Newsstand vs Direct: Clarity (and maybe less misinformation) Needed 5 5

[universal soldier]

On 3/20/2023 at 6:55 PM, Lazyboy said:

It's really not that hard to tell the difference between opinion, relevant fact, and irrelevant, limited data. I mean, assuming you actually know and understand the topic.

The topic is quite interesting it just diverged into chaos way too often to be productive. Not really knowing the history of the topic, it was certainly educational and it was pretty easy to tell where the agenda was pushing the narative. 

[valiantman]

Direct editions existed for some titles, for some publishers, earlier than the late-1970s, but generally speaking, we're talking about "late 1970s until today" for the direct market.

Outliers like Thor #337, ASM #252, and ASM #361 are usually first to be mentioned, but it's important to note that those newsstands were bought up in large quantities by direct edition buyers/sellers, so those newsstands are essentially no different than the direct editions for the same books. Same original owners, same conditions, same collections, same selling venues, etc. It's the books that weren't immediately sold out at the comic shop which would have "normal" newsstand distribution, which Thor #337 and ASM #252 aren't.  ASM #300 probably has "normal distribution" for newsstand, but ASM #361 does not.

Here's an analysis of some of the newsstand numbers from 2021... as always, more evidence would be great. More anecdotes and arguments without evidence... not-so-great.

https://comics.gpanalysis.com/news/2021/newsstand-direct-edition-data-where-gpanalysis-is-leading-the-way

Edited March 21, 2023 by valiantman

[Aman619]

On 3/20/2023 at 9:37 PM, valiantman said:

Direct editions existed for some titles, for some publishers, earlier than the late-1970s, but generally speaking, we're talking about "late 1970s until today" for the direct market.

Outliers like Thor #337, ASM #252, and ASM #361 are usually first to be mentioned, but it's important to note that those newsstands were bought up in large quantities by direct edition buyers/sellers, so those newsstands are essentially no different than the direct editions for the same books. Same original owners, same conditions, same collections, same selling venues, etc. It's the books that weren't immediately sold out at the comic shop which would have "normal" newsstand distribution, which Thor #337 and ASM #252 aren't.  ASM #300 probably has "normal distribution" for newsstand, but ASM #361 does not.

Here's an analysis of some of the newsstand numbers from 2021... as always, more evidence would be great. More anecdotes and arguments without evidence... not-so-great.

https://comics.gpanalysis.com/news/2021/newsstand-direct-edition-data-where-gpanalysis-is-leading-the-way

boy howdy that was an interesting read and well thought out and illustrated.  Really laid out all the factors influencing the whole Newsstand vs Direct value/grade and supply parameters! thanx

 

[mosconi]

Yeah, that was an interesting and informative article. Confirms many of my thoughts regarding CGC 9.6 and higher grades in "normal distribution" Newsstand vs Direct.

Edited March 21, 2023 by mosconi

[CJ Design]

The simple one I use....FWIW

 

[valiantman]

On 3/21/2023 at 1:10 PM, CJ Design said:

The simple one I use....FWIW

 

Those likely represent "what Chuck buys when he buys collections in bulk".

[Lazyboy]

On 3/21/2023 at 1:10 PM, CJ Design said:

The simple one I use....FWIW

 

Well, what it's worth is absolutely nothing. You've been seriously misled, not that you're alone.

On 3/21/2023 at 1:58 PM, valiantman said:

Those likely represent "what Chuck buys when he buys collections in bulk".

That may or may not be true, but that's not what they're claimed to be.

[paqart]

On 3/21/2023 at 2:58 PM, valiantman said:

Those likely represent "what Chuck buys when he buys collections in bulk".

Not sure I agree with you there. The numbers look closer to print run percentages to me than the ratio of newsstands on the marketplace. They are closer to the marketplace values with the more recent numbers than the older ones. When I check issues from the 1979-1983 time period, the newsstands are about equally represented with directs or are slightly more common. They are not 94/6.

Edited March 21, 2023 by paqart

[NP_Gresham]

On 3/20/2023 at 11:05 AM, Chaz G. said:

No.

Wrong

There are 2 versions of covers from as early as 1977. Call the Whitmans or direct, the newsstand copies are clearly different

[paqart]

On 3/21/2023 at 5:53 PM, NP_Gresham said:

Wrong

There are 2 versions of covers from as early as 1977. Call the Whitmans or direct, the newsstand copies are clearly different

I think you're looking at a regular newsstand and a Whitman newsstand here, no directs. I used to buy these things when I was a kid and only saw these Whitman 3-packs at 7-11's and places like that.

[NP_Gresham]

On 3/21/2023 at 3:02 PM, paqart said:

I think you're looking at a regular newsstand and a Whitman newsstand here, no directs. I used to buy these things when I was a kid and only saw these Whitman 3-packs at 7-11's and places like that.

I agree and I was actually buying these 3 packs at K-mart back in the days as reprints. But there was a long debate in bronze over direct vs Whitman which I would not care to rehash except I side with Whitman from personal experience.

The question was about newsstands in 1977, and yes they are different and as such should be noted, but personally I find the diamond versions far more difficult to find in high grade.

[paqart]

On 3/20/2023 at 1:39 PM, mosconi said:

To me, the most important question is when did "high grade" Newsstand copies begin to become more difficult to find in CGC 9.6 or higher grade in comparison to Direct Edition copies?  Can we pinpoint a specific year that this began to occur?  Or can we just say that Newsstand copies will always be considered harder to find in 9.6 or higher when compared to Direct just because of the fact that they were more poorly handled and many times stored on spinner racks, haphazardly in convenience/book/drug stores, thereby easily bent and manhandled, and just generally not treated as well as the Direct copies in comic stores?   

In my experience, high grade NS comics are always less common than their DE counterparts. An interesting detail is that, the farther back you go in time, NS issues become easier to find relative to more modern issues but the overall conditions rapidly declines. This means that the more common an NS edition is, the less likely it is to be in high grade. Modern NS comics are more likely to be high grade than older comics but they are so much less common overall that the improved grade doesn't affect availability of high grade comics much. If, for instance, I wanted a 9.8 newsstand copy of ASM V2 #30 and ASM V1 #200 (1980), you're going to find the #30 much more easily than the #200 despite the fact that the NS print run for #200 was significantly weighted to favor NS editions. On eBay, the only 2 #200's available in 9.8 are directs, both with the strikeout UPC box, indicating the very start of the direct era, when DE comics were printed in tiny quantities. As for the #30, I have 2 in my collection right now as 9.8's, and several more in slightly lower grades.

Bottom line, if you are going for high grade, print run is irrelevant. The amount of time since publication is the better gauge of condition-based  rarity.

[NP_Gresham]

BTW if these early diamond price box issues were ‘Whitmans’ , they were not always marked as such. One would think Whitman would want to advertise their own product. It may be that these were simply sold ‘direct’ and the reseller could package them whatever way they want in 3 packs or not.

What is clear to me is these books were not newsstand. They would be on shelves until they sold, there were no returns as per the newsstand.

 

[paqart]

On 3/21/2023 at 6:29 PM, NP_Gresham said:

BTW if these early diamond price box issues were ‘Whitmans’ , they were not always marked as such. One would think Whitman would want to advertise their own product. It may be that these were simply sold ‘direct’ and the reseller could package them whatever way they want in 3 packs or not.

What is clear to me is these books were not newsstand. They would be on shelves until they sold, there were no returns as per the newsstand.

 

I don't know about that. I worked at a comic book store during the era when these came out and we literally couldn't buy them at all. They weren't on Phil Seuling's list of items available for comic shops. I also know where I bought mine and none came from comic book stores. They may not have been returnable (I don't know anything about that) but they were found exclusively in newsstand distribution outlets as far as I know.

Edited March 21, 2023 by paqart

[NP_Gresham]

On 3/21/2023 at 3:34 PM, paqart said:

I don't know about that. I worked at a comic book store during the era when these came out and we literally couldn't buy them at all. They weren't on Phil Seuling's list of items available for comic shops. I also know where I bought mine and none came from comic book stores. They may not have been returnable (I don't know anything about that) but they were found exclusively in newsstand distribution outlets as far as I know.

Well that’s the debate. I recall directly that these were sold in 3 packs at K-mart. They were thought to be ‘reprint’ because they were there literally years after they were released on the regular newsstand circuit in spinner racks. The local K-mart I went ONLY had 3 packs.

So then what is a “Newsstand” ?

My understanding is they were returnable - thus the ‘remainder’ copies that show up on eBay with the cover torn off all the way or in part.

These diamond books seem to be direct in every fashion and they clearly exist in 1977

[CJ Design]

On 3/21/2023 at 2:45 PM, Lazyboy said:

Well, what it's worth is absolutely nothing. You've been seriously misled, not that you're alone.

That may or may not be true, but that's not what they're claimed to be.

Guess it's not worth spoon...I'll scrap it...sorry

[paqart]

On 3/21/2023 at 6:45 PM, NP_Gresham said:

Well that’s the debate. I recall directly that these were sold in 3 packs at K-mart. They were thought to be ‘reprint’ because they were there literally years after they were released on the regular newsstand circuit in spinner racks. The local K-mart I went ONLY had 3 packs.

So then what is a “Newsstand” ?

My understanding is they were returnable - thus the ‘remainder’ copies that show up on eBay with the cover torn off all the way or in part.

These diamond books seem to be direct in every fashion and they clearly exist in 1977

It sounds like you describe the Whitmans as "Direct" because of their non-returnable status. I believe that is incorrect, regardless whether they were returnable. It is true that non-returnability was the basis for creating the direct market, so I understand why you would think any non-returnable comic is direct. However, these 3-packs are non-returnable for a different reason. These were not reprints in most cases (unless labeled as such) but they were printed for Whitman, a publisher, on different terms than those reserved for the direct market. The direct market comics had different markings than the Whitmans and had (presumably) a different pricing structure. 

[paqart]

On 3/21/2023 at 6:49 PM, CJ Design said:

Guess it's not worth spoon...I'll scrap it...sorry

You needn't drop it so fast just because LazyBoy says the chart is bad. Those numbers may represent approximate NS/DE print run ratios even if they can't apply to every comic perfectly. As a rule of thumb, they make sense to me based on what I see in the market. What those figures leave out is high grade survivability. The issue there is that the high NS print runs in the early 1980's produced NS comics that are slightly less common than the significantly lower print run directs. For that reason, I believe Chuck's chart understates NS rarity, not the other way around. I look at it as a minimum measure of rarity, not an exaggeration.

Edited March 21, 2023 by paqart

[Lazyboy]

On 3/21/2023 at 5:55 PM, paqart said:

they were printed for Whitman, a publisher, on different terms than those reserved for the direct market.

No, the terms were the same: lower cost per unit but no returns.

[NP_Gresham]

On 3/21/2023 at 3:55 PM, paqart said:

It sounds like you describe the Whitmans as "Direct" because of their non-returnable status. I believe that is incorrect, regardless whether they were returnable. It is true that non-returnability was the basis for creating the direct market, so I understand why you would think any non-returnable comic is direct. However, these 3-packs are non-returnable for a different reason. These were not reprints in most cases (unless labeled as such) but they were printed for Whitman, a publisher, on different terms than those reserved for the direct market. The direct market comics had different markings than the Whitmans and had (presumably) a different pricing structure. 

Again, there is a 3 pack from my collection that is not marked “Whitman” anywhere that is from 1977 cover dated books

How to ascribe that to Whitman?

It seems that these are indeed direct and to different distributors. 

I think what needs to be added is ‘direct to retailers/comic shops’