Is the new Overstreet out yet??

[thirdgreenham]

A variant needs to be defined as a difference to "the standard" that is done on purpose. "On purpose" simply means that someone at some point consciously changed something for a reason, even if that reason is whim or was done unofficially.

 

The Gold Key Star Trek #1-3 photo variants qualify. Though Gold Key almost certainly didn't intend to create a variant for the reason(s) we think of today (that is, to sell more copies), the fact is, at some point, someone came along and thought it would be a good idea to change the back cover before, during, or after the initial "regular" print run. We can surmise that the photo back covers are the variants, because the rest of Gold Key's output from those months have the "regular" back cover.

 

Errors, and those issued to correct errors, would thereby not qualify as "variants."

 

 

I'm not so sure, Rocky. An error is a variant as well, as long as it had been re-issued with a corrected version. You really seem to be focusing on the more modern variants and all this "on purpose" jazz. That's how your mind got clouded.

 

Andy

 

Not at all.

 

Batman #2, 1940. Canadian price "variant."

 

Someone changed the price on purpose.

 

Variant, not error.

 

Errors are errors, not variants. Corrected errors are corrections, not variants (FF #110, for example.)

 

Variants should be confined to that which is done with intent. My justification for that is to exclude a whole bunch of unquantifiable "errors", so that a meaningful census of variants can be taken and understood.

 

Nothing clouded about it. In fact, quite the opposite. Makes things a whole lot clearer.

 

Okay, should I say you're right now?

 

Forget the term variant and I think you'll be fine. Keep numismatics in mind and think about the term "varieties". In order to have a proven, credible, quantifiable variety, you have to have a "regular" one and at least two identical copies of one that is different from the original. When you have two coins that are identical, yet different from the standard one, you now have a proven variety. This kind of variety was not done on purpose (usually ). Errors are a bit more confusing. Things like clipped planchets, blank planchets, off-set stampings are all of these unquantifiable errors that you're talking about. I'll give you this part, but keep in mind, not all errors were created equal. Think about mules, one side of the coin has another coin's face. Not done on purpose, but it's an error that is highly regarded and collected.

 

I'm using coins as an example, but you can easily shift the whole thought process over to comics. Comics that are manufactured with one staple are errors of the manufacturing sort. Should they be considered a variety or a variant, or just an error? Wasn't there a Batman book that was re-called because of the content and re-issued with a corrected version? This would have been an editorial error, and in my mind should be considered a variant. What about the comics that are printed with only part of the intended ink? Manufacturing error? Anyone care? Whether or not these kind of errors or varieties or variants or whatever you want to call them are going to be desired and collectible, is another matter altogether.

 

It'll be interesting to read this article, anyway, and see how this guy views all this.

 

Andy

[RockMyAmadeus]

A variant needs to be defined as a difference to "the standard" that is done on purpose. "On purpose" simply means that someone at some point consciously changed something for a reason, even if that reason is whim or was done unofficially.

 

The Gold Key Star Trek #1-3 photo variants qualify. Though Gold Key almost certainly didn't intend to create a variant for the reason(s) we think of today (that is, to sell more copies), the fact is, at some point, someone came along and thought it would be a good idea to change the back cover before, during, or after the initial "regular" print run. We can surmise that the photo back covers are the variants, because the rest of Gold Key's output from those months have the "regular" back cover.

 

Errors, and those issued to correct errors, would thereby not qualify as "variants."

 

 

I'm not so sure, Rocky. An error is a variant as well, as long as it had been re-issued with a corrected version. You really seem to be focusing on the more modern variants and all this "on purpose" jazz. That's how your mind got clouded.

 

Andy

 

Not at all.

 

Batman #2, 1940. Canadian price "variant."

 

Someone changed the price on purpose.

 

Variant, not error.

 

Errors are errors, not variants. Corrected errors are corrections, not variants (FF #110, for example.)

 

Variants should be confined to that which is done with intent. My justification for that is to exclude a whole bunch of unquantifiable "errors", so that a meaningful census of variants can be taken and understood.

 

Nothing clouded about it. In fact, quite the opposite. Makes things a whole lot clearer.

 

Nothing to do with intent, but everything do with the printing process. If the books are coming from the same place, running at the same time on the same press with "differences", they are variants.

 

According to whom?

 

So, a Silver Surfer #50 that ends up without the foil is a "variant"?

 

Of course not. It's an error.

 

This really isn't as difficult a concept to grasp for anyone whose collected and studied underground comics, because this is largely how distinguishing differences (cover prices, interior and cover tells) allowed and later led to the identification and reporting of "variations" in printings (i.e. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.). In the days of Superior and Bell Features Comics, those editions were printed in Canada and would fall into the category of foreign edition.

 

What are you talking about, "nothing to do with intent"...?

 

Did someone or did someone not put "15c" into the process on purpose?

 

Or is "15c" just an error...?

 

The answer is obviously done with intent. The reason WHY is a totally different discussion. That it happened with intent is what makes it a variant.

 

You mention undergrounds again...a 35c 2nd print orange Zap #1 is just as much of a variant to the original 25c first print as a foil Dreams of the Darkchylde #1 is to the regular. All done intentionally, all variants.

[RockMyAmadeus]

A variant needs to be defined as a difference to "the standard" that is done on purpose. "On purpose" simply means that someone at some point consciously changed something for a reason, even if that reason is whim or was done unofficially.

 

The Gold Key Star Trek #1-3 photo variants qualify. Though Gold Key almost certainly didn't intend to create a variant for the reason(s) we think of today (that is, to sell more copies), the fact is, at some point, someone came along and thought it would be a good idea to change the back cover before, during, or after the initial "regular" print run. We can surmise that the photo back covers are the variants, because the rest of Gold Key's output from those months have the "regular" back cover.

 

Errors, and those issued to correct errors, would thereby not qualify as "variants."

 

 

I'm not so sure, Rocky. An error is a variant as well, as long as it had been re-issued with a corrected version. You really seem to be focusing on the more modern variants and all this "on purpose" jazz. That's how your mind got clouded.

 

Andy

 

Not at all.

 

Batman #2, 1940. Canadian price "variant."

 

Someone changed the price on purpose.

 

Variant, not error.

 

Errors are errors, not variants. Corrected errors are corrections, not variants (FF #110, for example.)

 

Variants should be confined to that which is done with intent. My justification for that is to exclude a whole bunch of unquantifiable "errors", so that a meaningful census of variants can be taken and understood.

 

Nothing clouded about it. In fact, quite the opposite. Makes things a whole lot clearer.

 

Okay, should I say you're right now?

 

I don't understand the need for melodrama ("clouding your mind", "should I say you're right now?")

 

This is just a discussion. Let's discuss, without making it melodramatic. Just because I don't (usually) pepper my writing with passive/aggressive "IMHO" and "for what it's worth" and "your mileage may vary" doesn't mean the topic isn't open for discussion.

 

Forget the term variant and I think you'll be fine. Keep numismatics in mind and think about the term "varieties". In order to have a proven, credible, quantifiable variety, you have to have a "regular" one and at least two identical copies of one that is different from the original. When you have two coins that are identical, yet different from the standard one, you now have a proven variety. This kind of variety was not done on purpose (usually ).

 

"Varieties" in numismatics happened because dies were, in the 18th and early 19th centuries, made by hand. When dies stopped being made by hand, varieties that were "accidental" ceased to be (and the argument could be made that varieties were never "accidental" to begin with, because they were made by a human...rather than a machine...and that denotes some level of intent, even if the human made a mistake. If the mistake wasn't egregious, the die was used. Not an argument I might make, but some certainly could.)

 

Since comic book printing plates are NOT engraved by hand, your argument is anachronistic.

 

Errors are a bit more confusing. Things like clipped planchets, blank planchets, off-set stampings are all of these unquantifiable errors that you're talking about. I'll give you this part, but keep in mind, not all errors were created equal. Think about mules, one side of the coin has another coin's face. Not done on purpose, but it's an error that is highly regarded and collected.

 

Mules are almost always done on purpose. In fact, prior to 1999, mules were impossible at the US Mints "by accident."

 

However...this discussion has nothing to do with the desirability of errors. The fact is, in numismatics, error coins are always called ERROR coins...not "variants." The word "variant" isn't even used much in coins, because technically every branch mint coin with a mintmark is a variant of the "regular" Philadelphia coin.

 

When varieties ARE made, like the 1909-VDB Lincoln cents, they're called "Type 1" or "Variety 2" or in some cases, the actual variation is specifically named.

 

And coins are "minted", not "stamped." I know, superfluous detail...

 

I'm using coins as an example, but you can easily shift the whole thought process over to comics. Comics that are manufactured with one staple are errors of the manufacturing sort. Should they be considered a variety or a variant, or just an error?

 

Just an error.

 

They should not be called "variants." "Variant" implies intent.

 

Wasn't there a Batman book that was re-called because of the content and re-issued with a corrected version? This would have been an editorial error, and in my mind should be considered a variant.

 

This is easy. It's not a variant, because it wasn't made intentionally to be a variety alongside the original. It has a name, which you've already given: corrected version.

 

What about the comics that are printed with only part of the intended ink? Manufacturing error? Anyone care? Whether or not these kind of errors or varieties or variants or whatever you want to call them are going to be desired and collectible, is another matter altogether.

 

Whether or not errors are desired and collectible (and anyone with a cursory knowledge of comics knows there are highly desired errors in comics) is not what I'm discussing.

 

Errors are not variants. That is my sole and only argument in this discussion.

 

It'll be interesting to read this article, anyway, and see how this guy views all this.

 

Andy

 

Hopefully, this guy thinks clearly, and doesn't take a fanboy approach to the material. It will be the first thing I obtain at SD next week. We shall see.

[RockMyAmadeus]

To those who want to call errors "variants"....

 

Would a book printed with 2, 3, 4...or 9...covers be considered a "multple cover variant"....?

 

Even though it was obviously unintended? Even if subsequent copies (obviously) were "corrected"...?

 

To be consistent, you'd have to.

 

And therin lies the problem.

 

I'd have a problem with a "multple cover variant" because I'm convinced "multple" is a variant spelling to "multiple".

 

 

On a serious note (), when you say that variants "should be confined to that which is done with intent," you're arguing (I assume) practicality and convenience because it breaks things down to more manageable proportions. Are there arguments to the contrary or is this whole variant discussion still fluid enough to where paths are being forged and a consensus hasn't developed? In other words, do you think you are you in the minority or majority of folks who think/feel this way? :shrug: And why?

 

Don't know. Hopefully in the majority. I've done a lot of reseach into variants, and since, to the market in general, "variant" conjurs a mostly positive response, a lot of hucksters try to square peg/round hole the word totally out of meaning by applying it to their "double covers" and "siamese corners" and "single staples" in an attempt to sell them.

 

That's absurd. A variant, as it's been used in the industry by PUBLISHERS has always...and rightfully so...referred to intentional changes made to the regular edition, whether it's a contemporaneous variant, or a later printing variant.

 

 

[thirdgreenham]

A variant needs to be defined as a difference to "the standard" that is done on purpose. "On purpose" simply means that someone at some point consciously changed something for a reason, even if that reason is whim or was done unofficially.

 

The Gold Key Star Trek #1-3 photo variants qualify. Though Gold Key almost certainly didn't intend to create a variant for the reason(s) we think of today (that is, to sell more copies), the fact is, at some point, someone came along and thought it would be a good idea to change the back cover before, during, or after the initial "regular" print run. We can surmise that the photo back covers are the variants, because the rest of Gold Key's output from those months have the "regular" back cover.

 

Errors, and those issued to correct errors, would thereby not qualify as "variants."

 

 

I'm not so sure, Rocky. An error is a variant as well, as long as it had been re-issued with a corrected version. You really seem to be focusing on the more modern variants and all this "on purpose" jazz. That's how your mind got clouded.

 

Andy

 

Not at all.

 

Batman #2, 1940. Canadian price "variant."

 

Someone changed the price on purpose.

 

Variant, not error.

 

Errors are errors, not variants. Corrected errors are corrections, not variants (FF #110, for example.)

 

Variants should be confined to that which is done with intent. My justification for that is to exclude a whole bunch of unquantifiable "errors", so that a meaningful census of variants can be taken and understood.

 

Nothing clouded about it. In fact, quite the opposite. Makes things a whole lot clearer.

 

Okay, should I say you're right now?

 

I don't understand the need for melodrama ("clouding your mind", "should I say you're right now?")

 

This is just a discussion. Let's discuss, without making it melodramatic. Just because I don't (usually) pepper my writing with passive/aggressive "IMHO" and "for what it's worth" and "your mileage may vary" doesn't mean the topic isn't open for discussion.

 

Forget the term variant and I think you'll be fine. Keep numismatics in mind and think about the term "varieties". In order to have a proven, credible, quantifiable variety, you have to have a "regular" one and at least two identical copies of one that is different from the original. When you have two coins that are identical, yet different from the standard one, you now have a proven variety. This kind of variety was not done on purpose (usually ).

 

"Varieties" in numismatics happened because dies were, in the 18th and early 19th centuries, made by hand. When dies stopped being made by hand, varieties that were "accidental" ceased to be (and the argument could be made that varieties were never "accidental" to begin with, because they were made by a human...rather than a machine...and that denotes some level of intent, even if the human made a mistake. If the mistake wasn't egregious, the die was used. Not an argument I might make, but some certainly could.)

 

Since comic book printing plates are NOT engraved by hand, your argument is anachronistic.

 

Errors are a bit more confusing. Things like clipped planchets, blank planchets, off-set stampings are all of these unquantifiable errors that you're talking about. I'll give you this part, but keep in mind, not all errors were created equal. Think about mules, one side of the coin has another coin's face. Not done on purpose, but it's an error that is highly regarded and collected.

 

Mules are almost always done on purpose. In fact, prior to 1999, mules were impossible at the US Mints "by accident."

 

However...this discussion has nothing to do with the desirability of errors. The fact is, in numismatics, error coins are always called ERROR coins...not "variants." The word "variant" isn't even used much in coins, because technically every branch mint coin with a mintmark is a variant of the "regular" Philadelphia coin.

 

When varieties ARE made, like the 1909-VDB Lincoln cents, they're called "Type 1" or "Variety 2" or in some cases, the actual variation is specifically named.

 

And coins are "minted", not "stamped." I know, superfluous detail...

 

I'm using coins as an example, but you can easily shift the whole thought process over to comics. Comics that are manufactured with one staple are errors of the manufacturing sort. Should they be considered a variety or a variant, or just an error?

 

Just an error.

 

They should not be called "variants." "Variant" implies intent.

 

Wasn't there a Batman book that was re-called because of the content and re-issued with a corrected version? This would have been an editorial error, and in my mind should be considered a variant.

 

This is easy. It's not a variant, because it wasn't made intentionally to be a variety alongside the original. It has a name, which you've already given: corrected version.

 

What about the comics that are printed with only part of the intended ink? Manufacturing error? Anyone care? Whether or not these kind of errors or varieties or variants or whatever you want to call them are going to be desired and collectible, is another matter altogether.

 

Whether or not errors are desired and collectible (and anyone with a cursory knowledge of comics knows there are highly desired errors in comics) is not what I'm discussing.

 

Errors are not variants. That is my sole and only argument in this discussion.

 

It'll be interesting to read this article, anyway, and see how this guy views all this.

 

Andy

 

Hopefully, this guy thinks clearly, and doesn't take a fanboy approach to the material. It will be the first thing I obtain at SD next week. We shall see.

 

First off, I've got to say "thank you". I've always secretly wanted to be dissected by you and you didn't let me down.

 

Sorry for being melodramatic, it's just that your posts really do come across as the final say and not being open for discussion, most definitely due in part to the lack of writing things like "IMHO".

 

I understand your feelings completely, and even though I feel a little bit pwned now, this has been fun. Again, thank you. (thumbs u

 

Enjoy your time at SDCC!

 

Andy

[Jeffro.]

This is just a discussion. Let's discuss, without making it melodramatic. Just because I don't (usually) pepper my writing with passive/aggressive "IMHO" and "for what it's worth" and "your mileage may vary" doesn't mean the topic isn't open for discussion.

 

That's because there's nothing humble about your opinions, rocky. You should use IMN(ot)S(o)HO

[ShieldAgent]

not like I have much input, but I tend to agree with RMA.

 

errors are errors

 

reprints are reprints

 

Foreign editions are Foreign editions (there I said it again)

 

price variants are price variants

 

whitmans are ?? (some are variants)

 

multi cover books are manufactured variants

 

Variant has become a blanket term for every possible condition in hopes to raise prices of sellers trying to cash in on some percieved rarity.

 

I am interested in this new OS, but really, what new information is this report going to bring to light that has not been covered over at STLcomics? I am going to bet not too much, if any. Any thoughts? I hope it is not a bunch of speculative hype, but am afraid that might be all that is left.

[comicwiz]

I'm not going to get too hung up on this discussion, but it seems the way variants are determined according to distribution is erroneous. Distribution should have absolutely nothing to do with it. This thinking has to change because it is confusing the way we understand everything from foreign editions right through to reprints.

 

Variants are determined by the printing process. In addition, our understanding of foreign editions needs to be more concisely defined. IMHO, books that are printed in the U.S.A., that run at the same time, with notable differences, are variants. As mentioned earlier, books produced outside of the U.S.A. are in fact foreign editions, and this includes Superior/Bell and all foreign language editions. Foreign editions which are produced well after the books original production period are reprints.

 

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

[ShieldAgent]

 

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

I know that is what you want, but sorry, we will never agree. All the books delivered to Canada, or were made for Canada, are not special variants. I dont care about the print run or anything. They might be more rare than US editions. So what. They are foreign editions.

 

Foreign editions are foreign editions. I dont care if they are dell, marvel, DC, GK, or whitman. They are foreign editions.

 

Again, I say go to the indicia. If the price in the indicia matches the price on the front of the comic, you do not have a PRICE Variant.

 

I am sure there are exceptions, but they are just that, exceptions.

[comicwiz]

 

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

I know that is what you want, but sorry, we will never agree. All the books delivered to Canada, or were made for Canada, are not special variants. I dont care about the print run or anything. They might be more rare than US editions. So what. They are foreign editions.

 

Foreign editions are foreign editions. I dont care if they are dell, marvel, DC, GK, or whitman. They are foreign editions.

 

Again, I say go to the indicia. If the price in the indicia matches the price on the front of the comic, you do not have a PRICE Variant.

 

I am sure there are exceptions, but they are just that, exceptions.

 

It has nothing to do with what I want. It's just the most logical way of defining what is "foreign." I'd like for you to try and convince the IRS or Marvel/DC tax dept to file as a foreign corporation, when the comics they produced for Canada and the UK were being printed in the U.S.A. There are laws in place for companies to follow, and declaring otherwise has nothing to do with satisfying a collector base, and everything to with our everyday understanding of treating "foreign" in the strictest sense from both a commercial and human reasoning standpoint.

 

As far as my stand on variants being determined by the printing process, I guess we'll have to wait and see - perhaps I'll be one of the few who is holding out that this will be spelled out and corrected once and for all in the next update.

[joe_collector]

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

Nope, as where they're printed is 100% inconsequential to the "variant" term, it's where they're SOLD that matters. You need to have at least 2 different versions sold through the same distribution system and country to even start to qualify for "variant" status.

 

They could print them all in a factory in China and they'd still be US/Canadian/UK/etc. editions, not Chinese.

[joe_collector]

I know that is what you want, but sorry, we will never agree. All the books delivered to Canada, or were made for Canada, are not special variants. I dont care about the print run or anything. They might be more rare than US editions. So what. They are foreign editions.

 

Foreign editions are foreign editions. I dont care if they are dell, marvel, DC, GK, or whitman. They are foreign editions.

 

Exactly, and I'm not sure why in a "global economy", where the comics are printed even matters - the only important factor is the country they're sold in and whether that country had 2 or more versions hitting the same distribution path.

[ShieldAgent]

 

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

I know that is what you want, but sorry, we will never agree. All the books delivered to Canada, or were made for Canada, are not special variants. I dont care about the print run or anything. They might be more rare than US editions. So what. They are foreign editions.

 

Foreign editions are foreign editions. I dont care if they are dell, marvel, DC, GK, or whitman. They are foreign editions.

 

Again, I say go to the indicia. If the price in the indicia matches the price on the front of the comic, you do not have a PRICE Variant.

 

I am sure there are exceptions, but they are just that, exceptions.

 

It has nothing to do with what I want. It's just the most logical way of defining what is "foreign." I'd like for you to try and convince the IRS or Marvel/DC tax dept to file as a foreign corporation, when the comics they produced for Canada and the UK were being printed in the U.S.A. There are laws in place for companies to follow, and declaring otherwise has nothing to do with satisfying a collector base, and everything to with our everyday understanding of treating "foreign" in the strictest sense from both a commercial and human reasoning standpoint.

 

I guess we'll have to wait and see, and perhaps I'll be one of the few who is holding out that this will be spelled out and corrected once and for all in the next update.

 

so you believe that when you walked into your Canadian newsstand, all they had for sale was variants?

 

I am almost willing to bet a nice shiney real marvel price variant, that the article will provide you with no closure regarding this issue.

 

Like I said once, I really doubt the article brings to light anything that has not been discussed on either STLcomics or here.

[comicwiz]

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

Nope, as where they're printed is 100% inconsequential to the "variant" term, it's where they're SOLD that matters. You need to have at least 2 different versions sold through the same distribution system and country to even start to qualify for "variant" status.

 

They could print them all in a factory in China and they'd still be US/Canadian/UK/etc. editions, not Chinese.

 

Distribution is the part that is most inconsequential - rather where the book is printed, and how the press simultaneously procured the printing of different copies to run at the same time that determines they are variants.

[comicwiz]

 

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

I know that is what you want, but sorry, we will never agree. All the books delivered to Canada, or were made for Canada, are not special variants. I dont care about the print run or anything. They might be more rare than US editions. So what. They are foreign editions.

 

Foreign editions are foreign editions. I dont care if they are dell, marvel, DC, GK, or whitman. They are foreign editions.

 

Again, I say go to the indicia. If the price in the indicia matches the price on the front of the comic, you do not have a PRICE Variant.

 

I am sure there are exceptions, but they are just that, exceptions.

 

It has nothing to do with what I want. It's just the most logical way of defining what is "foreign." I'd like for you to try and convince the IRS or Marvel/DC tax dept to file as a foreign corporation, when the comics they produced for Canada and the UK were being printed in the U.S.A. There are laws in place for companies to follow, and declaring otherwise has nothing to do with satisfying a collector base, and everything to with our everyday understanding of treating "foreign" in the strictest sense from both a commercial and human reasoning standpoint.

 

I guess we'll have to wait and see, and perhaps I'll be one of the few who is holding out that this will be spelled out and corrected once and for all in the next update.

 

so you believe that when you walked into your Canadian newsstand, all they had for sale was variants?

 

I am almost willing to bet a nice shiney real marvel price variant, that the article will provide you with no closure regarding this issue.

 

Like I said once, I really doubt the article brings to light anything that has not been discussed on either STLcomics or here.

 

[joe_collector]

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

Nope, as where they're printed is 100% inconsequential to the "variant" term, it's where they're SOLD that matters. You need to have at least 2 different versions sold through the same distribution system and country to even start to qualify for "variant" status.

 

They could print them all in a factory in China and they'd still be US/Canadian/UK/etc. editions, not Chinese.

 

Distribution is the part that is most inconsequential - rather where the book is printed

 

So you're actually saying that if all comics are printed in a Chinese factory, then they are ALL variants? After all, the US is not China.

 

[comicwiz]

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

Nope, as where they're printed is 100% inconsequential to the "variant" term, it's where they're SOLD that matters. You need to have at least 2 different versions sold through the same distribution system and country to even start to qualify for "variant" status.

 

They could print them all in a factory in China and they'd still be US/Canadian/UK/etc. editions, not Chinese.

 

Distribution is the part that is most inconsequential - rather where the book is printed

 

So you're actually saying that if all comics are printed in a Chinese factory, then they are ALL variants? After all, the US is not China.

 

 

Read what I wrote in its undiced form to dignify your statement with a response

[joe_collector]

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

Nope, as where they're printed is 100% inconsequential to the "variant" term, it's where they're SOLD that matters. You need to have at least 2 different versions sold through the same distribution system and country to even start to qualify for "variant" status.

 

They could print them all in a factory in China and they'd still be US/Canadian/UK/etc. editions, not Chinese.

 

Distribution is the part that is most inconsequential - rather where the book is printed

 

So you're actually saying that if all comics are printed in a Chinese factory, then they are ALL variants? After all, the US is not China.

 

 

Read what I wrote in its undiced form to dignify your statement with a response

 

Answer this question:

 

Would a US comic printed in China, alongside a Canadian/UK/etc. runs, be a variant?

 

It seems that you're saying ALL comics printed in a multiple-run environment are variants.

[comicwiz]

Despite our past disagreement on the subject, newsstand comics printed in the U.S.A. that bear a single Canadian or UK price are in fact variants.

 

Nope, as where they're printed is 100% inconsequential to the "variant" term, it's where they're SOLD that matters. You need to have at least 2 different versions sold through the same distribution system and country to even start to qualify for "variant" status.

 

They could print them all in a factory in China and they'd still be US/Canadian/UK/etc. editions, not Chinese.

 

Distribution is the part that is most inconsequential - rather where the book is printed

 

So you're actually saying that if all comics are printed in a Chinese factory, then they are ALL variants? After all, the US is not China.

 

 

Read what I wrote in its undiced form to dignify your statement with a response

 

It seems that you're saying ALL comics printed in a multiple-run environment are variants.

 

Not entirely true, and lets keep this on subject. The publishers who produced different priced copies to accommodate the exchange rate differences in the early 80's were all based in the U.S.A., so lets not complicate things by bringing in China.

 

If we can agree that all those books from Marvel, DC, Archie, Charlton, Harvey, et al were printed in the U.S.A., then there is no question whether those "different" copies produced with a single price for Canada and the UK were printed simultaneously alongside their regular US/Direct editions. Comics priced for Canada and UK during this time are and should be regarded as variants.

 

When the multi-price format came into effect, there was no longer any need to run a simultaneous print run to procure a printing for different priced copies.

[joe_collector]

So by your bizarre definition, ANY comic printed in the same factory is a variant, since things were changed between runs.