'Marvel "Whitmans"

[shadroch]

I'm not sure thats the correct name for them, but I'm talking about the Big Diamond books that came out in the late 1970s.

Everything I have learned about these indicates that they were distributed in multi-packs, similar to how the DC Whitmans were.

Yet it seems that its much easier to find the Marvel books in higher grade than their DC counterparts.

Is this just luck on my part or are others finding the same thing?

I rarely come across a Whitman DC in VF shape, yet most Marvels I find are that or close to it.

[dgarthwaite-migration]

It makes sense to me. I'd agree with that observation.

 

 

DG

[marmat]

According to Doug Sulipa, among others, Marvel Whitmans does not exist

 

[PeterPark]

According to Doug Sulipa, among others, Marvel Whitmans does not exist

 

I thought all the Marvel Whitmans were treasuries. The marvel direct editions were also distributed in whitman three packs and that is what we are talking about here. Probably the issues in the three packs are not in great shape but the rest of the direct editions went to comic stores were better care was taken? I don't believe DC Whitmans were released anywhere except as part of a multipack, so they are all beat.

[FlyingDonut]

Bill is, I'm quite sure, referring to this kind of book as a "Whitman"

 

 

I think calling them "Whitmans" is a misnomer - they are more Direct Market variants. There are several treasuries with Whitman's logo on them, but no regular Marvels.

[Jeffro.]

Interesting that DC allowed their comics to have the Whitman logo, while Marvel did not

[shadroch]

According to Doug Sulipa, among others, Marvel Whitmans does not exist

 

I thought all the Marvel Whitmans were treasuries. The marvel direct editions were also distributed in whitman three packs and that is what we are talking about here. Probably the issues in the three packs are not in great shape but the rest of the direct editions went to comic stores were better care was taken? I don't believe DC Whitmans were released anywhere except as part of a multipack, so they are all beat.

 

Actually, I've yet to see any evidence that these FAT Diamond books were ever sold in anything except

three packs. Not all the three packs were Whitman packs, but there is no evidence any of these FAT Diamond books were ever sold individually. The Direct Market books came later and featued a thin diamond, not the FAT one.

[shadroch]

Bill is, I'm quite sure, referring to this kind of book as a "Whitman"

 

 

I think calling them "Whitmans" is a misnomer - they are more Direct Market variants. There are several treasuries with Whitman's logo on them, but no regular Marvels.

 

 

Not sure when this was written, but since it doesn't bring up the Overstreet article on variants from two years ago, I'm guessing its older and outdated. It also doesn't reference the CGB article from 2005, so it may be even older than that.

[dgarthwaite-migration]

Interesting that DC allowed their comics to have the Whitman logo, while Marvel did not

 

For maintaining the value of the brand it makes sense that a company would not want someone else putting their brand on the product. DC may have been willing to compromise because they needed to boost sales any way possible to remain profitable.

 

DG

[dgarthwaite-migration]

According to Doug Sulipa, among others, Marvel Whitmans does not exist

 

I thought all the Marvel Whitmans were treasuries. The marvel direct editions were also distributed in whitman three packs and that is what we are talking about here. Probably the issues in the three packs are not in great shape but the rest of the direct editions went to comic stores were better care was taken? I don't believe DC Whitmans were released anywhere except as part of a multipack, so they are all beat.

 

Actually, I've yet to see any evidence that these FAT Diamond books were ever sold in anything except

three packs. Not all the three packs were Whitman packs, but there is no evidence any of these FAT Diamond books were ever sold individually. The Direct Market books came later and featued a thin diamond, not the FAT one.

 

Exactly. Also, the linked thread had Mark Seifert saying he thought he saw them sold loose. Loose copies were around when customers ripped open packages and such. That doesn't mean the comics were distributed that way.

 

DG

[dgarthwaite-migration]

According to Doug Sulipa, among others, Marvel Whitmans does not exist

 

He's wrong if he says that. There are Whitman branded treasuries of Marvel product, and their were Whitman branded polybags sold that had comics inside branded as Marvel. Both would classify as "Whitman Marvels". One is marked of the comics and the other is marked on the packaging that held the comics.

 

DG

[ShieldAgent]

This is a topic that always spirals out of control with no conclusive evidence as to what they are.

 

One of the best questions I have seen for the people that want to refer to all of them as direct market, is to explain X-men 118. Why would Marvel choose to only have this one X-men book in the direct market, then not the subsequent issues.

 

There are certain similarities in the DC Whitmans, and the Marvel white UPC issues like the three packs, and the random months etc.

 

In the end there is probably as much proof that they are Whitmans as there is that they are not.

 

I also do not have a very high opinion regarding that variant mess published in OS a few years back, sorry.

[shadroch]

I was very disappointed with that OS article. I did find an excellent article in the CGC circa 2005. They call them Whitmans, so for simplicity's sake, so do I.

I'm far from an expert on these, but my observations are that there are many more HG Marvel FAT Diamonds than Whitman DCs. I'm wondering if others have seen this as well.

[Johncan]

I had a few of these in my collection that came directly off the presses at World Color Press in Sparta, IL. They were mainly issues of the Fantastic Four. I have no idea how many were printed and how they were distributed, I got them as "loose" issues. To my knowledge, they were not bagged in Sparta.

 

I had multiple copies of FF #186 with a 30 cent cover. I also got a handful of them (maybe 10) at Busch Stadium in St. Louis as part of a comic book giveaway for Sparta night during a Cardinals game in 1978.

 

I do recall seeing some random Marvel titles in bags after I left Sparta in 1980. I still have one bagged set of Battlestar Galactica.

 

I can scan them if anyone wants to see them.

 

[Ghostman-migration]

http://www.bipcomics.com/showcase/Direct/index.cfm

[ShieldAgent]

http://www.bipcomics.com/showcase/Direct/index.cfm

 

I have always liked that site, the dedication, the research, the scans...

 

It's not gospel, and again, not definitive either way.

 

To answer one of Shad's main questions - yes, I believe the marvel whatevers are easier to find in nicer grades than the DC Whitmans. One reason is the stigma that for a long time (before they were direct market) lots of people thought them to be reprints. Regardless, with the whitman logo, the DC's looked more like reprints than the marvel whatever counterparts, and were treated that way.

[shadroch]

http://www.bipcomics.com/showcase/Direct/index.cfm

 

When was the last time that site was updated? Why are they using 30 year old articles as source material when there are plenty of newer articles to use? That site may have been great in its day, but it seems to ignore anything published in the last decade.

[dgarthwaite-migration]

Tired of debating this. I was there when the comics were released and sold. This topic always spirals into "I think this..." from people who weren't even born when the comics were sold in 3-Packs. I disagree with some content on the bipcomics page but it's more informed than anything else I've read on the topic.

 

DG

[shadroch]

Have you read the CBG article on these?

[dgarthwaite-migration]

Nope.

 

DG