Manifest Destiny - Skybound - Chris Dingess, Matthew Roberts 1 1

[Vikingreed]

PP didn't heat up until issue 7-8. Then it exploded.

MD is hot right out of the gate.

 

I'm a big fan of both.

[slym2none]

4,500.

I know MD had 17,500, but didn't know if that included the Ottley.

 

So 4 X.

 

And true, they both are set in the past.

 

Compare away if you like.

 

Wow! I didn't think anything was printed lower than TWD #1 since it came out, not for Image #1s, anyway...

 

 

Thanks for the info!

 

 

 

 

-slym

[Lonzilla]

Todd #1 1st print is around 5,000 copies, when that book really explodes look out!

[jaybes]

Wow...feel like the point was missed completely. A book can rise in price by speculation, AND people can still want to read it. If the speculators bought a ton and dried up the market, wouldn't that trigger the same need for another printing? Either way the book appears popular to the publisher, right? Thus more printings?

 

Like I said, I think they can coexist, but I personally believe this one is highly speculator driven (low-ish print run relative to other 2013 Image titles, and speculators knowing that Image books tend to be safer bets nowadays). Doesn't mean I'm right or wrong, just an opinion, and I already said I'll be happy to admit if I'm ever proven wrong with MD...time will tell (thumbs u

 

Also, I was counting Image Firsts $1 as a third print for Peter Panzerfaust...my bad?

[Vikingreed]

Touché.

Image First would indeed be a "3rd printing".

[500Club]

So, why does there need to be a 3rd printing? Could it be that people are interested in this book and want to read it? Or is this speculator-driven speculation as well?

 

You'll figure out the answer.

 

[slym2none]

It was a rhetorical question.

 

 

 

 

-slym

[krighton]

I was able to sense the rhetorical nuance in the statement.

[500Club]

It was a rhetorical question.

 

It was a rhetorical answer.

 

 

 

...at least, after jaybes spelled it out one post before.

[slym2none]

I was able to sense the rhetorical nuance in the statement.

 

At least one person did, thank you!

 

 

 

 

-slym

[slym2none]

It was a rhetorical question.

 

It was a rhetorical answer.

 

 

 

...at least, after jaybes spelled it out one post before.

 

Then that is a rhetorical post as well.

 

HAH!

 

 

 

-slym

[500Club]

Bottom line is, multiple printings don't necessarily mean a book's secondary market price isn't speculation driven.

 

If you felt reassured that this third printing was definitive evidence of readers having driven up that price, that rhetorical point was incorrect.

[slym2none]

You assumed wrong, my friend.

 

But keep up the rhetoric!

 

 

 

 

-slym

[500Club]

OK, if that wasn't your point, spell it out for me and any other slow witted boardies. To me, it was a passive-aggressive jab at the idea MD's price run-up is speculator driven.

[jaybes]

OK, if that wasn't your point, spell it out for me and any other slow witted boardies. To me, it was a passive-aggressive jab at the idea MD's price run-up is speculator driven.

 

+1.

 

Slow witted boardie here

[Lonzilla]

As long as the multiple printing don't delay the next issues, (*AHEM* Nowhere Men, a year ago), I don't care how many times they reprint it. Different covers would've been nice tho

[500Club]

OK, if that wasn't your point, spell it out for me and any other slow witted boardies. To me, it was a passive-aggressive jab at the idea MD's price run-up is speculator driven.

 

+1.

 

Slow witted boardie here

Me really dum. Maybe beer help.

[jaybes]

OK, if that wasn't your point, spell it out for me and any other slow witted boardies. To me, it was a passive-aggressive jab at the idea MD's price run-up is speculator driven.

 

+1.

 

Slow witted boardie here

Me really dum. Maybe beer help.

 

Beer always helps

[slym2none]

It was a jab only to the people who believe that "speculator-driven speculation" and nothing else is what drives this book. If, like jaybes, you are of that opinion but are willing to be proven wrong, then there was no jab to you.

 

I don't know what drives this book. I can't say for certainty. I think no one really can, but it doesn't stop some.

 

I am hoping it is readers only and not speculators, but my hope does not at all have to be connected to reality.

 

 

 

 

-slym

[slym2none]

Please note, I never used the term "slow witted," and would not use that term, to describe anyone here.

 

Please, let's keep the hyperbole to a minimum? Let's not try to make it look like I am demeaning to anyone.

 

If that was not your intent, I apologise in advance.

 

 

 

-slym