The Distribution of US Published Comics in the UK (1959~1982) 15 15

[Get Marwood & I]

On 1/19/2022 at 3:04 PM, Malacoda said:

Yes it does, but wow. That's a lifetimes work.  I assume that those stamps were probably only put on the top comic of a bundle? 

I think so, yes. It's really hard to find multiple copies, but I managed it for a lot of the 1960s Charlton one shots without cover months, which allowed me to place them much more accurately alongside their peer titles by cover month. Gorgo and Konga #1 went from being the first UKPVs to not, via the application of this method. Not flawless by any means, but so much more accurate and justifiable than the conclusions that preceded it, in my opinion. 

It's a big old complicated pattern, all this stuff, with multiple strands, that can all join together to present the best possible version of what might have happened 60 years ago, without actually being there to confirm it. 

[Albert Tatlock]

On 1/19/2022 at 2:52 PM, Malacoda said:

I have to confess, I'm never too sure what those dates are. A dispatch date from ECP? A receipt date from the wholesaler? A receipt date from the local wholesaler? A receipt date from the retailer? 

Most probably the retailer, to let him know how long the mag had been on his shelf and when it was time to send it on its return journey.

He would probably stamp or write on all his deliveries of comics, not just the top one.

But, if only a minority of retailers could be bothered to do this, it would explain why only a small percentage of the still extant copies are so marked.

[Albert Tatlock]

This is only from memory, but here is my list in order of difficulty at the time (superhero titles only):

TTA  # 62 - way out in front

DD  # 4, Avengers  # 9

ASM  # 18

FF  # 32

JIM  # 109, 110

X-Men  # 8

ST  # 126

[Malacoda]

On 1/19/2022 at 4:43 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

This is only from memory, but here is my list in order of difficulty at the time (superhero titles only):

TTA  # 62 - way out in front

DD  # 4, Avengers  # 9

ASM  # 18

FF  # 32

JIM  # 109, 110

X-Men  # 8

ST  # 126

I can't believe you can remember this. I can remember a lot of ND comics because I spent years wanting them and seeing them on walls in comic shops, but this is something else. 

Based on what's still around 58 years later, I would definitely say TTA #62 is the rarest ( flat out ND in my opinion), followed by DD#4 and Avengers #9 which are rare but not as 'impossible' as some would have us believe.  

I would also put ASM #18 next.  Only ever found one of those. Not to speak for m'colleague, but Steve might put FF#32 ahead of that. He had it down as probably not existing until I showed him one but then he immediately found another one (or two even), so maybe not?

Based on my (possibly utterly misleading) experience, ST #126 is very rare. It's very collectible (1st Dormammu, 1st Clea) so I would expect a lot of these to have been preserved, but I only ever found one stamped copy. A year later I found another one and it turned out to be the same one being resold. 

JIM #109 is definitely tough, but it was a PV so it likely came over in quantity. I'm surprised you say #110 was rare.  I found ten copies of this and gave up looking very quickly.  X men #8 is also usually findable, albeit in smaller quantites.   

Others:  TTA 61 I find shockingly rare for a PV.  I'm also surprised TOS 59 is not on your list. Very collectible - first Cap in title - still only ever seen 2 of these in the wild. 

Thank Goodness for your memory, that's all I can say. 

 

 

[Malacoda]

On 1/19/2022 at 4:34 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Most probably the retailer, to let him know how long the mag had been on his shelf and when it was time to send it on its return journey.

He would probably stamp or write on all his deliveries of comics, not just the top one.

But, if only a minority of retailers could be bothered to do this, it would explain why only a small percentage of the still extant copies are so marked.

I would imagine we could actually figure this out. If we can get a reasonable sample base and the majority are stamped with the release date, it could be reasonably taken to be the wholesaler.  If they're all over the place, retailers? In Steve's DD4 example, the stamp predates the release date, which might indicate wholesaler.  This ST #126 matches the release date. This could therefore also be wholesaler. It doesn't seem very likely to me, given the size of the US, that many comics made it off the presses, into batches, got loaded, got delivered to wholesalers, batched up with a zillion other publications, re-loaded, dispatched to local wholesalers, re-batched for individual retailers, re-loaded, delivered, sorted out, stamped and banged out onto the shelves in one day.  I guess it depends exactly what the release date means and if it means it consistently.  

[themagicrobot]

Congratulations @malacoda. This thread already covered more ground into the history of comics than most of the Interweb but you've just taken it to a different level. I doff Albert's cap to you.

And A Brief Review of The First Official UK Distribution of US Published Comics in 1959/1960 (Followed by a selfless engagement in the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, a high and noble endeavour)

is a more fitting title but probably steve ought to change brief to some other adjective of his choice?

[Albert Tatlock]

On 1/19/2022 at 7:06 PM, Malacoda said:

I can't believe you can remember this.

What I cannot remember, because it was unimportant at the time, was whether the copies for sale back then were stamped or not.

I do remember several comic collecting colleagues struggling with FF 32 and ASM 18, but TOS 59 did not seem a problem. Possibly because some titles were more sought after than others. FF was Marvel's flagship back then.

I have several fanzines from the time with wants lists, and TTA 62 figured prominently. Also FF 7, which was probably lesser spotted than FF 1.

[Albert Tatlock]

On 1/19/2022 at 7:22 PM, Malacoda said:

I would imagine we could actually figure this out. If we can get a reasonable sample base and the majority are stamped with the release date, it could be reasonably taken to be the wholesaler.  If they're all over the place, retailers? In Steve's DD4 example, the stamp predates the release date, which might indicate wholesaler.  This ST #126 matches the release date. This could therefore also be wholesaler. It doesn't seem very likely to me, given the size of the US, that many comics made it off the presses, into batches, got loaded, got delivered to wholesalers, batched up with a zillion other publications, re-loaded, dispatched to local wholesalers, re-batched for individual retailers, re-loaded, delivered, sorted out, stamped and banged out onto the shelves in one day.  I guess it depends exactly what the release date means and if it means it consistently.  

If it were a wholesaler, would we not expect uniformity, not necessarily of the date, but certainly on how it was applied? Instead we have a wide variety of pen, pencil, marker, inkstamp, and different placements, front cover, back cover, wherever.

Look at the T & P stamps, there is a consistent pattern which would have been next to impossible if they had been applied by individual retailers.

My money (10 cents or 9d) is on the date being applied at point of sale.

[Albert Tatlock]

On 1/19/2022 at 7:06 PM, Malacoda said:

Thank Goodness for your memory, that's all I can say. 

Cheers, just remind me whether I have left the gas on. And why are my keys not in my pocket? Hope I haven't left them in the door again.

[Albert Tatlock]

On 1/14/2022 at 2:11 AM, Malacoda said:

We may have the answer to who distributed comics in Ireland. No one. Ever.

Once again from Tony Roche.............

And there was my one lone subscriber from the Republic, Damian Nolan from 142 Stella Gardens, Irishtown, in Dublin, who sent a detailed and largely positive letter after every issue from HU 1 on.

 

Subscribers all over the UK (I was one) and beyond, and only 1 from the Republic? Another indication that Irish youth were missing out on this particular form of escapist fantasy.

[Malacoda]

On 1/19/2022 at 8:08 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

Once again from Tony Roche.............

And there was my one lone subscriber from the Republic, Damian Nolan from 142 Stella Gardens, Irishtown, in Dublin, who sent a detailed and largely positive letter after every issue from HU 1 on.

 

Subscribers all over the UK (I was one) and beyond, and only 1 from the Republic? Another indication that Irish youth were missing out on this particular form of escapist fantasy.

Which makes you wonder.....was there no market because no one imported the comics or did no one import the comics because there was no market? 

[Malacoda]

On 1/19/2022 at 7:24 PM, themagicrobot said:

Congratulations @malacoda. This thread already covered more ground into the history of comics than most of the Interweb but you've just taken it to a different level. I doff Albert's cap to you.

And A Brief Review of The First Official UK Distribution of US Published Comics in 1959/1960 (Followed by a selfless engagement in the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, a high and noble endeavour)

is a more fitting title but probably steve ought to change brief to some other adjective of his choice?

Many thanks, Robot. It's funny how sometimes the most impenetrable aspects of the question are what gives you the answer.  The questions actually seemed straightforward: why did T&P prepare months in advance for a price increase rather than just do it, why didn't they seem to know how much or when they were going to increase by and why did they shut down a streamlined, automated, efficient system of pricing to change to a clunky, expensive manual one? It seemed like it had to be some impending changes to taxation or customs duties, but if that was the case, why didn't they know when the change was scheduled for and what the impact was going to be? As soon as you realise there was an election coming, you have the answer. There was a massive balance of payments crisis and an £800m budget deficit, which was going to necessitate some hard medicine, but, of course, in an election year neither party was going to spell out exactly what they would do. If the Tories had got back in, they would also have had to something pronto. They needed to grow exports and shrink imports (or discourage them and as a bonus, make more tax revenue from imports). Labour went for plan B and imposed an import tax, but I suspect the Tories would have killed two birds with one stone and devalued the pound. Currency speculators in the market were assuming that was going to happen whoever won.  Either way, there had to be a general election in October, whoever won had to address the crisis and whichever solution they deployed, import costs would go up. 

T&P knew all this, but without knowing exactly what the new government would do, or when or what the financial impact would be, they got as ready as they could. Once you twig that, everything else falls into place. 

I also think this foray into stamping gave them unexpected flexibility with their supply side.  It wasn't much use to them in 1964 when Irwin D was using IND as a stick to beat Marvel with, but it was a very different story by 1967.  But that's a bedtime story for another night.   

Cheers again. 

[Malacoda]

A Review of the Distribution of US Published Comics in the UK (1959~1982)

Wow, I'm finally on topic. 

[themagicrobot]

Quote

 but it was a very different story by 1967.  But that's a bedtime story for another night.

So the story continues???

Wikipedia says:

Quote

In July 1966, Thorpe & Porter went bankrupt which left many of its clients being owed substantial sums. The company was purchased by IND the distribution arm of DC Comics. (Traditionally, IND distributed all DC publications, as well as those of a few rival publishers, such as Marvel Comics from 1957 to 1969, in addition to pulp and popular magazines.)

Was there any disruption to comics being shipped from Thorpe and Porters warehouses to UK newsagents after July 1966? You'd think there'd be some sort of transition period if a company went bankrupt and was taken over but I can't recall any shortage of comics in the summer of 1966. Perhaps Albert can recall more? And who would be the clients left owed substantial sums? Someone in the States that had shipped comics over the atlantic in previous months? Or was IND owed substantial sums and aquired Thorpe and Porter as a result?

Wikipedia goes on to say:

Quote

In 1967, DC and IND were purchased by Kinney, which in 1969 purchased Warner Bros and became Warner Communications.. As a result of all this consolidation, by 1969 T & P's comics output became almost exclusively reprints of DC titles, as well as Larry Harmon's Laurel and Hardy, a color comic book series based on the animated TV series.

Not sure I fully follow what is being said here about their output being "exclusively reprints of DC titles".  Do they mean,but don't mention,that Thorpe and Porter now no longer produced their range of pocket books, but were now publishing the  Super DC magazine?

[themagicrobot]

It seems that although the company continued to be called Thorpe and Porter, long before the bankrupcy, Fred Thope, one of the main originators of the company, had moved on.  Having planned a "quiet retirement" (at the age of 50 or even younger ?!?) with his pipe, instead he set up Ulverscroft the publishers of large print books in 1964. I remember the first ones in my local library. The print was gigantic but so too were the books. He soon settled on large print but more standard-size books. Here is an image of him in 1969 aged 55, the year he was presented with an OBE. He died in 1999 at the age of 85.

 

Edited January 20, 2022 by themagicrobot

[Albert Tatlock]

On 1/20/2022 at 6:31 PM, themagicrobot said:

Not sure I fully follow what is being said here about their output being "exclusively reprints of DC titles".  Do they mean,but don't mention,that Thorpe and Porter now no longer produced their range of pocket books, but were now publishing the  Super DC magazine?

I think 'output' would mean items that T & P were publishing themselves.

They were distributing, not publishing, the DC and other imports.

There was no interruption of supply in 1966 that I recall, only the 6 month delay to the Marvels around November.

[Malacoda]

On 1/20/2022 at 8:34 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

I think 'output' would mean items that T & P were publishing themselves.

They were distributing, not publishing, the DC and other imports.

There was no interruption of supply in 1966 that I recall, only the 6 month delay to the Marvels around November.

@themagicrobot

Hi Robot.  As Albert says, there were non distributed issues over October - Dec 1966, which the conventional wisdom attributed to the 1966 dock strikes.  I think this was actually the fallout of T&P going bankrupt in the summer and the sticky period that followed. 

Please ping back to page 68 and you will find my extremely brief, concise and to-the-point notes on what happened. (Get comfy).  We'll wait here. 

[Makes cup of coffee and two rounds of toast. Sees that Meatloaf died. Feels very sad. Hopes that Heaven is no longer waiting]. 

OK, assuming you're back. Here are the answers to your questions: 

Was there any disruption to comics being shipped from Thorpe and Porters warehouses to UK newsagents after July 1966?

Yes, to Marvel starting in the autumn of 1966 (obviously there's a 3 month shipping delay). 

You'd think there'd be some sort of transition period if a company went bankrupt and was taken over but I can't recall any shortage of comics in the summer of 1966.

Some titles were not imported at the time and appeared with an intriguingly different stamp on them months later.  Rather than type it, I'll repaste the table from page 68. 

We've speculated that these stamps belong to David Gold's company and they distributed these 'suspended' issues later as distressed inventory.

And who would be the clients left owed substantial sums?

As detailed, UK publishers distributed by T&P were hardest hit and at least one went completely out of business. 

Someone in the States that had shipped comics ever the atlantic in previous months?

Yes, I suspect it was everyone who had shipped comics over the Atlantic in the previous months, but I think Marvel were probably hardest hit (because they actually did print runs of PV's for T&P) and also DC, although as they were probably sending leftovers / returns, their losses were largely on paper.  Nonetheless, DC had such a massive problem with returns in the US at this point (over 50%) I suspect that the ones they sent over to the UK on a final sale basis were saving some proportion of their bacon.  I also still don't know if Marvel's distribution deal with T&P was direct or if it was via IND. Given the state Timely was in in 1959 I can more easily believe that T&P had a deal for both DC and Marvel comics via IND, but the way Marvels were printed (PV, indica) suggests a direct deal. Anyway, depending on how the deal worked, it's possible that T&P owed IND money for Marvels as well as DC's. 

Or was IND owed substantial sums and aquired Thorpe and Porter as a result?

Yes. I think that T&P went bankrupt owing IND a lot of money and IND simply took over T&P in lieu. Gilberton's (T&P's US parent) went out of the business the following year, selling out to Twin Circle Publishing, so I imagine the whole thing was a firesale. 

I suspected for a long time that it went like this: National were looking to sell DC & IND in 1966 (Donenfeld was dead, Liebowitz was retired) and that they bought T&P as a piece of visible expansion because it looked good for a company looking to sell.

What I subsequently discovered was that the Kinney buyout which completed in 1967 actually took over a year to complete, so it may well be that having begun talks with Kinney, National suddenly had red ink all over the books as their UK distributor went under, owing them money. Not only was it costly, it didn't look great from a management point of view either. What to do? They wanted neither a costly buy out making them less liquid nor the collapse of their UK export business. So they let T&P go bankrupt rather than rescue it,  but then immediately swooped in and bought the business, possibly just for the value of the money they were owed. Instantly no loss on the books, but rather an investment. 

Another thing to consider is that Kinney was, at this point, a recently formed conglomerate made up of parking and cleaning enterprises wanting to break into publishing, so they were actually a very cash rich business. It might well have been, if Kinney were party to the IND/T&P conversation, that it was simply a very frank and honest, cards-on-the-table conversation. Buying up a UK publisher/distributor for a song would have been music to Kinney's ears at that point and may even have been a plus in the buyout talks. 

Also, if DC had a huge problem with US returns and T&P was a great way to get rid of some of their vast mountain of distressed inventory, whereas Marvel were operating at anything up to 85% sell through in the States, and actually printing fresh, costly first-run, bespoke PV's for T&P,  you can see how, when the bills stopped getting paid, DC's response would have been 'Sh*t, we need to protect ourselves by saving this' whereas Marvel's would have been 'Sh*t, we need to protect ourselves by restricting supply'.  

Edited January 21, 2022 by Malacoda

[themagicrobot]

Quote

Please ping back to page 68 and you will find my extremely brief, concise and to-the-point notes on what happened. (Get comfy).  We'll wait here. 

I might even have to re-read the thread from the beginning. I'm sure I would have read page 68 but I can't remember what I had for lunch and keep buying comics from eBay I already own multiple copies of.

109 pages and counting. The perils of posting to a forum/board rather than into a website where you can keep content/information and comments on that information in seperate places.

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by themagicrobot

[Malacoda]

On 1/21/2022 at 6:49 PM, themagicrobot said:

I keep buying comics from eBay I already own multiple copies of.

Not always a bad thing though, right?  Years ago, I cursed myself for accidently 'wasting' £60 buying a 2nd copy of TOD #10 in VF.  I've learned to live with it. 

[themagicrobot]

I have two full sets (at least) of all the 1975 Atlas/Seaboard comics (not the magazines) because someone was selling a job lot of most otf the titles (incredibly cheaply a decade ago) that contained the one issue (Vicki) I still needed and I thought I may as well tidy up and get the other missing issues. I also have 20 copies of the Brute No 2 but that is another story.

Edited January 21, 2022 by themagicrobot