If Captain America #1 surpasses Marvel #1, Can Tec #27 surpass Action #1?

[VintageComics]

Batman owned the 1960s and 1970s too

 

Superman owned the 1940s and 1950s. Yet those 1960s baby boomers still choose action 1 over Tec 27 today. Not by much but a quantitative reality none the less

 

Pretty sure Captain Marvel owned the 1940's.

[Crowzilla]

Pretty sure Captain Marvel owned the 1940's.

 

You mean with a balloon in the Macy's parade starting in 1940 (including attendance of over 100,000 at the Macy's exhibit), over 30 licensed products released in 1941 alone, 17 episodes of his cartoon that are rated some of the finest ever produced, a syndicated radio show that ran 3-5x a week for the entire decade and had nearly 2,000 episodes before 1950, 2 feature length serials, a daily newspaper strip than ran for over 2 decades and had a readership estimated at over 20 million, and being the only comic distributed by the Army to servicemen?

 

That kind of owned?

 

[VintageComics]

Pretty sure Captain Marvel owned the 1940's.

 

You mean with a balloon in the Macy's parade starting in 1940 (including attendance of over 100,000 at the Macy's exhibit), over 30 licensed products released in 1941 alone, 17 episodes of his cartoon that are rated some of the finest ever produced, a syndicated radio show that ran 3-5x a week for the entire decade and had nearly 2,000 episodes before 1950, 2 feature length serials, a daily newspaper strip than ran for over 2 decades and had a readership estimated at over 20 million, and being the only comic distributed by the Army to servicemen?

 

That kind of owned?

 

I thought they were talking about comic book sales.

 

[thedude]

Pretty sure Captain Marvel owned the 1940's.

 

You mean with a balloon in the Macy's parade starting in 1940 (including attendance of over 100,000 at the Macy's exhibit), over 30 licensed products released in 1941 alone, 17 episodes of his cartoon that are rated some of the finest ever produced, a syndicated radio show that ran 3-5x a week for the entire decade and had nearly 2,000 episodes before 1950, 2 feature length serials, a daily newspaper strip than ran for over 2 decades and had a readership estimated at over 20 million, and being the only comic distributed by the Army to servicemen?

 

That kind of owned?

 

 

[sfcityduck]

Pretty sure Captain Marvel owned the 1940's.

 

You mean with a balloon in the Macy's parade starting in 1940 (including attendance of over 100,000 at the Macy's exhibit), over 30 licensed products released in 1941 alone, 17 episodes of his cartoon that are rated some of the finest ever produced, a syndicated radio show that ran 3-5x a week for the entire decade and had nearly 2,000 episodes before 1950, 2 feature length serials, a daily newspaper strip than ran for over 2 decades and had a readership estimated at over 20 million, and being the only comic distributed by the Army to servicemen?

 

That kind of owned?

 

Are you talking about Donald Duck? Because, he started in the parade in 1934 not 1940, had thousands of licensed products not just 30, hundreds of cartoons not just 17, a number of feature films not just two "feature length" serials, a daily newspaper strip that ran much longer than two decades, and, at times, a bigger readership than any other character.

 

Which is a long way of saying this debate is a little silly. Capt. Marvel was at times a far more popular character than Superman and Batman, especially, I think, in the post-war GA. So was Donald Duck, obviously.

 

The unique argument for Superman is he was the first original comic book superhero. Capt. Marvel was just a clone. Batman, created to join the trend, was originally a throwback to the Shadow, the Crimson Avenger, and other masked detectives. He only became a true superhero due to the influence of Superman's success. Superman is the root of the tree, and also, arguably, its trunk, because he has maintained popularity throughout his history.

[VintageComics]

Pretty sure Captain Marvel owned the 1940's.

 

You mean with a balloon in the Macy's parade starting in 1940 (including attendance of over 100,000 at the Macy's exhibit), over 30 licensed products released in 1941 alone, 17 episodes of his cartoon that are rated some of the finest ever produced, a syndicated radio show that ran 3-5x a week for the entire decade and had nearly 2,000 episodes before 1950, 2 feature length serials, a daily newspaper strip than ran for over 2 decades and had a readership estimated at over 20 million, and being the only comic distributed by the Army to servicemen?

 

That kind of owned?

 

Are you talking about Donald Duck? Because, he started in the parade in 1934 not 1940, had thousands of licensed products not just 30, hundreds of cartoons not just 17, a number of feature films not just two "feature length" serials, a daily newspaper strip that ran much longer than two decades, and, at times, a bigger readership than any other character.

 

Which is a long way of saying this debate is a little silly. Capt. Marvel was at times a far more popular character than Superman and Batman, especially, I think, in the post-war GA. So was Donald Duck, obviously.

 

The unique argument for Superman is he was the first original comic book superhero. Capt. Marvel was just a clone. Batman, created to join the trend, was originally a throwback to the Shadow, the Crimson Avenger, and other masked detectives. He only became a true superhero due to the influence of Superman's success. Superman is the root of the tree, and also, arguably, its trunk, because he has maintained popularity throughout his history.

 

Hey Sean, ready to eat some Crow?

 

Seriously though, I'm impressed that you guys know all this stuff.

 

[Wayne-Tec]

I've really had a good time reading and responding to this thread.

 

For those whose opinions have differed from mine, please forgive my passion, enthusiasm and long-winded rebuttals. What I love is seeing fellow collectors step up to the plate to share their knowledge, their passion and their interest in these books.

 

It's one thing we all have in common.

 

A passion for history and a connection to these characters that many outside of our hobby probably wouldn't understand.

 

So thanks to all for contributing.

[rob_react]

So, it's agreed.

 

BATMAN IS THE BEST FOREVA!!!!

[G.A.tor]

I've really had a good time reading and responding to this thread.

 

For those whose opinions have differed from mine, please forgive my passion, enthusiasm and long-winded rebuttals. What I love is seeing fellow collectors step up to the plate to share their knowledge, their passion and their interest in these books.

 

It's one thing we all have in common.

 

A passion for history and a connection to these characters that many outside of our hobby probably wouldn't understand.

 

So thanks to all for contributing.

Sentence breaks. Ill read it

[Wayne-Tec]

I've really had a good time reading and responding to this thread.

 

For those whose opinions have differed from mine, please forgive my passion, enthusiasm and long-winded rebuttals. What I love is seeing fellow collectors step up to the plate to share their knowledge, their passion and their interest in these books.

 

It's one thing we all have in common.

 

A passion for history and a connection to these characters that many outside of our hobby probably wouldn't understand.

 

So thanks to all for contributing.

Sentence breaks. Ill read it

 

[Crowzilla]

Hey Sean, ready to eat some Crow?

 

Absolutely.

No question the Duck and the Mouse are the Kings.

Didn't even think that was an argument.

 

But whenever I hear about Captain Marvel owning Superman in the 40s, I think sometimes it gets a little overblown. Absolutely there was a time his CM outsold Superman - but by 20-25%, not double or anything implying Superman was falling out of favor, it is kind of like when Daredevil briefly outsold X-men in the 80s. It happened, and DD was very popular, but X-Men was the giant that kept on going.

 

[bodhee]

A little more food for thought.

 

In terms of All-Time USA Box Office figures, The Dark Knight ranks 4th and the the Dark Knight Rises ranks 7th -- Man of Steel ranks 56th. The decision to add a new Batman to the MOS universe strikes me as a sign of DC's lack of faith in Superman as a solo character. Even if Ben Affleck doesn't prove to be a great Batman, people will come to theaters to see Batman.

 

When Batman Forever hit theaters in 1995, it had the largest opening of ALL-TIME.

 

It wasn't a great film, but it does speak to the love fans of all generations have for the character.

 

Unfortunately, the last two superman movies were sub par. If the Man of Steel movie were half as good as it could have been, this wouldn't even be a conversation. There was a feeling amongst collectors at one point that movies would only have a short term effect on comic prices. That does not appear to be the case any more as slight "bumps" pre movie turn into a sustained rise in value if the movie is as popular as was batman series (and many marvel).

 

 

[rob_react]

Hey Sean, ready to eat some Crow?

 

Absolutely.

No question the Duck and the Mouse are the Kings.

Didn't even think that was an argument.

 

But whenever I hear about Captain Marvel owning Superman in the 40s, I think sometimes it gets a little overblown. Absolutely there was a time his CM outsold Superman - but by 20-25%, not double or anything implying Superman was falling out of favor, it is kind of like when Daredevil briefly outsold X-men in the 80s. It happened, and DD was very popular, but X-Men was the giant that kept on going.

 

We just need to get Superman to join the X-Men.

[VintageComics]

Hey Sean, ready to eat some Crow?

 

Absolutely.

No question the Duck and the Mouse are the Kings.

Didn't even think that was an argument.

 

But whenever I hear about Captain Marvel owning Superman in the 40s, I think sometimes it gets a little overblown. Absolutely there was a time his CM outsold Superman - but by 20-25%, not double or anything implying Superman was falling out of favor, it is kind of like when Daredevil briefly outsold X-men in the 80s. It happened, and DD was very popular, but X-Men was the giant that kept on going.

 

My understanding was that he outsold Superman 2:1 at his peak and was a front runner for most of the 1940's, including introducing super powered family members and sidekicks. I could be wrong though. It's just what I read and nobody seemed to contradict it.

 

DC seemed better at marketing their flagship heroes outside of paper comics.

[Sqeggs]

Hey Sean, ready to eat some Crow?

 

Absolutely.

No question the Duck and the Mouse are the Kings.

Didn't even think that was an argument.

 

But whenever I hear about Captain Marvel owning Superman in the 40s, I think sometimes it gets a little overblown. Absolutely there was a time his CM outsold Superman - but by 20-25%, not double or anything implying Superman was falling out of favor, it is kind of like when Daredevil briefly outsold X-men in the 80s. It happened, and DD was very popular, but X-Men was the giant that kept on going.

 

My understanding was that he outsold Superman 2:1 at his peak and was a front runner for most of the 1940's, including introducing super powered family members and sidekicks. I could be wrong though. It's just what I read and nobody seemed to contradict it.

 

DC seemed better at marketing their flagship heroes outside of paper comics.

 

Just browsing through Wikipedia, they have sales of Captain Marvel at 1.3 million per issue in the early 1940s and sales of Superman at 1 million per issue. Sources seems a little shaky. I'm trying to recall whether publishers in those days were obliged to publish circulation figures as they were in later years.

[Hamlet]

I think that the fundamental issue with Superman is that the character is very difficult to make interesting.

 

Perfect and nearly omnipotent characters are hard to identify with, and hard to make interesting from a story perspective.

 

It takes much more writer and acting talent to make a good Superman movie than a good Batman movie, IMO.

 

 

Unfortunately, the last two superman movies were sub par. If the Man of Steel movie were half as good as it could have been, this wouldn't even be a conversation. There was a feeling amongst collectors at one point that movies would only have a short term effect on comic prices. That does not appear to be the case any more as slight "bumps" pre movie turn into a sustained rise in value if the movie is as popular as was batman series (and many marvel).

 

[rec1978]

Captain Marvel covers that are eeeeerily similar to Superman Covers:

 

http://www.brittonpayne.com/Marvel/SupermanShazam.html

 

 

[jimbo_707]

I think that the fundamental issue with Superman is that the character is very difficult to make interesting.

 

Perfect and nearly omnipotent characters are hard to identify with, and hard to make interesting from a story perspective.

 

It takes much more writer and acting talent to make a good Superman movie than a good Batman movie, IMO.

 

 

Unfortunately, the last two superman movies were sub par. If the Man of Steel movie were half as good as it could have been, this wouldn't even be a conversation. There was a feeling amongst collectors at one point that movies would only have a short term effect on comic prices. That does not appear to be the case any more as slight "bumps" pre movie turn into a sustained rise in value if the movie is as popular as was batman series (and many marvel).

 

Quite true! The Spectre was approaching omnipotence, and readers seemed to grow tired of that character after a year or two (although he's one of my personal DC favs).

[Cat-Man_America]

Hey Sean, ready to eat some Crow?

 

Absolutely.

No question the Duck and the Mouse are the Kings.

Didn't even think that was an argument.

 

But whenever I hear about Captain Marvel owning Superman in the 40s, I think sometimes it gets a little overblown. Absolutely there was a time his CM outsold Superman - but by 20-25%, not double or anything implying Superman was falling out of favor, it is kind of like when Daredevil briefly outsold X-men in the 80s. It happened, and DD was very popular, but X-Men was the giant that kept on going.

 

My understanding was that he outsold Superman 2:1 at his peak and was a front runner for most of the 1940's, including introducing super powered family members and sidekicks. I could be wrong though. It's just what I read and nobody seemed to contradict it.

 

DC seemed better at marketing their flagship heroes outside of paper comics.

 

Just browsing through Wikipedia, they have sales of Captain Marvel at 1.3 million per issue in the early 1940s and sales of Superman at 1 million per issue. Sources seems a little shaky. I'm trying to recall whether publishers in those days were obliged to publish circulation figures as they were in later years.

 

Two points here. Fawcett was actually much better at marketing their flagship heroes in the early forties. Negotiating movie rights to two well done serials The Adventures of Captain Marvel and Spysmasher with Republic Pictures, the most popular serial producing studio, was a major coup that probably bolstered sales of Fawcett's comics.

 

My other point is that the 1.3 verses 1 million in sales per issue of Captain Marvel over Superman doesn't provide the whole picture. For quite awhile Captain Marvel was being published being bi-weekly while Superman maintained a bi-monthly publication throughout the war. So, approximating issue to issue sales figures don't provide much context.

 

That said, the actual contrasting sales of Captain Marvel over Superman at the formers peak could be anything from 1.3:1 to over 5:1 dependent upon which criterion is used to formulate a comparison.

 

On the other hand, if various titles featuring the flagship characters are included (for instance, Action & Superman, Whiz & Captain Marvel and various spin-offs), it might produce different outcomes. One would need much broader access to sales figures of both publishers to make such comparisons.

 

Also, Wikipedia searches comparing sales figures don't appear to be especially useful. Too many sources apply the same estimates that are frequently borrowed and reprinted without footnotes making it difficult to track and lock-down any hard figures.

[Crowzilla]

Just browsing through Wikipedia, they have sales of Captain Marvel at 1.3 million per issue in the early 1940s and sales of Superman at 1 million per issue. Sources seems a little shaky. I'm trying to recall whether publishers in those days were obliged to publish circulation figures as they were in later years.

 

Part of the problem was the way sales were reported back then. For example, DC used to report the sales of Action, Adventure, Detective, and More Fun as a single group - making it hard to peg individual numbers.

In Ian Gordon's book he quotes Donenfeld as saying that by 1940 Action had sales of 900,000 copies (which was equal to about 10% of the existing market) and that by the time Superman went to a bi-monthly that sales were 1,250,000 an issue with a yearly gross of $950,000 (which would put sales at over 1.5 million per issue).

 

Those numbers would put Superman right in Captain Marvel's ballpark, and I've always felt that Donenfeld purposely under-reported the numbers since the company was so often in dispute with Siegel and Shuster over sales/payments.

 

But to show how the Mouse & Duck were king though, WDC&S and Uncle Scrooge not only were the only comics to maintain 1,000,000+ circulation through the entire decade of the 50s, they were the last two comics to average sales of 1,000,000 per issue for an entire year - 1960.

(Superman's avg in 1960 was just over 800,000 per issue by comparison).