Malacoda

Good spot. Eric, what's the date on this please? I'm assuming, though it looks 1950's, it's actually post-1959? Thanks.

We're very focussed on the physical comics, the prices, stamps etc, which tends to make us look at those as the main event and work back from there. I think the key issue about the 5 DC PV's, which maybe I failed to emphasise enough, is that they must have been first-run comics, printed specifically for the UK. For 12 years, DC comics had been printed solely for the US market, distributed all over the US, been on sale for months, been gathered back up again, re-batched and exported as seconds, leftovers, at practically waste-paper prices to the UK. I think the change from this to (presumably) wholesale-priced, bespoke-printed, UK-specific comics is the key point. Having made that decision, it was a no brainer to get the prices in UK currency. We know that the reason DC comics were stamped cents copies was because they were US returns, and the reason Marvel were PV's was because they were printed for T&P from the get-go, so as soon as the decision to send a test batch of originals straight from the presses was taken, it was a no-brainer to get them with PV's. The decision to move from what was essentially left over waste-material being dispatched months after printing in extremely unequal quantities of titles to a bespoke print run in defined quantities and defined quantities of each title, is, in my opinion, the main event. The fact that they had pence prices on them is a side issue, and, in my opinion, far less consequential. Does it seem more likely that they decided to experiment with pence prices and then, for the sale of that, changed the entire distribution and cost structure round that, or does it seem more likely that they decided to experiment with distribution and changed the cover prices to pence because the distribution change presented the opportunity to do that? Which one of those two things seems like the bigger deal? I think you're right about T&P making (or driving) the decision to stay with stamping, but I don't think it was because it gave them greater flexibility to alter the pricing. They were only on a 3 month notice window with IND anyway, but, more tellingly, they simply didn't change the prices that much in this period (GS thing excepted). In 1974, when the paper shortage adds to the inflation, it goes nuts, but in 1971, after the GS thing prices settle at 20c and 6p and stay there until 1974. It's possible that they retained the stamping to retain pricing flexibility and then never used it, but it's certain that they never used it. This makes me think it was a distribution experiment. The other problem is that out of the 26 DC titles, only five of them had PV's. If this was about currency, price etc, surely they would have done it with all titles? All of that said, it's still conjecture on my part that this was to test out the newly installed container distribution system. That being the case, it does explain why it was such a minimal trial (it was foisted on T&P....maybe given to them as a cheap deal?) and they didn't want it. They wanted cheap returns. To your point, the key first piece of information is: was this driven by T&P or IND/DC? I think my answer (that IND wanted to test their new distribution system and T&P said 'OK then, but as long as we're doing this, please print PV's') makes sense. However, your point about the timing - they decided to try it out and between that decision and the execution, things got a lot more unstable, is clearly a strong one.

Oddly, the Super Heroes never used Big John's iconic cover from Silver Surfer #1, but for issues 1 & 2, mashes up artwork from the FF.

There's loads that I didn't notice at the time. A great one for UK covers is MWOM #129. Steranko's original artwork made the Hulk look so psychotic with rage that Romita toned it down for KS Special #1, but we got Steranko's original.

(Sorry, got to go out, but be back to finish off later)...

I agree, the turbulent times affect things much more than we think. @OtherEric previously made a very insightful point about economic policy to combat inflation which was probably the real answer to the long-pondered 1971 price increase and immediate (in the case of Marvel) decrease. Re: the PV's, One might think "well, it wouldn't be that. They wouldn't have initiated an experiment only to call it off so quickly" but it's worth remembering that 'the Nixon Shock' was exactly that: a bolt from the blue. As you say, the removal of the Gold standard (which was announced as a temporary measure, but I think they all knew it was the end of Bretton Woods forever) happened in August so I don't think it was a direct factor, but I think the point you're making is the general economic instability, and more specifically currency instability and inflation, leading up to August 15th was the reason that DC/T&P were dabbling. I think that instability was responsible for a lot of things, but I suspect not the DC PV's for the following reason......

Please don't apologise, your contributions are always excellent. Also, extra points for using the word 'spiffing' which really doesn't get out enough.

OK, I'm throwing this one out to the group.....Cap & Iron Man are from Avengers #4, but where does Thor come from? Looks like Kirby inked by Colletta, so probably an interior panel from their Silver Age run on JIM/Thor? Anyone? Anyone?

This one actually uses (bad) re-drawings of the correct original Thor and Iron Man covers....

This is a subtle one, but if you look hard, you might just spot what they did here.

OK, let's end, for the moment, on a corker. John Romita had only just done this cover for ASM when Tony Isabella re-tooled it as a SMCW cover. The idea and the drawing of Spidey & the spider come straight off the original..... but the characters around the spider have been changed to match what was going on in SMCW that week.....but not with art from the comics it was reprinting. The Spider Man story is ASM #66, but the picture of Mysterio is tweaked from an interior panel in ASM #67 (he looks better with purple gloves). SMCW #68 reprints the Iron Man story from TOS #51, but the picture of the Mandarin is from an interior panel in TOS #50 and it reprints the first part of Thor #132, but the pics of Thor & IM are from the cover of GS Avengers #1 though I suspect that pic of Iron Man (and variations) originates somewhere else because it was already Iron Man's logo pic by this time.

MWOM #111 is clearly a repasting of GS Defenders #1, the Torch and the Thing have been completely re-drawn to replace Doc & the Surfer, but it looks like someone has used Gil Kane's Subby as the template for DD and just morphed Namor into DD.

The preceding issue is even better. Although MWOM is nominally reprinting Hulk stories from TTA, they are padding it out as much as possible, so before these FF issues were used as Hulk stories in MWOM 49, Avengers #3 was also reprinted as a Hulk story. But the cover art is from the Defenders. Note Hulk & Thor from Defenders #10, but also Subby is Neal Adams from Marvel Feature #1 which is the first appearance of the Defenders. Also, just to complete the loop, while Tony Isabella clearly agreed with Steve & Sal's note at the bottom of the page and used this interior panel as cover art, John Romita was not of the same mind and re-drew it for the cover of Defenders #10.

MWOM #49 swipes Big John's cover of FF #112. Amazingly, MWOM #49 is actually an FF vs Hulk story, but it's a reprint of FF #25, so the cover art is separated from the story by more than 7 years.

It's a rich and varied seam. For example, as you know, Jim Starlin drew a lot of the early UK covers. I always thought that his UK covers were recycling ideas and layouts from his US work, but in fact, the UK covers were some of his first work at Marvel and precede the US covers. For instance, MTU 27 is pretty clearly a re-drawing of MWOM 44.

LOL. superb. How did I miss that one?

This has to be a swipe surely? It's not just Spidey's fingertips scraping the wall, it's the positioning of both legs.

So, I was thinking, that Red Sonja cover where the vampires are coming out of 3 mirrors in front of her, there must be loads of covers like that. However, when I checked, they're not actually mirrors, they're tombs.... Having said that, this was is what I thought it looked like......

By the way, this FF cover is credited to Jerry Ordway, not as inker but as artist.

This is a bit off topic, but the UK covers are a happy hunting ground for oddly similar covers because they re-used artwork or bits of artwork from the originals and then used the original itself, like the Rhino on 2 consecutive MWOM covers.... in some cases, the replication was a little more obvious.... notice how it's not only the same Hulk cover, but we are threatened (again) with the end of the Fantastic Four and Daredevil is STILL facing his deadliest foe (which was presumably an artwork deadline). For those of you who won't sleep until you know, the 2nd one is actually the reprint of Hulk 160 which does feature the Tiger Shark. #154 actually reprints Hulk's startlingly brief visit to Counter-Earth from Hulk #158, with Tiger Shark nowhere to be seen. I suspect they had got the artwork for 159 ready, but got caught short with #154.

Indeed. And the most interesting thing about that is the copyright. As far as I was aware, Stan & Al Landau hired Ray Wergan to publish MWOM and the other titles from 1972 - 1979. So although we all called them 'Marvel UK', the employees in London were actually employees of Transworld. Tony Isabella's team in NY created the B&W pages and covers with such re-edits as were necessary. Then the plates were sent to London, where Transworld added the letters pages, editorial notes, adverts and so on, changed any references deemed incomprehensible to UK readers, removed editorial notes relating to US stories that had not yet been published and occasionally made scantily clad ladies less scant....... so what on earth was 'Magazine Management London Ltd.'? After Goodman's departure, Perfect Film re-structured everything under Magazine Management, so if there had been some kind of parent company overseeing the UK end, that would have been the name, but what was it? I assume it was just a company in name only so Marvel could re-register the copyrights under UK law, but I think that's the first reference I've seen to any such thing. Note how the Conan reprint above is credited to Magazine Management in the original but Marvel International in the reprint. That's because after Perfect morphed into Cadence, they subsumed everything under Marvel, not MM.

I stand chastened. Subject and object.

@Get Marwood & I I feel like Albert is trying to goad you and I into a full on nerd-off, biggest loser wins. Are we taking the bait?

Seriously?