while #14 has taken center stage. But one wouldn't know that, unless they read the literature of the time period. The answer in 1998 was NO, Jon McClure DID NOT mean IF #14...he meant #15, which is what he said. Also, Mr. McClure didn't make a typo: if he had meant X-Men #100, he would have simply written X-Men #98-100. Now, I don't have my OPG #27 handy, but I recognize the passage, and believe that McClure was correct in quoting the OPG, but he is still in error about the details (obviously.) 30 cent issues HAD been known, and commented on, as far back as the mid-80's, when these books were a decade old. They even appear in OPG Updates, as "X-Men #98-100 30 cent price. NOT rare!" So, these books WERE known, on some level, by OPG and others...but nobody cared. But, of course, if someone didn't research that, they'd have no way of knowing.

The first unequivocal Direct market issue of ASM is #165. The great folks at BIP comics...with some uncredited help from yours truly...have put together this fine list: http://www.bipcomics.com/showcase/Direct/index.php

Other companies involved in what? Direct market distribution, or Direct market cover marking? No, it's not safe to say that. There were multiple Direct market distributors...Seagate, Bud Plant, Pacific Comics etc....before Marvel started experimenting with cover dress in late 1976. Aside to @Lazyboy and @darkstar...would it kill ya to give some of my posts a like once in a while...? I go around, liking all your posts, and get NO love in return. Jeez.