Comics You personally can't Understand Cost So Much

[RockMyAmadeus]

Now as for Conan #3.... oh never mind.

I ran across something in a Tales From the Database / Mile High Comics article...

 

'I want to tell you a short story about CONAN #3. For the past 25 years, that issue has been listed in the OFFICIAL OVERSTREET COMIC BOOK PRICE GUIDE as having low print runs in some areas.

 

I'm sure Chuck doesn't mean what he said.

 

After all, the book was only printed in one place...

 

But I for the life of me don't know where that could be, since I know nothing about the printing industry...

 

I do declare....

[mikenyc]

This thread got so much more interesting.

 

 

"Stick em in your mouth and suck em."

[RockMyAmadeus]

The reality is, the further you go out in the distribution chain, the smaller and more distributed each specific issue gets. That's why all these "possibilities" about what might have happened just don't hold up under scrutiny.

 

I have no doubt that the mob was involved in sitting on regional distributors to stockpile overages, laundering money through the "returns" racquet. This was clearly the case.

 

But to pull off the kind of numbers that would make a book actually have "low distribution" would require shenanigans very high up the chain, and all the guys in the subsequent chain would have said something about that.

 

Yet, there's nothing in the fan literature (or even professional literature) that I know of that makes even a peep about such an issue. And since returns were a normal part of the business anyways, sitting on bundles and pallets of undistributed material would have absolutely zero effect on the new issue market. It was built in to the system. So long as the newsstand dealers got the copies they ordered, or thereabouts, no one was the wiser. After all, Marvel certainly wasn't doing any surveys at local newsstands to find out what was actually selling (which is why the 50-100% overages were average. It's just the way magazines worked then. It wasn't that much more expensive per unit to print 100,000 more copies on a 500,000 copy run. It was FAR more expensive to go back to press if an issue sold out.)

 

If there is evidence to the contrary, by all means, prove me wrong and make with the goods. But there is nothing to suggest that SS #4...like SS #3, or #5, or Cap #109, or Nick Fury #5, or any other book...was treated any differently in the printing and distribution process than any other book. Lack of evidence is not proof...that should be accepted as GRANTED in this discussion...but it is a reasonable conclusion based on the facts at hand, and a much more reasonable conclusion than "they didn't print as many copies" or "20% of the print run was on a boat on the Mississippi, headed to New Orleans, and got sank by Hurricane Sue Storm."

 

No, the likeliest scenario is the Conan #3 scenario - people liked the cover, and either bought a copy who normally wouldn't have, or bought multiple copies who normally wouldn't have. By the time Bob Overstreet got around to it, it was a legitimately more difficult book to find on the back issue market, and the legend about why was born.

 

Since Bob Overstreet did not have access to the information we now have, he theorized that the book had "low distribution"...and since Bob Overstreet was Bob Overstreet, it stuck. A theory that is easily shown to be unlikely in this day and age is accepted by repititon.

 

And if you disagree with this, fine. But don't insult me about it, or tell me I don't know anything about it, or that I've "sucked the fun out of the discussion." Just make with the compelling counterargument. All the rest is juvenile and unnecessary.

[dupont2005]

I just thought of one. Albedo #2. 1st appearance of Usagi Yojimbo. I had no idea the character had the kind of following to demand prices like that. I love the character, didn't know so many others did as well

[lizards2]

The reality is, the further you go out in the distribution chain, the smaller and more distributed each specific issue gets. That's why all these "possibilities" about what might have happened just don't hold up under scrutiny.

 

I have no doubt that the mob was involved in sitting on regional distributors to stockpile overages, laundering money through the "returns" racquet. This was clearly the case.

 

But to pull off the kind of numbers that would make a book actually have "low distribution" would require shenanigans very high up the chain, and all the guys in the subsequent chain would have said something about that.

 

Yet, there's nothing in the fan literature (or even professional literature) that I know of that makes even a peep about such an issue. And since returns were a normal part of the business anyways, sitting on bundles and pallets of undistributed material would have absolutely zero effect on the new issue market. It was built in to the system. So long as the newsstand dealers got the copies they ordered, or thereabouts, no one was the wiser. After all, Marvel certainly wasn't doing any surveys at local newsstands to find out what was actually selling (which is why the 50-100% overages were average. It's just the way magazines worked then. It wasn't that much more expensive per unit to print 100,000 more copies on a 500,000 copy run. It was FAR more expensive to go back to press if an issue sold out.)

 

If there is evidence to the contrary, by all means, prove me wrong and make with the goods. But there is nothing to suggest that SS #4...like SS #3, or #5, or Cap #109, or Nick Fury #5, or any other book...was treated any differently in the printing and distribution process than any other book. Lack of evidence is not proof...that should be accepted as GRANTED in this discussion...but it is a reasonable conclusion based on the facts at hand, and a much more reasonable conclusion than "they didn't print as many copies" or "20% of the print run was on a boat on the Mississippi, headed to New Orleans, and got sank by Hurricane Sue Storm."

 

No, the likeliest scenario is the Conan #3 scenario - people liked the cover, and either bought a copy who normally wouldn't have, or bought multiple copies who normally wouldn't have. By the time Bob Overstreet got around to it, it was a legitimately more difficult book to find on the back issue market, and the legend about why was born.

 

Since Bob Overstreet did not have access to the information we now have, he theorized that the book had "low distribution"...and since Bob Overstreet was Bob Overstreet, it stuck. A theory that is easily shown to be unlikely in this day and age is accepted by repititon.

 

And if you disagree with this, fine. But don't insult me about it, or tell me I don't know anything about it, or that I've "sucked the fun out of the discussion." Just make with the compelling counterargument. All the rest is juvenile and unnecessary.

 

Is it possible that Marvel cut back on the print run in anticipation of a 'bomb' prior to seeing sales reports on # 1 ? :shrug:

 

Do we have actual circulation #s on #1, 2, 3, 4?

[500Club]

The reality is, the further you go out in the distribution chain, the smaller and more distributed each specific issue gets. That's why all these "possibilities" about what might have happened just don't hold up under scrutiny.

 

I have no doubt that the mob was involved in sitting on regional distributors to stockpile overages, laundering money through the "returns" racquet. This was clearly the case.

 

But to pull off the kind of numbers that would make a book actually have "low distribution" would require shenanigans very high up the chain, and all the guys in the subsequent chain would have said something about that.

 

Yet, there's nothing in the fan literature (or even professional literature) that I know of that makes even a peep about such an issue. And since returns were a normal part of the business anyways, sitting on bundles and pallets of undistributed material would have absolutely zero effect on the new issue market. It was built in to the system. So long as the newsstand dealers got the copies they ordered, or thereabouts, no one was the wiser. After all, Marvel certainly wasn't doing any surveys at local newsstands to find out what was actually selling (which is why the 50-100% overages were average. It's just the way magazines worked then. It wasn't that much more expensive per unit to print 100,000 more copies on a 500,000 copy run. It was FAR more expensive to go back to press if an issue sold out.)

 

If there is evidence to the contrary, by all means, prove me wrong and make with the goods. But there is nothing to suggest that SS #4...like SS #3, or #5, or Cap #109, or Nick Fury #5, or any other book...was treated any differently in the printing and distribution process than any other book. Lack of evidence is not proof...that should be accepted as GRANTED in this discussion...but it is a reasonable conclusion based on the facts at hand, and a much more reasonable conclusion than "they didn't print as many copies" or "20% of the print run was on a boat on the Mississippi, headed to New Orleans, and got sank by Hurricane Sue Storm."

 

No, the likeliest scenario is the Conan #3 scenario - people liked the cover, and either bought a copy who normally wouldn't have, or bought multiple copies who normally wouldn't have. By the time Bob Overstreet got around to it, it was a legitimately more difficult book to find on the back issue market, and the legend about why was born.

 

Since Bob Overstreet did not have access to the information we now have, he theorized that the book had "low distribution"...and since Bob Overstreet was Bob Overstreet, it stuck. A theory that is easily shown to be unlikely in this day and age is accepted by repititon.

 

And if you disagree with this, fine. But don't insult me about it, or tell me I don't know anything about it, or that I've "sucked the fun out of the discussion." Just make with the compelling counterargument. All the rest is juvenile and unnecessary.

 

Killjoy.

[RockMyAmadeus]

The reality is, the further you go out in the distribution chain, the smaller and more distributed each specific issue gets. That's why all these "possibilities" about what might have happened just don't hold up under scrutiny.

 

I have no doubt that the mob was involved in sitting on regional distributors to stockpile overages, laundering money through the "returns" racquet. This was clearly the case.

 

But to pull off the kind of numbers that would make a book actually have "low distribution" would require shenanigans very high up the chain, and all the guys in the subsequent chain would have said something about that.

 

Yet, there's nothing in the fan literature (or even professional literature) that I know of that makes even a peep about such an issue. And since returns were a normal part of the business anyways, sitting on bundles and pallets of undistributed material would have absolutely zero effect on the new issue market. It was built in to the system. So long as the newsstand dealers got the copies they ordered, or thereabouts, no one was the wiser. After all, Marvel certainly wasn't doing any surveys at local newsstands to find out what was actually selling (which is why the 50-100% overages were average. It's just the way magazines worked then. It wasn't that much more expensive per unit to print 100,000 more copies on a 500,000 copy run. It was FAR more expensive to go back to press if an issue sold out.)

 

If there is evidence to the contrary, by all means, prove me wrong and make with the goods. But there is nothing to suggest that SS #4...like SS #3, or #5, or Cap #109, or Nick Fury #5, or any other book...was treated any differently in the printing and distribution process than any other book. Lack of evidence is not proof...that should be accepted as GRANTED in this discussion...but it is a reasonable conclusion based on the facts at hand, and a much more reasonable conclusion than "they didn't print as many copies" or "20% of the print run was on a boat on the Mississippi, headed to New Orleans, and got sank by Hurricane Sue Storm."

 

No, the likeliest scenario is the Conan #3 scenario - people liked the cover, and either bought a copy who normally wouldn't have, or bought multiple copies who normally wouldn't have. By the time Bob Overstreet got around to it, it was a legitimately more difficult book to find on the back issue market, and the legend about why was born.

 

Since Bob Overstreet did not have access to the information we now have, he theorized that the book had "low distribution"...and since Bob Overstreet was Bob Overstreet, it stuck. A theory that is easily shown to be unlikely in this day and age is accepted by repititon.

 

And if you disagree with this, fine. But don't insult me about it, or tell me I don't know anything about it, or that I've "sucked the fun out of the discussion." Just make with the compelling counterargument. All the rest is juvenile and unnecessary.

 

Is it possible that Marvel cut back on the print run in anticipation of a 'bomb' prior to seeing sales reports on # 1 ? :shrug:

 

Do we have actual circulation #s on #1, 2, 3, 4?

 

YES...

 

BUT...

 

SS was bi-monthly at the time, and by the time #4 was ordered in October/November of 1968, #1 had been out 5-6 months, since May, and sales figures/returns would have already been known. Also, the overages were still in effect, so even cutting back the print run wouldn't have been typical. They'd sooner cancel a title than cut back on printing numbers, which they did by 1969-1970 with several titles (X-Men, Nick Fury, SS, etc.)

 

For a monthly, I absolutely agree with you. But a bi-monthly, that anticipated drop would have made much more sense for #2 or #3 than #4 at that time (though SS certainly did see a relatively moderate decline throughout the run, leading to it being the second cancelled title of the 1968 explosion, after Nick Fury.)

 

I don't know of any actual circulation numbers for this title, unfortunately.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Killjoy.

 

[500Club]

The reality is, the further you go out in the distribution chain, the smaller and more distributed each specific issue gets. That's why all these "possibilities" about what might have happened just don't hold up under scrutiny.

 

I have no doubt that the mob was involved in sitting on regional distributors to stockpile overages, laundering money through the "returns" racquet. This was clearly the case.

 

But to pull off the kind of numbers that would make a book actually have "low distribution" would require shenanigans very high up the chain, and all the guys in the subsequent chain would have said something about that.

 

On a more serious note, this is dead on. For just SS 4 to be 'low distribution', and not a whole swath of that month's books, you'd need the perpetrators of said shenanigans to be pulling a skid of SS 4 from the Sparta production facility. Any further down the chain, the titles would be being shipped together.

 

Yet, there's nothing in the fan literature (or even professional literature) that I know of that makes even a peep about such an issue. And since returns were a normal part of the business anyways, sitting on bundles and pallets of undistributed material would have absolutely zero effect on the new issue market. It was built in to the system. So long as the newsstand dealers got the copies they ordered, or thereabouts, no one was the wiser. After all, Marvel certainly wasn't doing any surveys at local newsstands to find out what was actually selling (which is why the 50-100% overages were average. It's just the way magazines worked then. It wasn't that much more expensive per unit to print 100,000 more copies on a 500,000 copy run. It was FAR more expensive to go back to press if an issue sold out.)

 

If there is evidence to the contrary, by all means, prove me wrong and make with the goods. But there is nothing to suggest that SS #4...like SS #3, or #5, or Cap #109, or Nick Fury #5, or any other book...was treated any differently in the printing and distribution process than any other book. Lack of evidence is not proof...that should be accepted as GRANTED in this discussion...but it is a reasonable conclusion based on the facts at hand, and a much more reasonable conclusion than "they didn't print as many copies" or "20% of the print run was on a boat on the Mississippi, headed to New Orleans, and got sank by Hurricane Sue Storm."

 

No, the likeliest scenario is the Conan #3 scenario - people liked the cover, and either bought a copy who normally wouldn't have, or bought multiple copies who normally wouldn't have. By the time Bob Overstreet got around to it, it was a legitimately more difficult book to find on the back issue market, and the legend about why was born.

 

Since Bob Overstreet did not have access to the information we now have, he theorized that the book had "low distribution"...and since Bob Overstreet was Bob Overstreet, it stuck. A theory that is easily shown to be unlikely in this day and age is accepted by repititon.

 

Definitely a reasonable theory. I'd be curious to know how Bob gathered data in the early days, and how many market advisors existed. Was he getting this feedback from sources in multiple markets? Did Bob himself unilaterally apply the notation?

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Definitely a reasonable theory. I'd be curious to know how Bob gathered data in the early days, and how many market advisors existed. Was he getting this feedback from sources in multiple markets? Did Bob himself unilaterally apply the notation?

 

From what I know, he gathered as much info as he could from as many sources as he could, and he really networked his arse off. I mean, considering what he did with the technology he had to work with, it's hard to overstate his accomplishment.

 

Harry Thomas, his compatriot, would tell stories of him and Bob traveling all over the country buying comics, and making notes.

 

Harry is no longer with us, but I do not doubt that Bob Beerbohm would have a lot of experience with this.

 

Oddly enough, when the OPG was published, a lot of dealers didn't take kindly to it, being "told" how much they should price things. But, Bob won out, as history has shown.

 

Did Bob unilaterally apply it? Doubtful. But you'd have to ask him.

 

Someday...someday, I WILL interview that man, hopefully before he leaves us.

 

[DiceX]

The reality is, the further you go out in the distribution chain, the smaller and more distributed each specific issue gets. That's why all these "possibilities" about what might have happened just don't hold up under scrutiny.

 

I have no doubt that the mob was involved in sitting on regional distributors to stockpile overages, laundering money through the "returns" racquet. This was clearly the case.

 

But to pull off the kind of numbers that would make a book actually have "low distribution" would require shenanigans very high up the chain, and all the guys in the subsequent chain would have said something about that.

 

Yet, there's nothing in the fan literature (or even professional literature) that I know of that makes even a peep about such an issue. And since returns were a normal part of the business anyways, sitting on bundles and pallets of undistributed material would have absolutely zero effect on the new issue market. It was built in to the system. So long as the newsstand dealers got the copies they ordered, or thereabouts, no one was the wiser. After all, Marvel certainly wasn't doing any surveys at local newsstands to find out what was actually selling (which is why the 50-100% overages were average. It's just the way magazines worked then. It wasn't that much more expensive per unit to print 100,000 more copies on a 500,000 copy run. It was FAR more expensive to go back to press if an issue sold out.)

 

If there is evidence to the contrary, by all means, prove me wrong and make with the goods. But there is nothing to suggest that SS #4...like SS #3, or #5, or Cap #109, or Nick Fury #5, or any other book...was treated any differently in the printing and distribution process than any other book. Lack of evidence is not proof...that should be accepted as GRANTED in this discussion...but it is a reasonable conclusion based on the facts at hand, and a much more reasonable conclusion than "they didn't print as many copies" or "20% of the print run was on a boat on the Mississippi, headed to New Orleans, and got sank by Hurricane Sue Storm."

 

No, the likeliest scenario is the Conan #3 scenario - people liked the cover, and either bought a copy who normally wouldn't have, or bought multiple copies who normally wouldn't have. By the time Bob Overstreet got around to it, it was a legitimately more difficult book to find on the back issue market, and the legend about why was born.

 

Since Bob Overstreet did not have access to the information we now have, he theorized that the book had "low distribution"...and since Bob Overstreet was Bob Overstreet, it stuck. A theory that is easily shown to be unlikely in this day and age is accepted by repititon.

 

And if you disagree with this, fine. But don't insult me about it, or tell me I don't know anything about it, or that I've "sucked the fun out of the discussion." Just make with the compelling counterargument. All the rest is juvenile and unnecessary.

 

Other than Overstreet, who said any of these books truly were "low distribution?"

I think you give Overstreet way too much credit. As can be shown on multiple occasions, once they put something in the book, they don't change it, regardless of how wrong the information is.

 

Perhaps you should put some effort into getting someone at OPG to listen to you. I don't think anyone here has the power to grant you a golden egg.

 

 

[500Club]

Definitely a reasonable theory. I'd be curious to know how Bob gathered data in the early days, and how many market advisors existed. Was he getting this feedback from sources in multiple markets? Did Bob himself unilaterally apply the notation?

 

From what I know, he gathered as much info as he could from as many sources as he could, and he really networked his arse off. I mean, considering what he did with the technology he had to work with, it's hard to overstate his accomplishment.

 

Did Bob unilaterally apply it? Doubtful. But you'd have to ask him.

 

I guess what I'm driving at is whether he got some sort of specific info that said that a distribution issue was at play, or he simply got feedback suggesting the books were 'hard to find' or seemingly unavailable in certain areas.

 

It may be more an issue of semantics, where 'difficult to find' would have been a better descriptor.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Other than Overstreet, who said any of these books truly were "low distribution?"

I think you give Overstreet way too much credit. As can be shown on multiple occasions, once they put something in the book, they don't change it, regardless of how wrong the information is.

 

Perhaps you should put some effort into getting someone at OPG to listen to you. I don't think anyone here has the power to grant you a golden egg.

 

 

I truly have no idea what you're talking about. Who said anything about trying to change anything? I don't personally care what they fix or don't.

 

This is just a discussion about what is and why it is, not ways or even reasons to fix it.

[Prince Namor]

Now as for Conan #3.... oh never mind.

I ran across something in a Tales From the Database / Mile High Comics article...

 

'I want to tell you a short story about CONAN #3. For the past 25 years, that issue has been listed in the OFFICIAL OVERSTREET COMIC BOOK PRICE GUIDE as having low print runs in some areas. Ummm, I don't think that really true. Back in the early 1970's, CONAN was our best-selling title. A peculiarity about those early days, however, was that the CONAN paperback books were all still in print, and fans really cared about which issue adapted which particular R.E.H. story. Issue #3 contains the adaptation of Grim Gray God, which was especially popular. As result, we were constantly sold out of issue #3, while issue #1 tended to stick around longer because of the higher price. To rectify this problem, all the Denver area dealers started marking #3 as "scarce," and pricing it above #1. To our amazement, this "fact" ended up in Bob Overstreet's price guide soon thereafter. To this day, I can't help but smile whenever I see that notation in the guide.'

 

 

And it's still noted as that!

[RockMyAmadeus]

Definitely a reasonable theory. I'd be curious to know how Bob gathered data in the early days, and how many market advisors existed. Was he getting this feedback from sources in multiple markets? Did Bob himself unilaterally apply the notation?

 

From what I know, he gathered as much info as he could from as many sources as he could, and he really networked his arse off. I mean, considering what he did with the technology he had to work with, it's hard to overstate his accomplishment.

 

Did Bob unilaterally apply it? Doubtful. But you'd have to ask him.

 

I guess what I'm driving at is whether he got some sort of specific info that said that a distribution issue was at play, or he simply got feedback suggesting the books were 'hard to find' or seemingly unavailable in certain areas.

 

It may be more an issue of semantics, where 'difficult to find' would have been a better descriptor.

 

Right, but I don't think anyone has that answer except Bob...and he may not be telling.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Someday...someday, I WILL interview that man, hopefully before he leaves us.

 

 

This statement makes no sense.

 

How would I interview him AFTER he left us..?

 

[This is water]

Someday...someday, I WILL interview that man, hopefully before he leaves us.

 

 

This statement makes no sense.

 

How would I interview him AFTER he left us..?

 

 

 

In limbo, right?

[Prince Namor]

Let me see if I can get his straight.

The books are printed in Sparta, IL. Some are sorted for distribution right there (which cancels those out), but bundles of them are loaded by train to go to other distribution points.

 

Somehow the mafia, with some kind of bizarre foresight (or inside info - Chuck? Owed the mob for a huge unpaid weed purchases?), target one of these trains to high jack, just knowing that hoarding the cool Silver Surfer #4, would pay big dividends down the road....Hunh?

 

Wait. This is 1968...

 

I'm confused. Seems unlikely.

 

I thought most of you guys didn't believe in conspiracy theories.

I think you are missing the idea. The mob was involved with funny books in order to launder money. They weren't in the business of Billy the Kidding trains. The books were non-consequential, an afterthought to the grand scheme of money laundering.

 

Where can I find more information on the mobs involvement in comics. Has anyone written in depth about this?

 

Maybe check with Robert Beerbohm? He was writing a book called something like "Comic Wars". I think he had some mafia related/ "low distribution" stuff in there. I also seem to remember that some excerpts were printed in Comic Book Marketplace.

 

I'm not sure about the mob's (direct) involvement with comics, but it is well-known and well-documented that the Mafia was heavily into porno (print and movies), especially on the east coast, but elsewhere as well during the '60s - '80s. There are also stories (some anecdotal, some verifiable, including an incidence in my personal experience) to support the idea that at least some early comic book stores were associated with, or operated as an adjunct to, adult bookstores and/or headshops.

 

How this impacted scarcity, etc., I don't know (but if it did, it was almost certainly unintentional). However, it is no more conspiratorial to suggest that the mob had its fingers in print media than it is to say that they also profited from pinball, vending machines, chicken distribution, vinyl records, and auto body repair, all of which are a matter of historical record.

 

Edit: Cf. this as well...

 

http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2012.html

 

 

 

Oh, I wasn't doubting it at all.

Just looking for more info, which I want to thank everyone for sharing.

 

Speaking of the mobs involvement in the adult entertainment industry, if you have an interest on reading about that, I'd recommend: "The Other Hollywood : The Uncensored Oral History of the Porn Film Industry", by legendary rock music critic Legs McNeil.

 

It includes many of the players including F.B.I. agents who are quoted at length about the whole process and it is fascinating reading.

[bababooey]

Someday...someday, I WILL interview that man, hopefully before he leaves us.

 

 

This statement makes no sense.

 

How would I interview him AFTER he left us..?

 

Yeah, if it took place AFTER then it would just be YOU responding to yourself.

 

Let's just agree that the interview would be more interesting if he were alive for it.

 

 

[aggr1103]

 

This has been a fun thread to watch digress. I've learned so much about what the word 'distribution' means.