Superman: The Man of Steel #17 & 18 (Doomsday) 3 3

[valiantman]

I guess I'll throw in the towel.

 

There's just something fundamentally unsettling about celebrating the reprints above the first printings.

 

They only went to a second printing become some johnny-come-lately buyers didn't have their heads on straight in time for the real thing.

They only go to even more printings because the second printing short bus buyers were followed by an even shorter bus of slower-on-the-uptake buyers.

 

To say that the last people to figure out that the books were worth reading are the ones who benefit the most... just seems so... short bus.

 

This is a fairly demeaning thing to say to the people who bought later printings, and assumes that everyone who did so, did so just because they "missed the boat" when they had the opportunity.

 

I wasn't alive when Lord of the Rings was first sold. Neither were you. If we buy reprints, are we "Johnny-come-latelies" who didn't have our heads on straight in time for the real thing...?

 

No, self-evidently we are not.

 

So, what if there was someone....like there were a lot of someones...who had nothing to do with comics, but became interested because of the media coverage surrounding Superman #75? MOS #18 had been out for weeks by then, and functionally sold out. If they are just interested in the story, why do they care if it's "not the real thing" because it's a second printing? It IS the real thing...to them. Identical in every way that matters.

 

The 5th printing of MOS #18 was printed some time in 1994, a year or more after the 1st printing. Are those people who bought them also Johnny-come-latelies..?

 

I don't read much of what some have been saying, but speaking for myself, I'm certainly not suggesting that, pound for pound, the 5th print should be worth more than the 1st print. That doesn't make any sense, and anyone suggesting that doesn't understand the situation.

 

However...in this case, the reality is that supply and demand has kicked in, and because the 4th and 5th printings are substantially rarer than the first printing, the price one has to pay to obtain one has risen above what one would "normally" have to pay. It's just like anything else. Time and chance has happened to these books, and as a result, they appear to be more "celebrated" than the first printings...but that is only the appearance, not the reality.

 

The fact that there are a 1000+ CGC 9.8 MOS #18 1st prints, and they STILL sell for $100+ on the market is a testament to the fact that the market HAS placed the "right" value on the "right" book. If there were a 1,000+ 9.8 5th prints, there is no way they would be selling for $100+. None.

 

One should not look at only one factor...the price...and make conclusions without considering these other factors.

 

I can't argue with most of this, since it mainly agrees with me.

 

But... you compared my saying that reprints of MOS 18 were for the people who didn't get the real thing to you (or I) having to buy Lord of the Rings reprints.

 

I guess I didn't realize there were two generations of people who would have missed out between 1992 and 1994.

[Brandon Shepherd]

The conversation of late has been thought provoking. I hope not to derail this said conversation but I wanted to mention MOS 17, the second printing. It has not been quite two years yet, but I purchased the first MOS 17 second printing to to grade CGC 9.8. Does this make me special? no. Do I still have it? no.

 

I didn't purchase the 17 2nd print because it was the lone 9.8 at the time, I really wanted it, and I like the blue logo against the green background better than the the yellow logo of the first print. I was also a little lost in the multiple printing notion at the time. Today there are now 23 copies listed in the census for MOS 17, 2nd print in 9.8.

 

As I was mulling over purchasing the 17 2nd print, I saw similar threads like this mention how 17 2nd prints would be the really HTF books, even questioning if and when a 9.8 would ever appear. I guess my point is that you never know what will come out of the woodwork, MOS 17 was hot in 9.8 for over two years before a 2nd print 9.8 hit the census, now there are over 20. Not a big number, but clearly not in the same boat as MOS 18 4th and 5th print. And yes, as mentioned previously in this thread, the census is not the ultimate indication of what is really out there.

 

I'm no RMA, this is just my experience/contribution to the thread

 

Maybe I'll get another MOS 17 2nd print in 9.8 someday, but only if I can get it for the right price.

[GM8]

The reprints of Bone #1 , did not come out the same month, as MOS 18 reprints did.....

We agree that MOS 18 fifth printing is from years later, right?

No, we do not.

 

The 5th printing of MOS 18 is dated the very same month as the 1st printing of MOS 18.

The 5th printing of MOS 18 is from 1994, or later. They didn't change the date... it's a reprint.

It isn't actually from 1992. If that's the basis for your argument then...

 

Well, I have written a veriatable treatise on why later printings of MOS 18 are valued and my preliminary thoughts on why Bone reprintings don't look like they have much room for growth....

You've written a veritable (<-- that's how you spell it) treatise while thinking a years-later reprint came out the same month?

Anyone can produce rare reprints years later. And they do.

When do those reprints years later have more value than the originals?

 

Man of Steel #18... and...

 

The only way that Man of Steel #18 maintains values of reprints higher than the first print value is that Man of Steel #18 reprints continue to break the decades-old market standard of lower-valued reprints.

 

Amazing Spider-man #1 has a nearly 50 year old reprint from 1966. It is 5 times "rarer" on the CGC census. It's not worth anywhere near the real thing.

 

Batman #1 1st print & 5th print are about equal now for NM copies, printed 1 year apart.

 

Spawn #1 direct & Spawn #1 B&W, printed 5 years apart.

 

There's probably others. I just don't understand your take on this. You almost want to will this "problem" away. It's the market...it just is.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I guess I'll throw in the towel.

 

There's just something fundamentally unsettling about celebrating the reprints above the first printings.

 

They only went to a second printing become some johnny-come-lately buyers didn't have their heads on straight in time for the real thing.

They only go to even more printings because the second printing short bus buyers were followed by an even shorter bus of slower-on-the-uptake buyers.

 

To say that the last people to figure out that the books were worth reading are the ones who benefit the most... just seems so... short bus.

 

This is a fairly demeaning thing to say to the people who bought later printings, and assumes that everyone who did so, did so just because they "missed the boat" when they had the opportunity.

 

I wasn't alive when Lord of the Rings was first sold. Neither were you. If we buy reprints, are we "Johnny-come-latelies" who didn't have our heads on straight in time for the real thing...?

 

No, self-evidently we are not.

 

So, what if there was someone....like there were a lot of someones...who had nothing to do with comics, but became interested because of the media coverage surrounding Superman #75? MOS #18 had been out for weeks by then, and functionally sold out. If they are just interested in the story, why do they care if it's "not the real thing" because it's a second printing? It IS the real thing...to them. Identical in every way that matters.

 

The 5th printing of MOS #18 was printed some time in 1994, a year or more after the 1st printing. Are those people who bought them also Johnny-come-latelies..?

 

I don't read much of what some have been saying, but speaking for myself, I'm certainly not suggesting that, pound for pound, the 5th print should be worth more than the 1st print. That doesn't make any sense, and anyone suggesting that doesn't understand the situation.

 

However...in this case, the reality is that supply and demand has kicked in, and because the 4th and 5th printings are substantially rarer than the first printing, the price one has to pay to obtain one has risen above what one would "normally" have to pay. It's just like anything else. Time and chance has happened to these books, and as a result, they appear to be more "celebrated" than the first printings...but that is only the appearance, not the reality.

 

The fact that there are a 1000+ CGC 9.8 MOS #18 1st prints, and they STILL sell for $100+ on the market is a testament to the fact that the market HAS placed the "right" value on the "right" book. If there were a 1,000+ 9.8 5th prints, there is no way they would be selling for $100+. None.

 

One should not look at only one factor...the price...and make conclusions without considering these other factors.

 

I can't argue with most of this, since it mainly agrees with me.

 

But... you compared my saying that reprints of MOS 18 were for the people who didn't get the real thing to you (or I) having to buy Lord of the Rings reprints.

 

I guess I didn't realize there were two generations of people who would have missed out between 1992 and 1994.

 

Just an (obvious) example to illustrate the point. Missing out is missing out, and doesn't necessarily mean "short bus", whether it's 30 years or 30 days.

 

I don't know if everything I've said mainly agrees with your comments, because you said you don't understand why the 5th print is "more celebrated", or more valuable, than the first.

 

It's not. Pound for pound, book for book, it's not. The factor is the difference in print run/extant copies/high grade copies.

[divad]

Missing out is just a state of mind.

[divad]

Back to the fanboy in me . . . it IS quite a cover:

 

[valiantman]

Back to the fanboy in me . . . it IS quite a cover:

Boooo... that's a first print. First prints are soooo pre-1992.

[Chillax23]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

 

Edited December 18, 2015 by Chillax23

[bababooey]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

The Doomsday story explanation insert that came in my story pack from one of the big box stores has a DC copyright date of 1993 and it had a fifth print of MOS 18.

 

I don't know if that's relevant or not.

 

 

 

[valiantman]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

[jsilverjanet]

I always thought Bone 1 2nd print had some value (above cover price)

[divad]

I always thought Bone 1 2nd print had some value (above cover price)

 

Of course it does. Many of us Bone collectors who don't have a 1st print love having it as a "placeholder".

[divad]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

 

One might think a tad bit of research would be in order for a professional grading company.

[valiantman]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

 

One might think a tad bit of research would be in order for a professional grading company.

Maybe. But does the date impact the grade?

 

They're grading and encapsulating... they could etch a serial number and grade number onto the clear slab and leave off the label entirely.

[RockMyAmadeus]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

 

One might think a tad bit of research would be in order for a professional grading company.

 

Let's not get lost in the weeds. Publication month/year is all that matters. Reprint dates aren't even generally made public (except in cases like Bone, interestingly enough), much less have any bearing on the original publication date. For a reprint to have a new date on the label, it would have to have that new date somewhere on the book, and would probably have to be substantively different from the original (like the EC reprints of the 1970's.)

 

Was MOS #18 5th printed in 1994? Probably. The first "DC Universe" UPC logo books have a Jan 1994 (printed in Nov 1993) cover date. But it doesn't matter, because the cover date is still Dec 92, and that didn't change. Trying to figure out the "actual date" would be a task beyond the scope of CGC.

[divad]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

 

One might think a tad bit of research would be in order for a professional grading company.

 

Let's not get lost in the weeds. Publication month/year is all that matters. Reprint dates aren't even generally made public (except in cases like Bone, interestingly enough), much less have any bearing on the original publication date. For a reprint to have a new date on the label, it would have to have that new date somewhere on the book, and would probably have to be substantively different from the original (like the EC reprints of the 1970's.)

 

Was MOS #18 5th printed in 1994? Probably. The first "DC Universe" UPC logo books have a Jan 1994 (printed in Nov 1993) cover date. But it doesn't matter, because the cover date is still Dec 92, and that didn't change. Trying to figure out the "actual date" would be a task beyond the scope of CGC.

 

They could just hire you freelance . . . As it is, you give it to them for free.

[thecopperagekids]

 

Curious what others think about The Killing Joke reprints. Collectible as a set (most, if not all, had different color logos on the cover), or not?

 

Absolutely.

 

I have up to the 14th printing. I *may* be missing the 12th.

 

I don't know if there's a 15th, but the hardcover came out in...2008? In time for the movie?

 

Easy to find:

 

1st

3rd

6th

 

Medium:

 

2nd

4th

7th

 

More difficult:

 

5th

8th

11th

14th

 

Very tough:

 

9th

10th

12th

13th

 

Cheers for more good intell.

 

You also laid out elsewhere (and again in this thread a couple posts up) the scarcest DOS/FFOF books.

 

I have a nice Action 686 2nd print (DCU logo)....I think you said that even *you* did not own a copy.I think I may actually have it graded.

 

I know for sure that I had the other books on rhat list but I blew them out at a show last year for $3 a piece.Ironically, they lasted til the very end of a 2 day show, when a dealer bought them and remarked to me that they were tough books....haha.

 

Then again, my $3 boxes were not in any kind of order at all, so a collector would have easily missed those books.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

So wait - the MOS18 5th print was printed two years later in 1994? Why does the CGC label say 12/92 like the 1st print then?

 

I mean I get that CGC screws up labels sometimes - but surely they could get the print date correct?

 

CGC uses the dates as they appear in the books, and some reprints (like these) don't change the original dates.

 

One might think a tad bit of research would be in order for a professional grading company.

 

Let's not get lost in the weeds. Publication month/year is all that matters. Reprint dates aren't even generally made public (except in cases like Bone, interestingly enough), much less have any bearing on the original publication date. For a reprint to have a new date on the label, it would have to have that new date somewhere on the book, and would probably have to be substantively different from the original (like the EC reprints of the 1970's.)

 

Was MOS #18 5th printed in 1994? Probably. The first "DC Universe" UPC logo books have a Jan 1994 (printed in Nov 1993) cover date. But it doesn't matter, because the cover date is still Dec 92, and that didn't change. Trying to figure out the "actual date" would be a task beyond the scope of CGC.

 

They could just hire you freelance . . . As it is, you give it to them for free.

 

How is that possible...? As ***REDACTED*** has said, I bring "zero value here. Zero."

 

[divad]

How is that possible...? As ***REDACTED*** has said, I bring "zero value here. Zero."

 

 

That can't be an accurate quote, as it doesn't show up in a search.

[GM8]

Ok glad all that is settled.

 

It seems that its a slow week in MoS 18 land for the 1st prints. Prices are softening somewhat with higher grade issues being $15-22.

 

The 4th and 5th prints have not softened (sorry 1st print purists!). A couple bundles with 4th and/or 5th printings have sold north of $100.