Marvel UK Price Variants 16 16

[OtherEric]

On 4/24/2022 at 10:35 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

People are afraid of what they don't understand Steven. In this case, a challenge to their 'authority' I shouldn't wonder. 

I was going to suggest that was a bit unfair, but then I remembered why I unsubscribed from the GCD mailing lists despite being a top 100 indexer at the time. (I’ve dropped to 142nd place since then, I still regularly contribute.  Just not nearly as much.)

With that said, I would have left the error scan there… it’s common enough that people will be looking for it.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/24/2022 at 7:16 PM, OtherEric said:

I was going to suggest that was a bit unfair, but then I remembered why I unsubscribed from the GCD mailing lists despite being a top 100 indexer at the time. (I’ve dropped to 142nd place since then, I still regularly contribute.  Just not nearly as much.)

With that said, I would have left the error scan there… it’s common enough that people will be looking for it.

Are you challenging my authority?

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/24/2022 at 7:16 PM, OtherEric said:

With that said, I would have left the error scan there… it’s common enough that people will be looking for it.

Joking aside, I was thinking a bit more about this Eric. What do you think the eligibility criteria should be for a misprint to be included on the GCD as a separate entity? 

Is there a current criteria, even?

I like your point that if an error edition is widely enough known that it should perhaps be included as it is a 'thing' and people will want to collect it. But where do you draw the line? What if there are comics with multiple error types in evidence (e.g. ASM #188)? Should they all be included too? And who gets to decide, if so?

It's quite an interesting situation - do you include all of them, none of them or only selected ones which meet a certain criteria?  

Steven - what's your view / understanding? @Steven Coates

[Steven Coates]

"Steven - what's your view / understanding?", doesn't look like much of a question, does it? The answer is not so easy. New and additional issues are now controlled by the cover images. The restrictions are (simply) base and variants. Criteria for printer errors has not been (rigidly) defined other than it is considered a print error if it does not meet the base or variant criteria. Including printer error covers would increase the number of issues. Everyone who had a print error cover would be submitting to the GCD.

I would like to see an alternate cover table added to the database to store both the variant covers and the print error covers, but that is a major restructuring.

[OtherEric]

On 4/25/2022 at 1:51 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

It's quite an interesting situation - do you include all of them, none of them or only selected ones which meet a certain criteria?  

 

That's a hard one.  It appears that most of the famous print errors have been removed from the GCD- I don't see Sandman #1, Venom: Lethal Protector #1 (black cover), or Fantastic Four #110 up there.  But I think all of those SHOULD be up there, as well documented and sought out print errors.  But as others have said, drawing the line can be tricky. 

https://www.comics.org/issue/978442/cover/4/

Meanwhile, here is a book with three variations, entirely based on where "SEPT." shows up on the cover.  I think that that is a far, far lesser distinction than any of the covers I mentioned, and at most on the level of the missing color on the FF 119.  But since it apparently required a change to the plates, it counts as a variant.

I feel like there should be a way to clearly articulate where the line is, but nothing comes to mind. 

[Get Marwood & I]

It doesn't look like there's a straightforward answer really, does it. Each option has its downsides I suppose. That's one of the things with comics - whenever you try to categorise them, you hit snags, outliers and issues. And there will always be someone who disagrees with the approach. 

All good fun 

[Steven Coates]

And the publishers are no help. What ever term is handy can be applied. And the GCD doesn't seem to understand the difference between a comic book produced for the "British" market by a UK publisher and a "British" UKPV from a USA publisher. I am seeing "Canadian" applied to both a general market CPV and a newsstand market CPV where there is a direct market copy also circulated in Canada, without any clarifying remarks or notes.

I only get GCD mailings from threads I am active in. I drop in often to see if any thing gets my interest. I like to start a thread when I find I am going to make corrections to existing data or to present findings and reasoning to changing the data.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/25/2022 at 11:08 PM, Steven Coates said:

And the publishers are no help. What ever term is handy can be applied. And the GCD doesn't seem to understand the difference between a comic book produced for the "British" market by a UK publisher and a "British" UKPV from a USA publisher.

 

Nor do CGC. They're all internationals to them. 

On 4/25/2022 at 11:08 PM, Steven Coates said:

I am seeing "Canadian" applied to both a general market CPV and a newsstand market CPV where there is a direct market copy also circulated in Canada, without any clarifying remarks or notes.

I only get GCD mailings from threads I am active in. I drop in often to see if any thing gets my interest. I like to start a thread when I find I am going to make corrections to existing data or to present findings and reasoning to changing the data.

Do you think one day there will be a great big comic summit, everyone will have their say and then battle it out to arrive at some standard terminology that we all have to use going forward? 

Look out! A flying pig. 

[rakehell]

On 4/25/2022 at 11:13 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

Look out! A flying pig. 

Hang on...

Don't you mean a flying variant, pig variant dog (Canadian edition)? 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/26/2022 at 8:31 AM, rakehell said:

Hang on...

Don't you mean a flying variant, pig variant dog (Canadian edition)? 

That's the one! That one or Spider-Pig, I can't remember now. 

[rakehell]

On 4/26/2022 at 8:33 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

That's the one! That one or Spider-Pig, I can't remember now. 

Just been reading this -

How's that for cosmic unconsciousness! 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 4/26/2022 at 8:36 AM, rakehell said:

Just been reading this -

How's that for cosmic unconsciousness! 

Spider-Pig, Spider-Pig, does whatever a Spider-Pig can 

[Albert Tatlock]

https://www.cgccomics.com/international-comics/

[Get Marwood & I]

On 5/3/2022 at 12:33 AM, Albert Tatlock said:

https://www.cgccomics.com/international-comics/

Join the conversation here Albert:

https://boards.cgccomics.com/topic/488611-a-discussion-about-how-cgc-label-non-us-publications-which-reprint-reproduce-original-us-comic-content/page/21/#comment-12311541

 

[Get Marwood & I]

It's always fun to see how eBay lots with 'hidden' books go, isn't it. Not that there is any such thing as hidden now for auction style lots. Being the first to spot a BIN is the only way to snag a bargain today, now all those speculator eyes are pouring over every lot.

The initial listing pictures, 99p no reserve start:

And the inevitable added picture, once all the queries came in!

The final hammer price:

A nice pence Hulk for someone out there....

[rakehell]

On 5/3/2022 at 9:48 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

It's always fun to see how eBay lots with 'hidden' books go, isn't it. Not that there is any such thing as hidden now for auction style lots. Being the first to spot a BIN is the only way to snag a bargain today, now all those speculator eyes are pouring over every lot.

I was following that lot & bid on their other one. These are the kind of lots that keep me constantly searching...

[Get Marwood & I]

On 5/3/2022 at 10:57 AM, rakehell said:

I was following that lot & bid on their other one. These are the kind of lots that keep me constantly searching...

A rare genuine one too. 

[Redshade]

On 5/3/2022 at 9:25 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Join the conversation here Albert:

https://boards.cgccomics.com/topic/488611-a-discussion-about-how-cgc-label-non-us-publications-which-reprint-reproduce-original-us-comic-content/page/21/#comment-12311541

 

Don't do it Albert! It's too late for us but you still have time to save yourself. Run man, run.

 

Edited May 3, 2022 by Redshade

[Get Marwood & I]

On 5/3/2022 at 7:53 PM, Redshade said:

Don't do it Albert! It's too late for us but you still have time to save youself. Run man, run.

 

[themagicrobot]

I pulled a handful of comics out of a box for some light reading this afternoon and puzzled why comics with a publication date of August and September 1976 have such a variety of cover price logo/heading layouts. I haven't yet (can't be bothered to) checked EVERY comic Marvel issued that month for further variations.

No doubt @Get Marwood & I will tell me he has analysed all this in detail on page umpty thrumpty of this thread but there are 118 pages now to check through...

I'm just pleased to have found a whole box of mid 1970s comics purchased then and stored since. Were there were any "key" (in CGC parlance)  issues then that I should be looking out for??

 

Edited May 9, 2022 by themagicrobot