Batman 1 7.0 Heritage auction 0

[woowoo]

The Batman 1 is only the 2nd copy I have seen without the dot before the 1

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/superhero/batman-1-dc-1940-cgc-fn-vf-70-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7177-91049.s?ic3=ViewItem-Auction-Open-ThisAuction-120115

Does anyone have opinion why the dot is not there.

[Gotham Kid]

you can ct to cvr after you win it Harold

Edited February 6, 2018 by Gotham Kid

[MrBedrock]

12 minutes ago, woowoo said:

Does anyone have opinion why the dot is not there.

Because it was printed there?

[Mr bla bla]

1 minute ago, MrBedrock said:

Because it was printed there?

But it was not?

[woowoo]

2 minutes ago, MrBedrock said:

Because it was printed there?

[woowoo]

55 minutes ago, Gotham Kid said:

you can ct to cvr after you win it Harold

 ct to cvr  was edited

[Randall Ries]

I have seen other copies w/o the dot. It seems like there was more than one printing run.The earlier print run didn't have the dot and the later one did.

[thedude]

15 minutes ago, Randall Ries said:

I have seen other copies w/o the dot. It seems like there was more than one printing run.The earlier print run didn't have the dot and the later one did.

this was my understanding as well, just like there were (3?) print runs of Superman #1, with small differences between the print runs. although the market hasn't shown any favorability to either printings.

[jpepx78]

27 minutes ago, Randall Ries said:

I have seen other copies w/o the dot. It seems like there was more than one printing run.The earlier print run didn't have the dot and the later one did.

Here's my theory about the dot since I believe the dot was always there initially on the cover printing plate. The dot would be a small raised point on the metal printing plate and over time and after tens of thousands of printings, the dot could have worn off or broken off resulting in no dot printing. I surmise that copies with the dot came first and copies without the dot were printed later in the initial print run or in later printing if there was a second print run. The missing dot was not noticed or was not a big enough difference to be worth fixing the printing plate.

Here's an example of a cover printing plate.

[bluechip]

1 hour ago, jpepx78 said:

Here's my theory about the dot since I believe the dot was always there initially on the cover printing plate. The dot would be a small raised point on the metal printing plate and over time and after tens of thousands of printings, the dot could have worn off or broken off resulting in no dot printing. I surmise that copies with the dot came first and copies without the dot were printed later in the initial print run or in later printing if there was a second print run. The missing dot was not noticed or was not a big enough difference to be worth fixing the printing plate.

Here's an example of a cover printing plate.

Exactly!   Same thing with the so-called Marvel 1 October editions.   They changed the date before it went to print so they could stay on the stands later.  But late in the run the "Nov" fell off.   So those few "Nov" copies are actually the LAST in the run.

 

And all those books that say "first edition."  They're not the first ones, either.  It's what they put at books at the end of a run, before they go to the second edition.

Edited February 6, 2018 by bluechip

[Silver Surfer]

Except that October is before November and is October not November. A dot is a dot.

[Primetime]

1 hour ago, jpepx78 said:

Here's my theory about the dot since I believe the dot was always there initially on the cover printing plate. The dot would be a small raised point on the metal printing plate and over time and after tens of thousands of printings, the dot could have worn off or broken off resulting in no dot printing. I surmise that copies with the dot came first and copies without the dot were printed later in the initial print run or in later printing if there was a second print run. The missing dot was not noticed or was not a big enough difference to be worth fixing the printing plate.

Here's an example of a cover printing plate.

Good theory Jeff. 

[Sqeggs]

5 hours ago, woowoo said:

The Batman 1 is only the 2nd copy I have seen without the dot before the 1

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/superhero/batman-1-dc-1940-cgc-fn-vf-70-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7177-91049.s?ic3=ViewItem-Auction-Open-ThisAuction-120115

Does anyone have opinion why the dot is not there.

I think there have been multiple threads about the dot and no-dot copies of Batman 1.  I can't quite remember the details, but at some point somebody presented a good case for there having been separate printings.

[Sqeggs]

2 hours ago, bluechip said:

Exactly!   Same thing with the so-called Marvel 1 October editions.   They changed the date before it went to print so they could stay on the stands later.  But late in the run the "Nov" fell off.   So those few "Nov" copies are actually the LAST in the run.

 

And all those books that say "first edition."  They're not the first ones, either.  It's what they put at books at the end of a run, before they go to the second edition.

First time I've heard this argument to explain the October and November versions of Marvel 1. Not saying it's incorrect, just that I can't recall having heard it before.

[woowoo]

I would like to have a copy with No dot over the dot you got that.

[Primetime]

1 minute ago, woowoo said:

I would like to have a copy with No dot over the dot you got that.

it's going to cost more than 1983 prices Harold 

[woowoo]

8 minutes ago, Primetime said:

it's going to cost more than 1983 prices Harold 

 don't know if I have $5 bucks more

[N e r V]

No one knows or can prove any theory either way. It’s just as possible that if there were 2 (or more) print runs or a single run the no dot could have come first and was corrected on a later run or corrected later in a single run when the mistake was noticed.

Edited February 7, 2018 by N e r V

[N e r V]

Like Marvel #1 if you’re a purist you’ll want both versions. 

[woowoo]

58 minutes ago, N e r V said:

No one knows or can prove any theory either way. It’s just as possible that if there were 2 (or more) print runs or a single run the no dot could have come first and was corrected on a later run or corrected later in a single run when the mistake was noticed.