New OPG Top 50 Silver Age books? 0

[jjonahjameson11]

On 7/24/2023 at 2:45 PM, Crowzilla said:

You're correct my bad. I should have stated more clearly that that the 8 titles "limit" wasn't in force during the Marvel superhero titles age (and if there was some "limit" above 8, we have no idea what it was, just the fact that every year after 1960, the average number of titles increased until distributors were changed). It is a fact that for the time period you mentioned, Marvel averaged 8 titles per month, and I have no idea if IN limited him or not during that time period, so thank you for the correction.

Thanks to all for the clarification on the Independent Distribution title allotments and dates.

it’s nice to know there are knowledgeable folks here on the boards who are willing to share information with the rest of us 👍🏻

[Rosland]

On 7/24/2023 at 9:47 AM, Slayah said:

Is Adventure Comics #247 hard to find in grade? I'm surprised it's not lower on the list.

There are five copies graded 9.0+

9.0 (OW/W)

9.2 (OW/W)

9.2 (C/OW) Mohawk

9.4 (OW) Bethlehem

9.6 ??                   (Could this be a White Mountain?)

[DanCooper]

On 7/25/2023 at 2:41 AM, Rosland said:

9.6 ??                   (Could this be a White Mountain?)

Don't believe there were any significant DC Silver Age key books in the White Mountain collection (especially 10 centers from 1956 -1960)

I remember having a conversation with Jerry Weist, right after he got the core of White Mountain Marvel keys and the DC & Atlas Sci-Fi runs, and he was lamenting the lack of Silver Age DC keys. He was hoping they would turn up, but never did.

A Showcase 19 (3rd Adam Strange/CGC 9.0) was perhaps the best DC SA 10 center to show up in the WM collection, and that was mainly because it was a Sci-Fi connection, which the original collector, Kennett Neily, was interested in.

[Prince Namor]

On 7/24/2023 at 2:32 PM, Frisco Larson said:

In your statement, you claim that Independent News didn't give Goodman restrictions on how many titles they could publish. That is a direct quote, see above. Evidence supports that there WAS a restriction and the statistics I provided about only 8 titles per month for the duration I outlined are fact. Maybe someone on some other thread thinks Atlas/Marvel published that amount and ONLY that amount for that period of time for another reason. I don't know. I don't care. Everyone can believe whatever they want as far as opinion, but facts are facts. 

Facts are facts, and the fact is there is no real evidence that I'm aware of that Independent News put that restriction on Goodman's comic output. 

If you have any proof of it, other than Stan's 'story', and the people who've repeated it, I'd love to see it.

It's far more likely that Goodman may have put that restriction on Stan, as we're starting to see evidence that he wanted to shut down the comic division. As Kirby's monster books sold more and more, Goodman eased up the restrictions. As the superhero books sold more... Goodman eased up the restrictions even more. 

If Independent News put restrictions on Marvel to protect DC from the competition (a laughable idea at the time anyway - DC was a dominant publisher in the market), then why would THEY ease restrictions on Goodman's books as they continued to sell MORE? If the purpose of the restrictions as to keep them from being competitive - why'd they keep letting them publish more as they sold more?

ALSO: If you go back and read Stan's correspondence with fanzines and as he began to talk to colleges, he makes it clear when fans ask about expanding to more titles: They don't have the manpower - they barely manage with what they have to get the books out that they do.

THIS is again a part of Goodman keeping a tight reign on what Stan could do, and limiting the amount of books published - not feeling as if it would become anything. (Boy, was he wrong!)

Edited July 30, 2023 by Prince Namor

[Prince Namor]

On 7/24/2023 at 1:54 PM, Frisco Larson said:

From December 1957 (not long after the arrangement with Independant News was made) until September of 1960, the Atlas/Marvel entity only published 8 titles per month! That's not opinion, that's a fact which you can check at any time. 

That's not completely correct...

In August of 1958, they published zero, which lines up exactly when Kirby says he walked back in the door to save Marvel from shutting down...   Mike's Amazing World of Comics August 1958

(Three Jack Kirby #1's appeared the following month: September of 1958)

In July of 1959 they release 16 titles to the newsstand: July of 1959

Followed by zero the following month: August of 1958 (I guess this is where the creative publishing schedule stories came from, but...)

They also released 16 to the newsstand in October: October of 1959

Meaning they actually released 104 for 1959... that'd be 8.66 per month. 

In May, June, July, August, September and October of 1960, they released 10 titles a month to the newsstand: May of 1960 (Click forward through each month)

In November it was again zero: November of 1960, before finishing the year with 4 in December December of 1960

So even in the early days of the Independent News era, Goodman seemed to be the one controlling how much was put out...

 

(This is all done, NOT by cover date, but by month released to the newsstand.)

[Prince Namor]

On 7/24/2023 at 2:45 PM, Crowzilla said:

You're correct my bad. I should have stated more clearly that that the 8 titles "limit" wasn't in force during the Marvel superhero titles age (and if there was some "limit" above 8, we have no idea what it was, just the fact that every year after 1960, the average number of titles increased until distributors were changed). It is a fact that for the time period you mentioned, Marvel averaged 8 titles per month, and I have no idea if IN limited him or not during that time period, so thank you for the correction.

It's only been in recent years where the 'story' has gotten amended to say that it wasn't that way during the superhero years. For decades, it was presented as that was the way it was throughout the Silver Age. As more information became available, the 'story' was exposed and then tweaked.

People like Marvel Editor Tom Brevoort continue to peddle some of it, here in this post he repeats the eight titles a month bit when talking about a time period where Goodman was publishing 12-13 titles a month. 

At one point he says: "Martin got 8 slots, which he used to put out 16 bimonthly books. This is how things stood at the start of Marvel, where FANTASTIC FOUR became a 17th title ..." Which is just laughably silly - there was never a time this happened. All of the information is out there for us to see. 

Tales to Astonish, Tales of Suspense, Journey into Mystery, and Strange Tales (all books where Kirby was writing and drawing his own monster stories) all went MONTHLY in Spring of 1960, a year before FF #1.

The Tom Brevoort Experience

 

And I'm not saying there wasn't a contract or that the eight titles 'agreement' didn't exist in 1957. I don't know. I don't know if ANYONE knows for sure.

I'm curious if any proof of this contract has ever been shown or if the whole thing is some fan theory which just got repeated over and over again until everyone assumes it's fact. 

And I really don't understand how someone like Brevoort who is a long time Marvel VP and presents himself as an authority on comics history can make a mistake like saying Marvel was limited to 8 titles a month when FF #1 was published. Marvel had published 10 titles the month before and 17 the month OF and 17 the month after FF #1.

[sfcityduck]

On 7/25/2023 at 7:32 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

In May, June, July, August, September and October of 1960, they released 10 titles a month to the newsstand: May of 1960 (Click forward through each month)

In November it was again zero: November of 1960, before finishing the year with 4 in December December of 1960

So even in the early days of the Independent News era, Goodman seemed to be the one controlling how much was put out...

 

(This is all done, NOT by cover date, but by month released to the newsstand.)

According to Mike's Amazing World this is 1960:

January - 8 titles

February - 8 titles

March - 8 titles

April - 8 titles

May - 10 titles

June - 10 titles

July - 10 titles

August - 10 titles

September - 10 titles

October - 10 titles

November - 0 titles

December - 4 titles

1960 Average - 8 titles per month.

The clear implication is that there's a misinterpretation as to what the deal was. It appears that the deal was a average of 8 titles a month. Occam's razor. That interpretation is consistent with the witness testimony, which is evidence that provides context for the numbers.

[sfcityduck]

Now let's look at 1958:

January - 8 titles

February - 8 titles

March - 8 titles

April - 8 titles

May - 8 titles

June - 8 titles

July - 8 titles

August - 0 titles

September - 8 titles

October - 8 titles

November - 8 titles

December - 8 titles

1958 Average - 7.33 per month (exactly 8 titles short of the alleged contract amount)

So what happens in 1959?

January to June - 8 titles a month.

July - 16 titles

August - 0 titles (exactly like in 1958)

September - 8 titles

October - 16 titles

November to December - 8 titles

1959 Average - 8.66 per month (exactly 8 titles over the alleged contract amount)

Lessons:

(1) Looks like Goodman's contract wasn't per month, or even per year, but was a monthly average over the life of the contract. From 1958-1960 the average was exactly 8 months a title.

(2) Maybe Goodman or his printer liked to take August as a holiday from publishing for a few years. Zero titles published in 1958 and 1959? Does not seem likely. More likely, Goodman was trying to keep his monthly average down.

(3) Prince Namor's argument that "in August of 1958, they published zero, which lines up exactly when Kirby says he walked back in the door to save Marvel from shutting down" is a classic example of correlation not causation because they published zero in 1959 also. Sorry Namor.

By 1961, it looks like the contract amount had been stepped up, but was still in place as short month occurred in March (6 titles) and a skip month in October (0 titles). After all, why would a publisher have short and skip months unless he was trying stay under a quota?  A question that Namor does not ask. 

The 1961 average is about 10 titles per month, which seems a pretty obvious step up amount. For 1962 the average is 11 titles per month. Again an obvious step up. And in 1963 the average is about 12 titles per month - looks like another step up.  Seems pretty obvious to me what was happening here.

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by sfcityduck