Marvel UK Price Variants 16 16

[Redshade]

On 8/19/2021 at 11:16 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Not me, not by a long chalk. I am OK on Silver Age, but Bronze dried to a trickle, still not bothered with a lot of them, I am definitely a Silver fan.

However, as a kind soul has now given us a target (3023) to aim at, I might have a go.

One stumbling block, though will be FF 1 and 2, both of mine are cents.

Posting the pre-hero Astonish, I have 17 of the available 22. Missing are 14, 21, 26, 28 and 34. In the foolishness of my youth I traded up (so I believed at the time) to cents.

Anyone who can supply the missing quintet will earn my undying gratitude.

 

What a great set Albert. Shouldn't they be in an underground vault with a 24 hour armed guard?

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/19/2021 at 11:27 PM, Kevin.J said:

pre-code

pre-hero?

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/19/2021 at 11:35 PM, Redshade said:

What a great set Albert. Shouldn't they be in an underground vault with a 24 hour armed guard?

Ena with her rolling pin bars the path.

[Kevin.J]

On 8/19/2021 at 11:41 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

pre-hero?

Yes, my bad 

[Albert Tatlock]

There is one anomalous issue here, Astonish  # 33. 

For some reason, the usual masthead was changed from the one that had been running for over 20 issues, to this one, which had never been used before and never was again, apart from the one on # 18, also for just the one issue.

Tying this in with the earlier posts about prices being scratched out at the last minute and so on, makes you wonder about how chaotic and ad hoc the printing room floor must have been. Still, this masthead is perfectly clear and well-positioned, so why could they not go with the usual one?

Edited August 20, 2021 by Albert Tatlock
scan added.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/19/2021 at 11:16 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Cor, don't they look good. I love comics from this age 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/20/2021 at 6:24 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

There is one anomalous issue here, Astonish  # 33. 

For some reason, the usual masthead was changed from the one that had been running for over 20 issues, to this one, which had never been used before and never was again, apart from the one on # 18, also for just the one issue.

Tying this in with the earlier posts about prices being scratched out at the last minute and so on, makes you wonder about how chaotic and ad hoc the printing room floor must have been. Still, this masthead is perfectly clear and well-positioned, so why could they not go with the usual one?

Good spot Albert 

I wonder if any of the pre-hero boys had noticed this, or know why? @bc @Frisco Larson

                               #32                                                                           #33                                                                             #34

 

[Redshade]

Following my post yesterday regarding comics being used as ballast on ships from the US to the UK.

I have always been sceptical (What! You Stephen sceptical?) about this being the case. I have never seen any evidence to back up this claim. It just seems to be one of those things that people have read and repeated without looking for verification. I looked up "Ship's Ballast" and below are a few random quotes gleaned from the interweb. Does anyone really know where the above narrative first appeared and can anyone vouch for the veracity or otherwise of it?

QUOTES:

“Prior to the 1880s, ships used solid ballast materials such as rocks and sand, which had to be manually shoveled into cargo holds, and similarly discharged when cargo was to be loaded on board. Unfortunately, if not properly secured, solid ballast is prone to shifting in heavy seas causing instability. With the introduction of steel-hulled ships and pumping technology, water became the ballast of choice.”

" In the nineteenth century, cargo boats returning from Europe to North America would carry quarried stone as ballast, contributing to the architectural heritage of some east coast cities (for example Montreal), where this stone was used in building.”

“Ballast takes many forms. On larger modern vessels, the keel is made of or filled with a high density material, such as concrete, iron, or lead. By placing the weight as low as possible (often in a large bulb at the bottom of the keel) the maximum righting moment can be extracted from the given mass. Traditional forms of ballast carried inside the hull were stones or sand.”

“The concept of ballast is not new and has been followed since ancient times. In the earlier times, the sea-going vessels used solid ballast such as sandbags, rocks, iron blocks, etc. which were loaded/unloaded once the cargo loading or discharge operation was finished. This method helped to a certain extent to maintain the stability of the ship and its seaworthiness.

However, today’s vessels carry liquid ballast, which includes fresh water, salt water or brackish water in various ballast tanks. As ships get bigger in size and the cargo carried by the vessels varies one port to another (due to global economics, ship condition, local voyage requirements etc.), water ballast tanks are used to compensate for maintaining the trim and stability of the vessel for a safe sea passage.”

“Ballast is material that is used to provide stability to a vehicle or structure. Ballast, other than cargo, may be placed in a ship that holds water is called a ballast tank. Water should move in and out from the ballast tank to balance the ship. In a vessel that travels on the water, the ballast will remain below the water level, to counteract the effects of weight above the water level.[1] The ballast may be redistributed in the vessel or disposed of altogether to change its effects on the movement of the vessel."

“Water can be easily pumped in and out of ballast tanks and requires little manpower. When ships need ballast, water is pumped from the sea where the ship is located into the ships’ ballast water tanks, which adds weight to key parts of the ship. Ballast water is discharged at sea when it is no longer needed or when the weight of the ship needs to be lightened.”

 

Edited August 21, 2021 by Redshade

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/21/2021 at 8:17 AM, Redshade said:

It just seems to be one of those things that people have read and repeated without looking for verification.

There are a few snippets like that Stephen, that have travelled down the years without anyone ever actually verifying them. That's why I try to stick to verifiable fact myself, and then badge everything else clearly as speculation. The suggested 2-5% early Marvel pence print run has never been verified. The 'makeweight' pre-UKPV UK distribution copies have never been seen. The time it took for books to be printed and then arrive in UK outlets has never been definitively proven - three months, one, six? The cause of the many issue gaps has never been definitively proven - shipping strikes, UK-US contractual issues, US printer problems? We don't know for sure - we only know there is a gap. We can't say for certain which books were printed first - pence or cents - or whether it varied. Again, no direct evidence of a systematic approach. 

My favourite is the still repeated to this day 'fact' that Thorpe & Porter were the sole UK distributors of UKPVs in the UK. I've proven that to be wrong for Charlton and, briefly, Marvel (L Miller) but I cannot say for certain who distributed the Archie UKPVs, Gold Key or Dell. There's no proof. It's hugely likely That Roberts & Vinter distributed the post-Miller Charlton copies in the UK, but there is no direct proof - yet - that the 'RV' stamp is theirs.

It's amazing really how little we know, or can actually prove, about some of these long held, oft repeated assumptions. 

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/21/2021 at 8:44 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

'fact' that Thorpe & Porter were the sole UK distributors of UKPVs in the UK

Correct, but only so far as the particular issue in question. Other issues, other distributors.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/21/2021 at 9:47 AM, Albert Tatlock said:

Correct, but only so far as the particular issue in question. Other issues, other distributors.

Yes. What a load of ballast. 

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/21/2021 at 8:17 AM, Redshade said:

comics being used as ballast on ships from the US to the UK

There were a lot of water damaged comics about in the early 1970s, but not seriously damaged enough to have been completely waterlogged.

There must be some other explanation for this, but I rack my brains, scratch my head and furrow my brow to no avail.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/21/2021 at 10:01 AM, Albert Tatlock said:

There were a lot of water damaged comics about in the early 1970s, but not seriously damaged enough to have been completely waterlogged.

There must be some other explanation for this, but I rack my brains, scratch my head and furrow my brow to no avail.

Well, given the wonderful consistency of our inclement English weather, I don't think you have to think too hard to come up with a plausible explanation Albert.... 

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/21/2021 at 10:11 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Well, given the wonderful consistency of our inclement English weather, I don't think you have to think too hard to come up with a plausible explanation Albert.... 

The puzzle is that this was not across the board. There were lots of certain titles, none of others.

Looks like they had set off water damaged, especially as quite a few of them were the ND issues.

[Frisco Larson]

On 8/21/2021 at 1:54 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Good spot Albert 

I wonder if any of the pre-hero boys had noticed this, or know why? @bc @Frisco Larson

                               #32                                                                           #33                                                                             #34

 

My quick answer is no and no, hadn't specifically noticed, don't know why. However, upon further examination, I have found that it's even a bit more complicated than just that. Issues #1 - #11 shared the same basic logo, while issue #12 became the thicker, jagged logo with the notched O. Then issue #18 comes along and returns to a similar font and style of the #1 - #11 period, except that the letters are thicker and the exclamation point doesn't return. Then issue #19 is released and the logo returns to the #12 - #17 style. Going forward, I must stop and site a variation on issue #30. While the logo is consistent in almost all regards to what had come out the month before, it appears that the notch in the O has gotten smaller for some unknown reason. I didn't go back and check every single issue with that style logo to see if any others had the smaller notch, but either way, it looks different. Now onto issue #33: the logo looks to be almost the same as issue #18, except the "TALES TO" seem to be a bit thicker on the #33. I have provided examples from my collection below for comparison. I don't have a complete run. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/21/2021 at 3:03 PM, Frisco Larson said:

My quick answer is no and no, hadn't specifically noticed, don't know why. However, upon further examination, I have found that it's even a bit more complicated than just that. Issues #1 - #11 shared the same basic logo, while issue #12 became the thicker, jagged logo with the notched O. Then issue #18 comes along and returns to a similar font and style of the #1 - #11 period, except that the letters are thicker and the exclamation point doesn't return. Then issue #19 is released and the logo returns to the #12 - #17 style. Going forward, I must stop and site a variation on issue #30. While the logo is consistent in almost all regards to what had come out the month before, it appears that the notch in the O has gotten smaller for some unknown reason. I didn't go back and check every single issue with that style logo to see if any others had the smaller notch, but either way, it looks different. Now onto issue #33: the logo looks to be almost the same as issue #18, except the "TALES TO" seem to be a bit thicker on the #33. I have provided examples from my collection below for comparison. I don't have a complete run. 

Cheers Frisco - I had a quick look and TOS seems pretty consistent. Another 60's mystery to ponder...

[Frisco Larson]

On 8/21/2021 at 10:41 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Cheers Frisco - I had a quick look and TOS seems pretty consistent. Another 60's mystery to ponder...

Thanks! I DID throw a few pence copies in there too, for equal time and fair play!  I haven't look at TOS to see if there were any notable differences. Maybe when time allows. It's interesting to see differences over the course of a titles run. I'm at a loss to explain it, but cool to see variations. 

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/21/2021 at 5:56 PM, Frisco Larson said:

I haven't look at TOS to see if there were any notable differences

From memory, TOS masthead had no variations, apart from the changeover at 34/35. Will delve deeper anon.

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/21/2021 at 3:03 PM, Frisco Larson said:

it appears that the notch in the O has gotten smaller for some unknown reason.

I have had a look at a few of these, and there is a possibility that they are all identical, but the addition of the second (darker) colour is obscuring the outline of the earlier (lighter) colour. Difficult to tell, though.

[Frisco Larson]

On 8/21/2021 at 5:07 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

From memory, TOS masthead had no variations, apart from the changeover at 34/35. Will delve deeper anon.

A quick look revealed no notable changes.