How rare are modern newsstand editions? 5 5

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

On 1/31/2022 at 3:44 PM, FlyingDonut said:

On 1/31/2022 at 3:43 PM, The Meta said:

I had used to think of it as Ron Jeremy's Mustache Ride Emporium, but then Ron Jeremy turned out to be the exact unsavory character he, well lets be honest, most of us expected him to be

Hey now - I don't think anybody expected that.

On 1/31/2022 at 3:46 PM, The Meta said:

Well I can't presume to move in porn star circles

But yeah, I didn't expect that 

 

[jimjum12]

On 1/31/2022 at 6:33 PM, paqart said:

Print run ratios, it would seem, must influence availability. However, when a comic from 1980 starts with 80% newsstand and ends up with 14% newsstand, there is a huge destruction rate. What that tells me is that destruction , or survivability, is more important to market availability. Comics like UF4 throw a wrench into that theory however, unless they also had a small run of newsstand editions. By "small" I mean less than 5%.

Absolutely .... and the destruction of returns doesn't always occur, and this has been true since at least the 60's. As for UF4, the newstand ratio may be small because, for example, they were hoarded en masse by local speculators and still, wisely so, locked down. This would likely not be the case with UF3 or UF 5. GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[valiantman]

On 1/31/2022 at 4:55 PM, jimjum12 said:

I remember riding around and scarfing up Thor 337, ASM 361, and other similar issues a month after they became hot.... but ONLY for those type of books.

Multiple posts around here have used those two books (plus ASM 252) as specific examples of where newsstand survival rates were greatly impacted by the behavior of comic shop collectors who raided newsstands.  Those specific books have availability at least 3 or 4 times the newsstand percentage seen in the marketplace for similar title and timeframe books which weren't instantly popular.

[paqart]

On 1/31/2022 at 6:44 PM, jimjum12 said:

Absolutely .... and the destruction of returns doesn't always occur, and this has been true since at least the 60's. As for UF4, the newstand ratio may be small because, for example, they were hoarded en masse by local speculators and still, wisely so, locked down. This would likely not be the case with UF3 or UF 5. GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

The reason I doubt the hoarding explanation for UF4 is that they are very expensive already. If they existed, I'd expect to see more in the marketplace than there are, which at the moment is nothing.

The argument works better for Supergirl 1 (2005) which is worth much less in direct. I've seen them go for between $10-$20, with a couple of slabbed 9.8's for $50-$75. I wouldn't sell something so hard to find for such a low price, so I'd hang onto it (and am). If they were going for $5,000 each (newsstand) and $300-$500 direct, I'd be selling them. Some comics aren't worth enough to be worth going through the hoops involved in listing online. UF4 isn't one of those comics. As for Supergirl, it sold more copies when it came out than UF4. On that basis, it could be described as more popular at the time, thus more likely to be hoarded than UF4.

Collectors strongly influence prices. If they know they are unlikely to find something they want, they'll be less resistant to a higher price. That does drive prices in this market. My impression is that as the extent of this desert becomes more widely known, availability will go down more. It already has. Comics I was able to find two years ago without difficulty are now either hard to find or not available at all.

Edited February 1, 2022 by paqart

[valiantman]

@Lazyboy @FlyingDonut

How's this logic?

According to the Statement of Ownership for the Avengers title: https://www.comichron.com/titlespotlights/avengers.html

Return rates throughout the 1980s were 40% to 48% and specifically 40% to 41% in the middle of the 1980s (1984-1986) when many agree that the printed amounts for Marvel direct edition and newsstand were likely to have been about 50/50.

If 50% of the books printed were newsstand and the return rate was 40% (or 41%) in that specific year, then The Avengers newsstand sell-through rate (mid-1980s) would have been 20% of newsstands printed sold with 80% of newsstands printed being returned.

As the percentage of newsstands printed decreased through the 1990s, the percentage of returns decreased from 39% in 1989 and 1990 to 35% in 1992 and 1994. 

1993 is an outlier throughout the industry because everything sold well in 1993, but the return rate was still 30% for The Avengers in 1993, having 35% returns the year before and after.

The numbers on Comichron get "wonky" for The Avengers in 1995, 1996, and 1997 (75% returns in 1995, 2% returns in 1996, 21% returns in 1997), but if you average those 3 years assuming overlapping reporting, you'll get 32% returns per year 1995 through 1997, with 29% returns reported in both 1998 and 1999.

There's a corresponding decrease in the percentage of returns which matches a decrease in the newsstand market throughout the 1990s.

Working with an 80% newsstand return rate (which is closest to absolute as we can get in the mid-1980s with 50/50 newsstand/direct and 40% returns), we'd be able to estimate the percentage of newsstand printed for The Avengers in the 1990s and the ratio of what "survived" (not returned) from the original print run.

Example:  The Avengers v3 in the middle of 1998-1999 had 29% returns.  If 80% of newsstands printed were returned, then 29% represents 80% of 36%.  In 1999, print runs for The Avengers could have been 64% direct and 36% newsstand, but the non-returned copies "surviving" would be 64% direct and 7% newsstand.  That's a 9:1 direct-to-newsstand survival rate from a 1.8-to-1 direct-to-newsstand print run.

I haven't checked to see if that 9:1 matches with what is seen in the marketplace because I'm trying to understand print runs and survival separate from the marketplace.

EDIT: I just checked the Iron Man title and return percentages. They are very similar to The Avengers as described above.

Edited February 1, 2022 by valiantman

[Lazyboy]

On 1/31/2022 at 6:44 PM, valiantman said:

Return rates throughout the 1980s were 40% to 48% and specifically 40% to 41% in the middle of the 1980s (1984-1986) when many agree that the printed amounts for Marvel direct edition and newsstand were likely to have been about 50/50.

Distribution, not print runs. The direct market didn't overtake the newsstand market by printing more, it did so by selling more (though obviously it eventually printed more as well).

[valiantman]

On 1/31/2022 at 8:47 PM, Lazyboy said:

Distribution, not print runs. The direct market didn't overtake the newsstand market by printing more, it did so by selling more (though obviously it eventually printed more as well).

If the distribution was 50/50, and the return rate was 40%, that means the original print run was 70% newsstand and 30% direct editions in the mid-1980s, with 30% newsstands surviving and 30% direct editions surviving (50/50 distribution).

That would be a newsstand return rate of 40% out of 70% printed, or 57% of newsstands printed were returned.

Does all that match your interpretation?

 

The 50/50 print run date would have occurred later than the mid-1980s in that scenario.

Edited February 1, 2022 by valiantman

[Lazyboy]

On 1/31/2022 at 9:00 PM, valiantman said:

If the distribution was 50/50, and the return rate was 40%, that means the original print run was 70% newsstand and 30% direct editions in the mid-1980s, with 30% newsstands surviving and 30% direct editions surviving (50/50 distribution).

That would be a return rate of 40% out of 70% printed, or 57% of newsstands printed were returned.

Does all that match your interpretation?

 

The 50/50 print run date would have occurred later.

[WoWitHurts]

All I know is I had to give up on completing my ASM 200-299 Newsstand run. I got about 50% done before this recent craziness kicked in. *sigh*

[bababooey]

On 1/31/2022 at 10:00 PM, valiantman said:

If the distribution was 50/50, and the return rate was 40%, that means the original print run was 70% newsstand and 30% direct editions in the mid-1980s, with 30% newsstands surviving and 30% direct editions surviving (50/50 distribution).

That would be a newsstand return rate of 40% out of 70% printed, or 57% of newsstands printed were returned.

Does all that match your interpretation?

 

The 50/50 print run date would have occurred later than the mid-1980s in that scenario.

 

[valiantman]

On 1/31/2022 at 9:11 PM, Lazyboy said:

On 1/31/2022 at 9:00 PM, valiantman said:

If the distribution was 50/50, and the return rate was 40%, that means the original print run was 70% newsstand and 30% direct editions in the mid-1980s, with 30% newsstands surviving and 30% direct editions surviving (50/50 distribution).

That would be a return rate of 40% out of 70% printed, or 57% of newsstands printed were returned.

Does all that match your interpretation?

 

The 50/50 print run date would have occurred later.

Moving on to the 1999 Avengers estimates, a 29% return rate, if it represents 57% of newsstand returns, would mean that the print run in 1999 was 50% newsstand and 50% direct editions. That seems unlikely for 1999, doesn't it?

Survival would be 50% direct editions (all) and 21% newsstands, making the ratio 5:2 or about 70% direct edition and 30% newsstand surviving from 1999 Avengers. Again, that seems too high for newsstands in 1999.

[mr_highgrade]

On 1/31/2022 at 2:20 PM, buttock said:

Yeah, someone should just email Marvel and see if they have that number.  Otherwise it's opinion, and so long as you have some reasonable justification for it... which both sides appear to have... then why argue? 

Does anyone know who was in charge of the newsstand dvision for Marvel back in the 2000's? 

[Lazyboy]

On 1/31/2022 at 10:21 PM, valiantman said:

Moving on to the 1999 Avengers estimates, a 29% return rate, if it represents 57% of newsstand returns, would mean that the print run in 1999 was 50% newsstand and 50% direct editions. That seems unlikely for 1999, doesn't it?

Survival would be 50% direct editions (all) and 21% newsstands, making the ratio 5:2 or about 70% direct edition and 30% newsstand surviving from 1999 Avengers. Again, that seems too high for newsstands in 1999.

That doesn't seem unreasonable, though the numbers could be different. Remember, the direct market wasn't exactly in great shape in the late 90s.

[FlyingDonut]

On 1/31/2022 at 10:13 PM, WoWitHurts said:

All I know is I had to give up on completing my ASM 200-299 Newsstand run. I got about 50% done before this recent craziness kicked in. *sigh*

That should be relatively easy to do - its just money, yes? Or are you looking for specifically high grades? Newsstands for ASM should be very easy to find.

[valiantman]

On 1/31/2022 at 10:45 PM, Lazyboy said:

That doesn't seem unreasonable, though the numbers could be different. Remember, the direct market wasn't exactly in great shape in the late 90s.

OK, then moving forward to Avengers in 2007, the return rate was 7.2%. Again, using 57% return rate, the 7.2% returns point to 12.6% newsstands printed. That's 87.4% direct and 12.6% newsstand printed, with 87.4% direct and 5.4% newsstand survival. That's 16:1 direct-to-newsstand survival for Avengers in 2007.

That 16:1 estimate is before any damage/destruction/discarding done by newsstand buyers.

Edited February 1, 2022 by valiantman

[FlyingDonut]

On 1/31/2022 at 11:53 PM, valiantman said:

OK, then moving forward to Avengers in 2007, the return rate was 7.2%. Again, using 57% return rate, the 7.2% returns point to 12.6% newsstands printed. That's 87.4% direct and 12.6% newsstand printed, with 87.4% direct and 5.4% newsstand survival. That's 16:1 direct-to-newsstand survival for Avengers in 2007.

That 16:1 estimate is before any damage/destruction/discarding done by newsstand buyers.

Note that I think there will be certain issues where there will be outliers because the newsstand prices were different, but your numbers seem reasonable. Can you plug actual numbers in? That would tend to point to a sanity check, given that we have a relatively good idea of newsstand outlets.

[valiantman]

On 1/31/2022 at 11:02 PM, FlyingDonut said:

Can you plug actual numbers in?

Avengers 2007 has 172,200 copies per issue reported.

87.4% direct would be 150,500 direct editions.

12.6% newsstand would be 21,700 copies printed with 9,300 surviving after 12,400 returns.

 

About half for Avengers 2011:  75,000 direct and 4,700 newsstand after 6,200 returns.

Edited February 1, 2022 by valiantman

[FlyingDonut]

On 2/1/2022 at 12:08 AM, valiantman said:

Avengers 2007 has 172,200 copies per issue reported.

87.4% direct would be 150,500 direct editions.

12.6% newsstand would be 21,700 copies printed with 9,300 surviving after 12,400 returns.

That sounds very reasonable - and for a random Avengers book from 2007 there's nothing in it to make people look for it.

[valiantman]

On 1/31/2022 at 11:13 PM, FlyingDonut said:

That sounds very reasonable - and for a random Avengers book from 2007 there's nothing in it to make people look for it.

Would this include early Ronin issues of New Avengers?

[FlyingDonut]

On 1/31/2022 at 6:55 PM, valiantman said:

Multiple posts around here have used those two books (plus ASM 252) as specific examples of where newsstand survival rates were greatly impacted by the behavior of comic shop collectors who raided newsstands.  Those specific books have availability at least 3 or 4 times the newsstand percentage seen in the marketplace for similar title and timeframe books which weren't instantly popular.

I would add MSH 8, Man of Steel 18, Superman 75, and Batman 428 to that list. That's probably another list - which books have significantly higher marketplace availability as newsstands than others.