Is the new Overstreet out yet??

[Jeffro.]

Guys, doesn't the word variant by definition (because it comes from the root "vary" or "to vary") mean that ANY noticeable difference makes it a variant?

 

No. Next question.

 

Why not? It varies from the original. How it varies, why it varies and whether it's collectible or not is an entirely different matter.

 

What is happening in this thread is that people are trying to pigeonhole the term variant when in fact it can't be pigeonholed because as different types of "variants" are produced that term becomes more and more broad to the point where it needs to be broken down into categories.

 

 

That is simply not true. You are trying to pigeonhole an intentionally overbroad definition that does not apply. I have a copy of a marvel comic (Warlock I think) that has the interior of a karate kid from the same time period. That is not a variant. It varies from what it is supposed to be, but it is not a variant. It is an error.

 

I have an Iron Man annual that has the pages out of order. Same issue. Its an error, not a variant.

 

[comicwiz]

It'll be interesting to see if what Troy McClure has to say in his report is going to be accepted as truth. The final say in what defines a variant. I think that there will definitely be people who have a strong belief already, and if their belief isn't in line with McClure's, then they'll denounce him, just as some have denounced others in this thread. We'll see, we'll see.

 

BTW, I know it's Jon McClure.

 

All I know is some people throw around the term "variant" far too easily and usually only when they want to try to wring out a few more bucks when selling their books. Usually on ebay.

 

 

Same goes with "CGC" - does it mean the end of the hobby as we know it when people don't know better than to upset the savvy with improper use of keywords in their listings?

 

No. We laugh and cry about it - the hobby still goes on.

[mica]

 

u 2 guyz dnt hv kidz tht txt mch.

 

w/e = whatever in 15yearold text speak

Please do not pass that evil on.

[thirdgreenham]

 

u 2 guyz dnt hv kidz tht txt mch.

 

w/e = whatever in 15yearold text speak

Please do not pass that evil on.

 

Don't you uh uh my uh huh.

[goldust40]

I think that Sig Series books are variants.

[thirdgreenham]

I think that Sig Series books are variants.

 

Well, they do vary from the unsigned ones. (thumbs u

[Jeffro.]

What if I have a copy of the Fantastic Four that's a price variant manufactured with only one staple, the pages out of order, and the Thing colored mauve?

Then what is it???

[Chespirito]

Trash

[hulksmashdave]

What if I have a copy of the Fantastic Four that's a price variant manufactured with only one staple, the pages out of order, and the Thing colored mauve?

Then what is it???

 

Homemade and colored by a child??

[goldust40]

What if I have a copy of the Fantastic Four that's a price variant manufactured with only one staple, the pages out of order, and the Thing colored mauve?

Then what is it???

 

Difficult to read?

[greggy]

What if I have a copy of the Fantastic Four that's a price variant manufactured with only one staple, the pages out of order, and the Thing colored mauve?

Then what is it???

 

Difficult to read?

Approve my Facebook "friend" request, wanker.

[RockMyAmadeus]

To call these true variants is a misconception of what a variant is in relation to their demand in the hobby.

 

Jim

 

There's your mistake. The definition of a variant has NOTHING to do with demand or price or any aspect of the market. Only production matters.

 

+1

 

I just want to say that misconceptions brought up in this thread about... intent...they all have absolutely nothing to do with determining variants. While they're all important variables in arriving at a better understanding of why they captivate the interests of collectors, they are all afterthoughts as far as determining variants is concerned.

 

And in response, I re-iterate that you're incorrect. There is no "misconception"...we simply don't agree.

 

A variant is created by intent. If there is no intent, it's an error. It's pretty basic, and has EVERYTHING to do with determining if something is a variant. according to how that word is used and has been used and understood by the comics community at large. In fact, contrary to what you've written here, intent has absolutely nothing to do...variable or otherwise...with why variants captivate the interests of collectors. Collectors are captivated because it's something different. No more, no less. Most collectors could not care less WHY something was made...but to understand what is and is not a variant, WHY becomes all important.

 

I certainly agree with you that distribution and demand have nothing to do with determining what is and is not a variant, but you are egregiously wrong when you say intent has nothing to do with it.

 

If that were true, anything is a variant...I have a coffeee ring stain variant, a small tears on edge variant, a no foil variant, a married pages variant...etc, etc, etc.

 

That is self-evidently not true.

 

As Lazyboy said, only production matters. That is absolutely correct.

[RockMyAmadeus]

The Canadian "editions" are still a variant compared to the majority print run of the direct market (and US) edition though because the entire content of the book is the same except for the price and indicia being different.

 

So what do you call them if you don't call them a Canadian Newsstand Price variant?

 

 

Foreign editions. That's what they are. To say they are variants is diluting what a variant is in this hobby. They are no different then Brit editions. Same comic, different price on the cover. Made at the same time but distribured to different foreign regions.

 

To call these true variants is a misconception of what a variant is in relation to their demand in the hobby.

 

Jim

 

I tend to agree (as I did at STL, and especially as it concerns dilution of the word "variant"), but I have no real philosophical problem with calling them price variants in the United States.

 

In Canada, they can certainly retaliate by calling ours "American Price Variants"...

 

 

 

Look, I'll give you the philosophical aspect of falsely recognizing a book as something which goes contrary to research. For example, there has been a body of research which has existed since 1982, which documents underground comix printings. There is no mention of variant anywhere. IMHO, to start throwing around the term "variant" to describe a print run, an anomaly, irregularity, error or misprint of any kind would be ridiculous.

 

That's what I've been saying this entire thread.

 

 

Have you been entirely hung up on undergrounds this entire conversation...? I suspect so.

 

Suffice it to say, without going into great detail...pause for laughter...undergrounds as a whole have historically operated under a completely different set of rules in the comics community, not the least of which is their lack of inclusion in the OPG since Day 1.

 

But that's another discussion.

 

That said, I am also open minded about noting these irregularities and new discoveries because it makes it possible to identify characteristics which may someday work towards filling in past research gaps. Just don't call them variants.

 

With regard to books printed by the mainstream comic publishers and as far as variants are concerned, as I've said earlier in this thread, the research is badly in need of revision. The collector and crowd sourced beliefs and understandings have become so badly convoluted that people in this very thread are still confusing the most basic premise of what constitutes a foreign edition.

 

No, it's just that people don't agree with you.

 

And people think *I* am condescending and dismissive.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

It'll be interesting to see if what Troy McClure has to say in his report is going to be accepted as truth. The final say in what defines a variant. I think that there will definitely be people who have a strong belief already, and if their belief isn't in line with McClure's, then they'll denounce him, just as some have denounced others in this thread. We'll see, we'll see.

 

At last! Something we can agree on!

 

 

We need a soda slupring smiley, too...

[goldust40]

What if I have a copy of the Fantastic Four that's a price variant manufactured with only one staple, the pages out of order, and the Thing colored mauve?

Then what is it???

 

Difficult to read?

Approve my Facebook "friend" request, wanker.

 

Done and done, my dear tosspot.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

Andy, I agree. Some of the hardest rallyers behind Jon's research will see it for what it is - an opportunity to inject new interest and excitement in the hobby. The people who want to remain stuck behind the research curve, aren't going to like it much. My only explanation for this mindset is they're probably happy to remain in auto-pilot mode. They've enjoyed the perks of having intimate knowledge, and perhaps even using it in opportunistic ways - maybe too often to their advantage as opposed to sharing it with newcomers. That's about to change, and for some of the ones who've already remarked as much in this thread, Doug Sulipa said it best in that article - The comic-collecting world does not yet know this article is coming."

 

For what it is...? It's a research article, for which McClure undoubtedly got paid.

 

"an opportunity to inject new interest and excitement in the hobby"...? Probably wayyyyyy down on the list of reasons for doing it, if it was even a consideration. After all...who reads Overstreet articles?

 

Answer: people to whom the information is already very familiar. Very, very few people who don't already have a fairly intimate knowledge of the material are going to be interested in reading it.

 

Some, but few.

 

As for "stuck behind the learning curve"...once more: just because someone doesn't agree with you does not mean they're "stuck" behind ANYTHING.

 

They just don't agree with you.

 

As for McClure's article, it will undoubtedly contain information with which I am not familiar, and that is of paramount concern to me. Filling in and perfecting my knowledge is what matters to me. If he defines things in a way I don't, I'll certainly feel free to critique him, but he's the one who got asked to write the article...not me. That should tell you how much my opinion is worth to the powers that be.

 

And I have absolutely zero problem with that. Self-confidence RULES.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Guys, doesn't the word variant by definition (because it comes from the root "vary" or "to vary") mean that ANY noticeable difference makes it a variant?

 

No. Next question.

 

Why not? It varies from the original. How it varies, why it varies and whether it's collectible or not is an entirely different matter.

 

What is happening in this thread is that people are trying to pigeonhole the term variant when in fact it can't be pigeonholed because as different types of "variants" are produced that term becomes more and more broad to the point where it needs to be broken down into categories.

 

 

That is simply not true. You are trying to pigeonhole an intentionally overbroad definition that does not apply. I have a copy of a marvel comic (Warlock I think) that has the interior of a karate kid from the same time period. That is not a variant. It varies from what it is supposed to be, but it is not a variant. It is an error.

 

I have an Iron Man annual that has the pages out of order. Same issue. Its an error, not a variant.

 

Would it be inappropriate to express my undying love for the two of you in public...?

 

I love the way you think.

 

[mica]

What if I have a copy of the Fantastic Four that's a price variant manufactured with only one staple, the pages out of order, and the Thing colored mauve?

Then what is it???

 

Difficult to read?

Approve my Facebook "friend" request, wanker.

[MrBedrock]

 

And people think *I* am condescending and dismissive.

 

An example of an error.

[comicwiz]

 

Andy, I agree. Some of the hardest rallyers behind Jon's research will see it for what it is - an opportunity to inject new interest and excitement in the hobby. The people who want to remain stuck behind the research curve, aren't going to like it much. My only explanation for this mindset is they're probably happy to remain in auto-pilot mode. They've enjoyed the perks of having intimate knowledge, and perhaps even using it in opportunistic ways - maybe too often to their advantage as opposed to sharing it with newcomers. That's about to change, and for some of the ones who've already remarked as much in this thread, Doug Sulipa said it best in that article - The comic-collecting world does not yet know this article is coming."

 

For what it is...? It's a research article, for which McClure undoubtedly got paid.

 

"an opportunity to inject new interest and excitement in the hobby"...? Probably wayyyyyy down on the list of reasons for doing it, if it was even a consideration. After all...who reads Overstreet articles?

 

Answer: people to whom the information is already very familiar. Very, very few people who don't already have a fairly intimate knowledge of the material are going to be interested in reading it.

 

Some, but few.

 

As for "stuck behind the learning curve"...once more: just because someone doesn't agree with you does not mean they're "stuck" behind ANYTHING.

 

They just don't agree with you.

 

As for McClure's article, it will undoubtedly contain information with which I am not familiar, and that is of paramount concern to me. Filling in and perfecting my knowledge is what matters to me. If he defines things in a way I don't, I'll certainly feel free to critique him, but he's the one who got asked to write the article...not me. That should tell you how much my opinion is worth to the powers that be.

 

And I have absolutely zero problem with that. Self-confidence RULES.

 

 

There is a stark difference between stating an opinion, and immersing it in some hope that it ushers in a wave of excitement in the hobby. It's another thing to serve up conjecture on Jon's reasons for writing the article. Mix that with your reasoning on bringing intent into the fold, and at the risk of being called condescending or dismissive, I really can't say I've had the opportunity to disagree or even criticize what you're saying, because I really don't understand any of it.