The Distribution of US Published Comics in the UK (1959~1982) 16 16

[baggsey]

On 7/7/2024 at 1:25 PM, Redshade said:

You'll know of this site? 
ausreprints.net/publisher

Thanks for the suggestion, @Redshade . I've tried to access it over the past few days, but the pages time out before they load in my browser. I'll try again.

[themagicrobot]

There is currently a problem with the AusReprints front page but I can still get in "sideways" via a saved link https://ausreprints.net/cover/series/15/313/1/100/50. Actually it amazes me that the UK can connect with the US let alone Australia almost instantly. During my childhood my Grandfather had to book a phonecall to contact relatives in the US.

The AusReprints site was built many years ago and consequently is quite difficult to navigate. There is a page for the UK Supermans but I can't see one for the Batmans. Looking at the Aus Batman comics pages they each contain a link to the UK variant. Batman No 1 appeared in 1950 and the first 10 issues cost 6d Aus. Issues 10 to 20 cost 8d Aus. All of those issues were apparently distributed in the UK. Issue No 21 was the first to be printed with two different prices. 8d Aus for the home market and 6d for export to the UK. So after paying 8d an issue for the best part of a year we see a price reduction!! The final issue of this first series of Batman by K.G.Murray was No 115 in January 1960. The rest is history as then we have reached the-distribution-of-us-published-comics-in-the-uk-1959~1982

The other three comics K.G.Murray imported in quantity to the UK were Superboy, Superadventure and Superman. The Superman comics cause confusion because the earliest issues didn't come to the UK. Our Supermans had different numbering as well as different prices. 

PS: I noticed this pulp and the indicia indicates that Atlas had an Australian offshoot. 

[baggsey]

On 7/8/2024 at 4:10 AM, themagicrobot said:

There is currently a problem with the AusReprints front page but I can still get in "sideways" via a saved link https://ausreprints.net/cover/series/15/313/1/100/50. Actually it amazes me that the UK can connect with the US let alone Australia almost instantly. During my childhood my Grandfather had to book a phonecall to contact relatives in the US.

The AusReprints site was built many years ago and consequently is quite difficult to navigate. There is a page for the UK Supermans but I can't see one for the Batmans. Looking at the Aus Batman comics pages they each contain a link to the UK variant. Batman No 1 appeared in 1950 and the first 10 issues cost 6d Aus. Issues 10 to 20 cost 8d Aus. All of those issues were apparently distributed in the UK. Issue No 21 was the first to be printed with two different prices. 8d Aus for the home market and 6d for export to the UK. So after paying 8d an issue for the best part of a year we see a price reduction!! The final issue of this first series of Batman by K.G.Murray was No 115 in January 1960. The rest is history as then we have reached the-distribution-of-us-published-comics-in-the-uk-1959~1982

The other three comics K.G.Murray imported in quantity to the UK were Superboy, Superadventure and Superman. The Superman comics cause confusion because the earliest issues didn't come to the UK. Our Supermans had different numbering as well as different prices. 

PS: I noticed this pulp and the indicia indicates that Atlas had an Australian offshoot. 

Thanks for the link to the materials @themagicrobot and the suggestion to jump in via another link than the homepage. I'll work on capturing those publication dates into my ever-growing spreadsheet. As far as I know, the Atlas Publications Pty Ltd Melbourne had no connection to the Atlas Publishing & Distributing Company Ltd in the UK. In fact, just saw this info about the Australian Atlas Publications Pty on https://ausreprints.net/publisher/122 which supports that assumption. Still, there may be some business connection/arrangement not yet uncovered.

 

[OtherEric]

On 7/8/2024 at 2:10 AM, themagicrobot said:

There is currently a problem with the AusReprints front page but I can still get in "sideways" via a saved link https://ausreprints.net/cover/series/15/313/1/100/50. Actually it amazes me that the UK can connect with the US let alone Australia almost instantly. During my childhood my Grandfather had to book a phonecall to contact relatives in the US.

The AusReprints site was built many years ago and consequently is quite difficult to navigate. There is a page for the UK Supermans but I can't see one for the Batmans. Looking at the Aus Batman comics pages they each contain a link to the UK variant. Batman No 1 appeared in 1950 and the first 10 issues cost 6d Aus. Issues 10 to 20 cost 8d Aus. All of those issues were apparently distributed in the UK. Issue No 21 was the first to be printed with two different prices. 8d Aus for the home market and 6d for export to the UK. So after paying 8d an issue for the best part of a year we see a price reduction!! The final issue of this first series of Batman by K.G.Murray was No 115 in January 1960. The rest is history as then we have reached the-distribution-of-us-published-comics-in-the-uk-1959~1982

The other three comics K.G.Murray imported in quantity to the UK were Superboy, Superadventure and Superman. The Superman comics cause confusion because the earliest issues didn't come to the UK. Our Supermans had different numbering as well as different prices. 

PS: I noticed this pulp and the indicia indicates that Atlas had an Australian offshoot. 

The cover is a reprint from Planet Stories but the contents only have one match that I can see without opening the book.

[Redshade]

On 7/7/2024 at 11:38 PM, baggsey said:

Thanks for the suggestion, @Redshade . I've tried to access it over the past few days, but the pages time out before they load in my browser. I'll try again.

I've just received this update from AusReprints :

 

Old Australian Pre-Decimal Comics Up To 1966

James Zanotto  ·   · 

 

 

AusReprints update

I've kept the Australian Reprint Comic Book Appreciation Society Facebook group in the loop, but here's an updated for interested members in this group.

AusReprints has been unreliable since about January and I've been working through solving the problems. The bottom line is that the technology of the site is ageing, and it isn't coping.

There has been steady growth in users, but a massive burst early this year overwhelmed the site and brought it to a standstill. For reasons I don't fully understand, the site remained unreliable even when user volume dropped (because no one could access it).

A key limit is caused by user connections to the underlying database, and some of you will have seen the dreaded 'max_user_connections' error.

My service provider was unhelpful and did not increase this critical limit. I expected (at least) an offer to do it for more money. I now know that the hosting provider has changed hands twice in the past six months, which is a likely cause of the poor service.

I have now set up a test AusReprints site with a new provider. That involved updating the software, reworking a lot of the code and working through a range of problems.

I think it's almost there. In coming weeks, I hope to move the URL across and make the 'test' site the real site.

Now a bonus for those who have read to the bottom—the test site is at http://ausreprints.net.au (note the AU on the end). It still has glitches, but it is overall more reliable than the standard site.

Give it a try and let me know if you strike errors. I'd like to gently increase the volume of users and monitor the results.

In the near future, I am going to do a callout for financial assistance, probably via a Kickstarter or similar. The new site has more power, is scalable for growth and is more expensive.

If you value AusReprints, please consider contributing when I do the callout.

 

 

 

All reactions:

6Jeff Battista and 5 others

 

 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 7/6/2024 at 7:25 PM, baggsey said:

I'm conscious that the discussion around this is veering away from UK comic Price Variant territory (sorry @Get Marwood & I ), so perhaps I need to set up another discussion thread, unless there is one already more suited to it?  

Post away, Bags. It's the people that matter in this thread, not the subject matter 

[Get Marwood & I]

What a beauty, in more ways than three, stamped nine dee 

[Albert Tatlock]

On 7/16/2024 at 1:52 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

What a beauty, in more ways than three, stamped nine dee 

Cut outs to paste in your scrapbook, pin-ups to detach, puzzles to fill in, what more could you ask for?

And you can win a prize, no doubt by clipping a coupon.

Surprised there's anything left of it.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 7/16/2024 at 3:12 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Cut outs to paste in your scrapbook, pin-ups to detach, puzzles to fill in, what more could you ask for?

And you can win a prize, no doubt by clipping a coupon.

Surprised there's anything left of it.

That copy is complete, Albert, but the Margie scissor-curse looms large elsewhere in my collection!

 

[Get Marwood & I]

Nothing sad about it, Eric. It shows it was loved and looked after by its intended audience original owner! 

[OtherEric]

On 7/16/2024 at 9:12 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

Nothing sad about it, Eric. It shows it was loved and looked after by its intended audience original owner! 

Very true!.  My sadness was for the assumption that you were still lacking an intact copy, as the current owner.

For myself, I'll always be grateful for Jimmy here, who loved his book so much it wound up being affordable to me 30 years ago. 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 7/16/2024 at 5:27 PM, OtherEric said:

Very true!.  My sadness was for the assumption that you were still lacking an intact copy, as the current owner.

For myself, I'll always be grateful for Jimmy here, who loved his book so much it wound up being affordable to me 30 years ago. 

Indeed. Sometimes, it's the only way we'll ever own some of these things. Happily for me, though I love them dearly, the Charlton UKPV collecting is largely about proving what exists. I do have one or two dupes though, and a complete Margie 44 is in the vaults 

[Albert Tatlock]

On 5/14/2024 at 6:29 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

My arrival date studies are focussed elsewhere Albert. Someone else can have a go.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

On 5/14/2024 at 5:55 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

What would help, if we could find enough of them, would be arrival dates on later than # 58 copies of JIM in 1960 and 1961.

Then, comparing them with arrival dates from the same cover months on TOS, TTA and Strange Tales would inform us whether the alleged 3 week gap in the on sale date was reflected in the arrival dates in bricks and mortar outlets Stateside.

And, if that turned out to be the case, it would make sense for the JIMs sent across to the UK to have been subject to a similar time lag.

I noticed back in 1961 that the late arrival of JIM was what was happening as I religiously focused on those four PHM titles, never missing an issue once I latched onto them, but have not followed up Mike's data further than the end of that year. Maybe it continued right up to # 125, or even beyond, retitled as Thor.

I have given this matter further thought, and have now come to the conclusion that ALL the May 1960 dated Marvels shipped to the UK arrived simultaneously with the June cover dated ones.

The key is to be found in the JIM issues.

As we have previously noted, using Mike's Amazing data, the release date for JIM # 58 (May 1960), matches Strange Tales # 75 (June 1960).

I noticed in mid-1961 that JIM always appeared a month behind its companions Astonish, Suspense and Strange Tales. 

Checking with Mike again, this was the case right up to the final issue # 125 (February 1966). 

However, this would prove only that JIM was distributed to outlets in the US later than the other titles, and what we need to know is the on sale date in the UK.

So, how do we do that?

The first few UKPVs had the month printed on the cover, but T & P decided that it would be better for sales to omit the date.

For Astonish, Suspense and Strange Tales, the switch was made between April and May, as shown below.

However, for JIM, the change took place between March and April.

This means that at the time the request was made, the April TTA, TOS and ST had already been printed, but not the JIM.

April JIM was printed a little later, but travelled with the May issues.

Extrapolating this back to May/June 1960, that would mean that the May issues of JIM and Gunsmoke Western were put on the same boat as ST # 75, Kid Colt # 90, Wyatt Earp # 29, Battle # 70, Patsy and Hedy and whatever other June issues there might have been.

I hope that clears it up. There are now not just the two candidates for first official Marvel UK distribution, but several, all equally worthy of the accolade.

 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/1/2024 at 9:50 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

This means that at the time the request was made, the April TTA, TOS and ST had already been printed, but not the JIM.

April JIM was printed a little later, but travelled with the May issues.

In isolation, that makes sense to me, Albert. For the April JIM #67 to not have a cover month, whereas the other April dated books do, that does seem to indicate that JIM was produced after the instruction was received at the printers to drop the cover month.

I'm a little wary of extrapolating back though. The extract of my spreadsheet below shows only the titles that have a UKPV dated May or June 1960. Your assertion is that the two May books - JIM #58 and Gunsmoke Western #58 - were shipped to the UK along with the six June dated titles. Your cover date cut off point relates to 1961 though, a time when the books were monthly. When we track back, the early titles are bi-monthly so it's not a like for like comparison. And there is no hard and fast reason to suggest that just because JIM was printed late for issue #67 that it was also in preceding months. Maybe that changed on a title by title basis. 

We also have the Miller / T&P split to consider. Would a Miller solicitation travel to the UK with a T&P one? Logically, yes, but how can we be sure of that? And who would get their product on the shelves first?

We can see from the T&P stamp numbers that the early DCs arrived in different shipments. But those were returns of course, and the UKPVs were printed to order. Date stamps (on US copies) won't help us therefore, other than to indicate the order they were distributed, and therefore printed, in the US. But our UKPVs could have been printed and then stored for a while, who knows? They would have been small in number, comparatively, so they may have waited for enough to make shipping viable. Maybe the May, June and July copies all shipped in one go. Imagine the boat having all those DC unsolds, and then a tiny amount of Marvel UKPVs.

In summary, for me, I really like what you're doing here Albert, but there is no way of saying for certain what came when. Cover dates are just that - calendar sequential issue dates - but we can't say with any certainty that that sequentially was mirrored in actual arrival events in the UK. You have recollections from 1961 onwards and we've no reason to distrust them - your ledger is an indication of how seriously you took it all. But there isn't anyone alive (it seems) who has a concrete recollection of how those books arrived in the UK in those early months of 1960. So for me, I'm only happy to say what the first Marvel UKPVs were by cover date. I wouldn't want to state with any degree of certainty when they went on sale in the UK and whether they were the first to do so or were joined by the June issues too. And again, even if GW #58 and JIM #58 came together, first, alone, who is to say which went on sale first, given that each had a different UK distributor?

I look at all the publishers and the sense I get is that we might all be surprised by what was arriving, and when, in those first months. I sense it would have been chaotic. If you look at the extract below, you'll see that there are sequential 1959 Charlton titles with T&P stamps. They then stop before Miller takes over in August 1960. So did those four War at Sea books arrive in 1959 or, more likely, late in bulk in 1960? What would the shops that sold them have looked like? Charltons with four issues on the trot, DCs all over the place, Dells, Harveys, Archies, IW's. Total random, often out of date chaos with a mix of UKPVs and stamped US titles.

I don't think we'll ever know what went on, but I'd love to have been a kid back then, fighting through that lot. 

I do like what you're trying to do though, Albert. 

 

[Get Marwood & I]

@Albert Tatlock

....it's funny what you say about JIM being late all the time - whenever there's something unusual, it's always JIM that's the exception. There might be something in the indicia changes that further supports your theory, thinking about it, but it's late and my head hurts. One for another day....

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/1/2024 at 11:05 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

In isolation, that makes sense to me, Albert. For the April JIM #67 to not have a cover month, whereas the other April dated books do, that does seem to indicate that JIM was produced after the instruction was received at the printers to drop the cover month.

I'm a little wary of extrapolating back though. The extract of my spreadsheet below shows only the titles that have a UKPV dated May or June 1960. Your assertion is that the two May books - JIM #58 and Gunsmoke Western #58 - were shipped to the UK along with the six June dated titles. Your cover date cut off point relates to 1961 though, a time when the books were monthly. When we track back, the early titles are bi-monthly so it's not a like for like comparison. And there is no hard and fast reason to suggest that just because JIM was printed late for issue #67 that it was also in preceding months. Maybe that changed on a title by title basis. 

Mike's data shows that JIM was printed later than the other titles with the same cover month all the way from # 58 (and most likely before - I have not checked) to the final issue # 125.

Consider the situation at the time the May 1960 issues were printed.

Astonish and Suspense (Strange Tales skipped this month) were cents only. If Jim # 58 had been at the printers on the same day, it too would have been cents only, and the same applies to GW # 58.

So TTA and TOS went out to US retailers.

JIM had to wait, and by the time it was available, Atlas/Marvel had an order for a separate run of UKPVs.

So what happened to those? Were they sent immediately?

I would say not, as on that same date (29 January 1960), according to Mike, Wyatt Earp # 29, Battle # 70, GW # 58, Strange Tales # 75 and Patsy and Hedy 70 were sitting alongside on a pallet.

Surely a no-brainer to put them all on the same truck (possibly 2 trucks if Miller had made separate arrangements, but it would have been simpler for the printer to deal with only one shipping agent) and send them to the docks.

No cast iron proof, of course, unless T & P's old files turn up.

The evidence we have may be circumstantial, but it is sufficient to convince me.

Incidentally, Kid Colt # 90, again according to Mike, had a release date of 28 December 1959, so could have been shipped along with the May/June batch, or theoretically even earlier.

Alan Austin's 1983 Price Guide states that KC # 91 was the earliest UKPV of that title, but Duncan's site says that # 90 was the earliest, although the only image provided is a Cents.

To quote him:

Issue: 90

From: 1960 To: 1960

(May 1960) Jack Kirby and Dick Ayers cover.

1st officially Distributed issue in the UK. The UK Variant had a printed 9d cover price and is incredibly tough to find in UK circulation - you just don't see it.

 

 

 

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/2/2024 at 5:49 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Alan Austin's 1983 Price Guide states that KC # 91 was the earliest UKPV of that title, but Duncan's site says that # 90 was the earliest, although the only image provided is a Cents.

To quote him:

Issue: 90

From: 1960 To: 1960

(May 1960) Jack Kirby and Dick Ayers cover.

1st officially Distributed issue in the UK. The UK Variant had a printed 9d cover price and is incredibly tough to find in UK circulation - you just don't see it.

I make Alan right, but would love for Duncan to be right.

Here's my Kid #91:

When I was compiling the Marvel UKPV list, over many years, I always thought those KCO gaps didn't look right and fully expected 90, 92-94 to turn up but they never did:

I've always said 'never say never', but wouldn't it be a thing if one of them popped up one day, after all this time.

I just had another look just now if I'm honest. Old habits. It brought back memories - hours, days, weeks, months and years of trawling. I definitely should have gone out more....

[Get Marwood & I]

By the way, if anyone wants to read an abridged version of my recent WordPress article on Marvel UKPVs in print, you'll find it in here:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0DBFBFMCG/ref=pe_27063361_485629781_TE_item_image

[Albert Tatlock]

On 8/2/2024 at 7:49 PM, Get Marwood & I said:

. I definitely should have gone out more....

Never too late.

You have everything you need at your fingertips.

[Get Marwood & I]

On 8/2/2024 at 8:20 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Never too late.

You have everything you need at your fingertips.