Waitaminute... who owned what and why ? Marvel of the 60's Question. 1 1

[Buzzetta]

So I am going through some comics that I am going to list.  Like a good boardie, I go through the books to make sure the pages are all there and nothing is clipped out.  Since it is a Marvel Tales book, I wanted to see what issues they pulled the stories from... then I notice the following from Marvel Tales 16 from 1968.

Spider-man reprinted courtesy of Non-Pareil Publishing Corporation 1964

Thor reprinted courtesy of Atlas Magazines Inc. 1964

Human Torch reprinted courtesy of Vista Publications Inc. 1963

Marvel Boy reprinted courtesy of 20th Century Comic Corp 1951

What gives with the different 'rights' concerning the 1963-1964 stories?

Sorry if this is a silly question... but I figure someone here knows the history. 

[catman76]

4 hours ago, Buzzetta said:

So I am going through some comics that I am going to list.  Like a good boardie, I go through the books to make sure the pages are all there and nothing is clipped out.  Since it is a Marvel Tales book, I wanted to see what issues they pulled the stories from... then I notice the following from Marvel Tales 16 from 1968.

Spider-man reprinted courtesy of Non-Pareil Publishing Corporation 1964

Thor reprinted courtesy of Atlas Magazines Inc. 1964

Human Torch reprinted courtesy of Vista Publications Inc. 1963

Marvel Boy reprinted courtesy of 20th Century Comic Corp 1951

What gives with the different 'rights' concerning the 1963-1964 stories?

Sorry if this is a silly question... but I figure someone here knows the history. 

Publishers used to have many different companies they published under, I don't know the exact reasons but I am sure financial reasons, ways to get around taxes and stuff like that. It seems to have been really common in the 40s and 50s , sometimes from issue to issue the name of the publisher in the indicia will change, even if there's the main publisher name on the front cover. Plus those are Marvel comics and Marvel had so many name changes over the years.

[Larryw7]

It had something to do with getting out of paying postal regulations. EC did the same thing in the fifties. It cracks me up to see that Shock Suspenstories was listed in the indicia as being published by "Tiny Tot Publications".

[shadroch]

So I am going through some comics that I am going to list.  Like a good boardie, I go through the books to make sure the pages are all there and nothing is clipped out

 

That's so 2010.

[Sqeggs]

On 7/7/2017 at 0:52 AM, Larryw7 said:

It had something to do with getting out of paying postal regulations. EC did the same thing in the fifties. It cracks me up to see that Shock Suspenstories was listed in the indicia as being published by "Tiny Tot Publications".

I remember noticing that years ago and you probably have the likely explanation, which also explains why publishers would switch themes of a book while retaining a version of the title (or the same numbering even if changing the title):  Moon Girl and the Prince becomes Moon Girl becomes Moon Girl Fights Crime becomes A Moon, a Girl ... Romance becomes Weird Fantasy. 

Edited July 8, 2017 by Sqeggs
Typo

[catman76]

The postal regulations and fees thing was the reason I always heard was why publishers always avoided starting new titles if they could, just continued numbering from another title or starting a title at number 10, all to avoid paying whatever fees they had too for new titles. Ziff Davis did that with all their titles in the 50s and started every title at number 10. Also why comics all had text pages in them, another thing to avoid some postal regulation where the fees were lower if there was a minimum of two all text pages in any magazine, or something like that. I never have been able to find what the exact rules or regulations were or much about it ever.

[Buzzetta]

All interesting stuff so far. 

[catman76]

I just remembered Myron Fass, not totally comic related, but he published a crazy amount of magazines and comics in the 60s and 70s under the like 20 publishing companies names he would use. It's really fascinating, he was a nut and would do anything for a buck and save money, everything was on the cheapest paper he could get, published anything at all as long as it made a buck. Victor Fox is another guy that always fascinated me, he ran Fox publications in the 40s, he supposedly had ties to the mob and all this criminal stuff, published the most exploitative stuff he could to sell the comics, paid next to nothing, screwed over artists. All those old publishers and how they operated is fascinating to me, comics and pulps and men's magazines and all that was really low, bordering on criminal enterprises. It was all cheap stuff churned out to make a buck and had all these different company names and stuff to avoid taxes and avoid getting busted for stuff they published. I wish there was more information about it all. Same with old exploitation films and roadshowing and all that, these sleazy, exploitative companies doing anything to make a buck and avoid getting busted and everything.

[shadroch]

ALL comic publishers had mob links, if only because EVERY newsstand distributor  was mobbed up.  It's not a coincidence that almost every distributor went under just as The US Senate started having hearings  on the mob.

Sixty years ago, someone started the myth of Seduction of The Innocent almost putting comics out of business. The fact is the distribution system shut down overnight as most were nothing more than money laundering operations.

[Dick Pontoon]

On 7/6/2017 at 7:19 PM, Buzzetta said:

So I am going through some comics that I am going to list.  Like a good boardie, I go through the books to make sure the pages are all there and nothing is clipped out.  Since it is a Marvel Tales book, I wanted to see what issues they pulled the stories from... then I notice the following from Marvel Tales 16 from 1968.

Spider-man reprinted courtesy of Non-Pareil Publishing Corporation 1964

Thor reprinted courtesy of Atlas Magazines Inc. 1964

Human Torch reprinted courtesy of Vista Publications Inc. 1963

Marvel Boy reprinted courtesy of 20th Century Comic Corp 1951

What gives with the different 'rights' concerning the 1963-1964 stories?

Sorry if this is a silly question... but I figure someone here knows the history. 

They are all just shell companies in Martin Goodman’s publishing empire, detailed exhaustively in The Secret History of Marvel Comics by Blake Bell and Dr. Michael J. Vasallo. It’s worth a read and has lots of great, rare illustrations.

http://www.fantagraphics.com/secrethistoryofmarvelcomics/

 

[Prince Namor]

17 hours ago, Pontoon said:

They are all just shell companies in Martin Goodman’s publishing empire, detailed exhaustively in The Secret History of Marvel Comics by Blake Bell and Dr. Michael J. Vasallo. It’s worth a read and has lots of great, rare illustrations.

http://www.fantagraphics.com/secrethistoryofmarvelcomics/

 

Great book.

[Unca Ben]

6 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

Great book.

Hey Chuck, just wanted to comment that I'm still following your Undercover Archie blog.  It's still great; keep up the good work!  

[lizards2]

On 7/6/2017 at 10:08 PM, shadroch said:

So I am going through some comics that I am going to list.  Like a good boardie, I go through the books to make sure the pages are all there and nothing is clipped out

 

That's so 2010.

That's also so un-BSD of you.  You probably don't have any employees to blame any glitches on.

[Buzzetta]

On 7/10/2017 at 11:26 AM, Pontoon said:

They are all just shell companies in Martin Goodman’s publishing empire, detailed exhaustively in The Secret History of Marvel Comics by Blake Bell and Dr. Michael J. Vasallo. It’s worth a read and has lots of great, rare illustrations.

http://www.fantagraphics.com/secrethistoryofmarvelcomics/

 

On your recommendation I just picked up a copy.  I found it for $20 shipped though on Amazon.   It is even cheaper if someone else is looking to read it and does not mind buying a used copy.  I think the lowest cost was $13 + shipping. 

Edited July 12, 2017 by Buzzetta

[bronze_rules]

On 7/10/2017 at 8:26 AM, Pontoon said:

They are all just shell companies in Martin Goodman’s publishing empire, detailed exhaustively in The Secret History of Marvel Comics by Blake Bell and Dr. Michael J. Vasallo. It’s worth a read and has lots of great, rare illustrations.

http://www.fantagraphics.com/secrethistoryofmarvelcomics/

 

Great recollection! I knew I've read it somewhere, but just couldn't offhand remember the source. It may have also been in other Marvel documentary books.

But, I will say, that reading the opening thread does give me a whole new perspective on just how bizarre it seems on the surface.

------

In fact, digging back through twomorrows publishing's very excellent 'American Comic Book Chronicles -- 50s and 60s, I'll add some additional color to the discussion.

 

From ACBC50s (p 20),

"One of the biggest producers of romance and Western titles was Martin Goodman's line, referred to in the 1940's as Timely and in the 1960s as Marvel, had no single name during the 1950s. Presumably for tax purposes, his comics were published by numerous small companies. For the sake of clarity, this book refers to comics that Goodman published in the years before and after he carried the Atlas globe on his covers - late 1951 through most of 1957 - as "Martin Goodman's comics.""

then, from ACBC60s (p 48, and referring to period just before FF1 explosion).

"In the fine print of the indicia in each comic book, Martin Goodman's company still seemed to be published by multiple entities.

Starting with two June 1961 dated issues (Patsy Walker #95 and Journey Into Mystery #69), it took a significant step towards a uniform corporate identity when a small boxed "MC" began appearing in each cover."

 

gcd denotes, Indicia/Colophon Publishers for most published titles. There's more detailed description at the link.

We can see a detailed list here, -- clearly, Marvel had a multitude early on.

Related Blog Post

 

Edited July 13, 2017 by bronze_rules

[shadroch]

That book is okay, but I still believe the author had a severe anti- Lee bias and presents unsubstantiated stories from other sources as facts.

Worth reading, but it wasn't handed down from on high.