Marvel comics 1 entry price? 0

[G.A.tor]

this was my oct/nov duo some time ago

[KirbyJack]

Absolutely inspiring. 

If I ever get money...

 

[pemart1966]

On 2017-06-09 at 10:37 PM, Ameri said:

Many collectors call that black "slug" an ink stamp. No 2nd printing. It's October copies with a stamp. Goodman had a squadron of staff stamping those October copies so don't believe everything you read about shifting plates and all that nonsense. There is no November "copy" because the word Oct is right underneath the black stamp that says Nov. If you want to call it Nov/Oct copy, I can dig that. Get in your time machine and prove me wrong.  

There's no friggin' way that Goodman was going to pay "a squadron of staff" to manually stamp 800,000 covers.  To my knowledge, the circle and the "Nov" are printed.

I think that anyone thinking that these are not 2 different versions is just fooling themselves.

"There's no November copy"??  There were 800,000 November copies!

Edited June 11, 2017 by pemart1966

[Comicdey]

I wonder not how many copies are out there and available in the market.  That number sounds quite low.

I'd be curious to know how many copies are currently in dealer/collectors hands vs collectors that do not resell as a business or side hobby.  Maybe a percentage.  

50% dealer owned or is it higher/lower?  Not saying dealers are selling   Just holding?

 

[Ameri]

9 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

There's no friggin' way that Goodman was going to pay "a squadron of staff" to manually stamp 800,000 covers.  To my knowledge, the circle and the "Nov" are printed.

I think that anyone thinking that these are not 2 different versions is just fooling themselves.

"There's no November copy"??  There were 800,000 November copies!

OK, you might be right. The fact that the NOV and circle are never in the same spot from copy to copy does make one wonder though. Goodman did the same black circle with this book 

[porcupine48]

3 minutes ago, Ameri said:

OK, you might be right. The fact that the NOV and circle are never in the same spot from copy to copy does make one wonder though. Goodman did the same black circle with this book 

Oddly enough,I have never come across one without the dot.

[Ameri]

6 minutes ago, porcupine48 said:

Oddly enough,I have never come across one without the dot.

This one doesn't have the black circle

[pemart1966]

57 minutes ago, Ameri said:

This one doesn't have the black circle

...and there's a 3rd version with a different "12c" font...

[MrBedrock]

On Sat Jun 10 2017 at 7:22 PM, rjpb said:

I know Mystic Comics#4 has versions with a black or silver overstamp  of JULY and AUGUST printed above it, has anyone seen a "JULY" copy with no overstamp?

Given that we know there were three printings of Superman #1, and most likely two of Batman #1, and at least two states if not printings of MM #1, one wonders if there were more bi-monthly or quarterly books that had more than one printing, particularly first issues, where the sales potential was just guesswork. As quality control was fairly minimal, color variations and dimensional differences in width aren't very reliable indicators, and without some yet to be found clue , there would be no way of knowing which copies were which. This happened with quite a few underground comics, where several documented printings were run back in the day with no apparent changes, though over the years collectors have in some cases sussed out printing and bindery variances that they believe to be indicative of separate printings.

The 3-D Mighty Mouse was so popular that it had legitimate multiple printings. 

[MrBedrock]

1 hour ago, pemart1966 said:

There's no friggin' way that Goodman was going to pay "a squadron of staff" to manually stamp 800,000 covers.  To my knowledge, the circle and the "Nov" are printed.

I think that anyone thinking that these are not 2 different versions is just fooling themselves.

"There's no November copy"??  There were 800,000 November copies!

You really can't be certain either. The truth is we just don't know.

But I also believe they were stamped.

[Sqeggs]

2 hours ago, Ameri said:

OK, you might be right. The fact that the NOV and circle are never in the same spot from copy to copy does make one wonder though. Goodman did the same black circle with this book 

There's also this one, which I think also comes in stamped and unstamped (10 cent) versions (as indicated by the label note).

[pemart1966]

38 minutes ago, MrBedrock said:

You really can't be certain either. The truth is we just don't know.

But I also believe they were stamped.

I'm saying printed for the following reasons:

1.  Goodman didn't have "a squadron of staff" to do all of that hand stamping.

2.  Goodman being as cheap as they say he was was not going to outsource the hand stamping of 800,000 copies nor was he about to pay what staff he did have to hand stamp 800,000 copies.

3.  Once Goodman found out that the October version had sold out quickly he would have wanted the reprint (there...I said it) out ASAP.  He would not have been able to wait for 800,000 copies to be hand stamped.  Too costly and too time consuming.

4.  I suspect that since the elapsed time between the October and November versions was quite narrow, that the plate for the October issue still existed at the time the decision was made to do the reprint.  Goodman had the printer put some sort of a plug on the plate where "Oct" had been and had the printer add a "NOV" plate and then ordered 800,000 copies printed.  These new added "mini plates" may well have moved during the printing process explaining why copies aren't consistent wrt their placement on the cover.

5.  If the NOV copies had been hand stamped, I think that the difference in inks between the "stamp" and the printed cover would be pretty obvious - even after almost 80 years.  I would have expected to see smudging, bleed through etc etc after almost 80 years of handling, storage etc.

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by pemart1966

[Sqeggs]

Can't stamping be done mechanically, rather than by hand?

[pemart1966]

4 minutes ago, Sqeggs said:

Can't stamping be done mechanically, rather than by hand?

I had asked myself the same question but I was replying in part using Ameri's assertion that they were "hand stamped".    It would definitely have to have been some sort of mechanical process for sure.

Any printers know if mechanical stamping could be done circa late 1939?

Edited June 12, 2017 by pemart1966

[Jaydogrules]

15 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

I'm saying printed for the following reasons:

1.  Goodman didn't have "a squadron of staff" to do all of that hand stamping.

2.  Goodman being as cheap as they say he was was not going to outsource the hand stamping of 800,000 copies nor was he about to pay what staff he did have to hand stamp 800,000 copies.

3.  Once Goodman found out that the October version had sold out quickly he would have wanted the reprint (there...I said it) out ASAP.  He would not have been able to wait for 800,000 copies to be hand stamped.  Too costly and too time consuming.

4.  I suspect that since the elapsed time between the October and November versions was quite narrow, that the plate for the October issue still existed at the time the decision was made to do the reprint.  Goodman had the printer put some sort of a plug on the plate where "Oct" had been and had the printer add a "NOV" plate and then ordered 800,000 copies printed.  These new added "mini plates" may well have moved during the printing process explaining why copies aren't consistent wrt their placement on the cover.

5.  If the NOV copies had been hand stamped, I think that the difference in inks between the "stamp" and the printed cover would be pretty obvious - even after almost 80 years.  I would have expected to see smudging, bleed through etc etc after almost 80 years of handling, storage etc.

 

You forgot the most obvious one:

6)  It would actually be cheaper and FAR less time consuming to simply reprint the comic (which is what the November copy is, a reprint) than to pay a gaggle of lackies however long it would take to "hand stamp" nearly a million copies.  

Such a notion is just patently and ridiculously absurd.  

-J.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Jaydogrules

[pemart1966]

5 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

You forgot the most obvious one:

6)  It would actually be cheaper and FAR less time consuming to simply reprint the comic (which is what the November copy is, a reprint) than to pay a gaggle of lackies however long it would take to "hand stamp" nearly a million copies.  

That is just absolutely and patently ridiculous.

-J.

Hand stamping was Ameri's claim not mine.

I've always contended that the November version is a reprint so I'm not too sure what it is you think I missed 

Edited June 12, 2017 by pemart1966

[Jaydogrules]

Just now, pemart1966 said:

Hand stamping was Ameri's claim not mine.

I've always contended that the November version is a reprint so I'm not too sure what it is you think I missed 

Touche.  Guess I just felt the need to put an exclamation point at the end of it.   

-J.

 

[N e r V]

I've come to the conclusion that certain posters here are only interested in their own agendas or trolls. Take your pick.

 

Stating your opinion is one thing but continued attempts to counter others opinions by trying to beat your own on to them over and over again is not polite.

 

I'm annoyed. 

[G.A.tor]

 whatever folks want to call it (second printing, reprint, extended print, altered printing etc) it really doesn't matter...we are trying to apply modern terms and preferences to an almost 80 year old "throw away"... they are what they are...they are highly coveted...and folks pay crazy money to get one!

 

I believe it was Geppi that told us the covers were run, then sent through a mechanical process that applied both the black out and the Nov date simultaneously... though I can't fully recall if this is accurate or not...

[MrBedrock]

31 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

I'm saying printed for the following reasons:

1.  Goodman didn't have "a squadron of staff" to do all of that hand stamping.

2.  Goodman being as cheap as they say he was was not going to outsource the hand stamping of 800,000 copies nor was he about to pay what staff he did have to hand stamp 800,000 copies.

3.  Once Goodman found out that the October version had sold out quickly he would have wanted the reprint (there...I said it) out ASAP.  He would not have been able to wait for 800,000 copies to be hand stamped.  Too costly and too time consuming.

4.  I suspect that since the elapsed time between the October and November versions was quite narrow, that the plate for the October issue still existed at the time the decision was made to do the reprint.  Goodman had the printer put some sort of a plug on the plate where "Oct" had been and had the printer add a "NOV" plate and then ordered 800,000 copies printed.  These new added "mini plates" may well have moved during the printing process explaining why copies aren't consistent wrt their placement on the cover.

5.  If the NOV copies had been hand stamped, I think that the difference in inks between the "stamp" and the printed cover would be pretty obvious - even after almost 80 years.  I would have expected to see smudging, bleed through etc etc after almost 80 years of handling, storage etc.

 

Again you can't be certain of any of your assertions. For instance you claim that the October copies sold out, while the general thought is that they were a mistake and the Novembers are the corrected version. If the Octobers sold so well why aren't there more surviving copies? I am sure you will counter me with a ton of theoretical hyperbole, but the truth is none of us know.

And the books are stamped.