Stan Lee File Copies 1 1

[HeritageJohn-migration]

This is getting silly. The story behind both Stan's Schultz Oil Painting and his comics has been told many time, in many different forums. For the sake of clarity, I'll tell them both again, as I was there for both of them.

 

Shortly after we started Heritage's Comics division, we contacted Stan, and he invited me to come out and inspect his holdings. He told us that he had several storerooms worth of stuff (he admitted that even he didn't know what was in there), and that I was welcome to come out and see it for myself. If I thought there was anything of value, we could talk about his consigning that material to a future auction.

 

I flew out to LA and met with Stan, and began the process of cataloging the storerooms. To be honest, the vast majority of the stuff he had was pretty mundane: lots of Marvel Masterworks, comp copies of more recent comics, lots of scrapbooks with fan mail, etc. But there were some gems. There was a box labeled "Number Ones," which contained the heart of what would become the first offerings of File Copies (FF #1, AF #15, ASM #1, etc.), along with several shelves of comics in various conditions. There was the original art to a number of the Spider-Man dailies, as well as other significant pieces.

 

An agreement was reached with CGC to label the books "Stan Lee File Copies." A few of the books were signed, but not all of them. Later, as we continued to submit books from Stan's collection, CGC declined to give the designation "File Copy" to low-to-mid-grade books, and, after returning to LA and having the remaining books personally signed by Stan, they were graded as "Stan Lee Signature Series" books. FYI, documentation on all of these books is on file wirth CGC. They were very strict (and rightfully so) about the conditions under which they would accept these books.

 

As far as books that were water damaged in Stan's basement, I have no knowledge of that. If that happened when he lived on the East Coast, that was many years before he got involved with Heritage. However, Sta told me that these were the copies he kept on and for reference, so I'm sure they weren't in his basement at any time.

 

ALL the books sold by Heritage that claim to be either SL File Copies or SL Signature Series were personally obtained by me from Stan himself. All of the Signature Series books were signed by Stan in my presence. End of story.

 

There's also no mystery about the Schultz painting. Stan bought that piece years ago at a USO charity Pop Art auction. A number of cartoonists were asked to create a piece of Pop Art for this event, and this is what Schultz came up with. Stan told us that story when he gave us the piece, and even gave us supporting documentation. As Stan had always been upfront and forthcoming with us before, we had no reason to question his word.

 

Just before the auction in which the painting was to be offered, we were contacted and told that the painting was not, in fact, by Schultz. We disagreed (remember, we not only had Stan's word, we had documentation, all of which is talked about in the catalog description of that piece), but rather than risk damaging the piece, we pulled it from the auction. We then set out contacting other prominent cartoonists who were at the same event, and they corroborated Stan's version of events. As it turns out, the person who insisted the piece was a fake wasn't even associated with Schultz at the time the painting was created. It was a non-issue, but I feel certain that we handled that situation in exactly the right way.

 

So there you go. Sorry to disappoint you, but there's no big conspiracy or cover-up here. Do a little research online, and you'll find that these stories have been told many times before, and in the exact same way.

 

I hope that clears up any confusion. Working with Stan on this was one of the high points of my life, and it's a memory I'll always cherish.

 

Best,

 

John Petty

[Aman619]

I sure hope he didn't do all of those endless references to page numbers strictly from memory! That would be a little scary.

 

Stan was top writer and Editor in Chief, but except for the first year or so, Im pretty sure Stan himself didnt actually look up the referenced page #s. He probably just marked where to put the notes and what to say in them... I mean really! he had to write 12 books or whatever a month! He was a busy beaver.

[sckao]

I sure hope he didn't do all of those endless references to page numbers strictly from memory! That would be a little scary.

 

Stan was top writer and Editor in Chief, but except for the first year or so, Im pretty sure Stan himself didnt actually look up the referenced page #s. He probably just marked where to put the notes and what to say in them... I mean really! he had to write 12 books or whatever a month! He was a busy beaver.

 

By reference, I'm sure we all realize that it could mean "memory refresher about what the plot was and what the villain did and said the last time that villain appeared..."

 

ESPECIALLY if the villain was handled by another writer.

 

They have to maintain continuity after all. It's not just about page numbers.

 

When a new writer gets on a book these days, he has the option of picking up TPBs or buying back issue readers. Institutional memory is hard to maintain. That's why people like Waid and Busiek are good people to know.

Edited May 13, 2006 by sckao

[sckao]

 

Thanks for the first person account, John.

 

I had read pretty much the same story on the net when the File Copies first came out.

[Aman619]

I agree. But back in 1964, Stan had a finite line of titles... and he wroye nearly all of them. He certainly remembered the basics like which villain first appeared where and whether he had reappeared anytime after that. But we all know Stan's memory fordetail was not a strong suit. Robert Banner became Bruce Banner, didnt he?

[weirdling-migration]

By "page number" I obviously meant issue number.

[OldGuy]

An agreement was reached with CGC to label the books "Stan Lee File Copies." A few of the books were signed, but not all of them. Later, as we continued to submit books from Stan's collection, CGC declined to give the designation "File Copy" to low-to-mid-grade books, and, after returning to LA and having the remaining books personally signed by Stan, they were graded as "Stan Lee Signature Series" books. FYI, documentation on all of these books is on file wirth CGC. They were very strict (and rightfully so) about the conditions under which they would accept these books.

 

I must be missing something here. Did I not understand that correctly?

 

 

 

[Aman619]

many of the books were much worse, werent they? these look nice enough.

[OldGuy]

Yea, they are nice, but my point is, what does this mean: "CGC declined to give the designation "File Copy" to low-to-mid-grade books".

 

As nice as these are, are they not "mid grade"?

 

And like you said, many were worse then this.

[AlexH]

many of the books were much worse, werent they? these look nice enough.

 

Here is an example. This is one of Stan Lee's that didn't get the "File Copy" label:

 

[rodan57]

I think a problem of provenance is created when some books are listed as File Copies and some as Signature Series.

 

When I see a Stan Lee signature in the Signature Series, I don't 'see' a book that was once owned by Stan Lee, but a book perhaps signed at a convention at the request of a collector.

 

Is there any other evidence of provenance that goes with such books?

[AlexH]

I think a problem of provenance is created when some books are listed as File Copies and some as Signature Series.

 

When I see a Stan Lee signature in the Signature Series, I don't 'see' a book that was once owned by Stan Lee, but a book perhaps signed at a convention at the request of a collector.

 

Is there any other evidence of provenance that goes with such books?

 

The only provenance I would wager to offer would be from the previous statement from Heritage John:

 

"Later, as we continued to submit books from Stan's collection, CGC declined to give the designation "File Copy" to low-to-mid-grade books, and, after returning to LA and having the remaining books personally signed by Stan, they were graded as "Stan Lee Signature Series" books. " FYI, documentation on all of these books is on file with CGC

 

Keep in mind I would never try and sell it using the phrase "Stan Lee File Copy". I do know that this is one of those books. I think for me as a seller, it would just be too tough to try and prove to someone that this is one of his. It has been easier to not bother trying.

[MasterChief]

My apologies to you and the members if my remarks seem silly. I honestly do not intend them to be. Nor am I implying any grandiose conspiracy theory or covert cover-up by the parties involved in bringing Stan's books to market. And I appreciate your suggestion of conducting more research, John. But the more I do, the more questions I have.

 

As stated earlier, I am not questioning weather Stan had the books. No doubt there, and it would be foolish to say so otherwise. Rather I am calling into question the designated "label" which was applied to them. A label which affords a status. A status, which when applied at the highest level, creates a fever in the market. A fever that, more often than not, ultimately realizes unheard-of prices at many multiples of guide.

 

For me, the layman, label designations can be pretty tricky to nail down when it comes to the application thereof during certification. That said, one would assume there must be some short of definition, guideline, specification, checklist, measure, or assurance process in place and effectively employed prior to grading and encapsulation.

 

Not being privy to assumed processes, one can only research and reference public resource material like official statements, press releases, new articles and trade publications in an effort to ascertain the substance of evaluation.

 

As mentioned in a previous post and supported with cited reference, the SLFC was designated as a pedigree [1]. Additionally, the placement of the pedigree designation is consistent with other recognizable pedigrees, that being, the upper right-hand quadrant of the CGC label.

 

Given that, a study may be conducted to evaluate if in fact the SLFC fits the parameters of a pedigree, and the evaluation criteria used are those found in the aforementioned public resources. Let's start with the definition of Pedigree found in a recognizable industry standard – the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide (Thirty-Fifth Edition):

 

"PEDIGREE – A book from a famous and usually high grade collection - e.g. Allentown, Lamont Larson, Edgar Church/Mile High, Denver, San Francisco, Cosmic Aeroplane, etc. Beware of non-pedigree collections being promoted as pedigree books; only outstanding high grade collections similar to those qualify."

 

Be that as it may, maybe it would be helpful if there was more substance to the term "high grade". Something that may provide a greater detail of meaning helping to clarify individual understanding and cement the concept of quality. From Gemstone Publishing:

 

"There are a group of special books, known as pedigrees, that have high cover gloss, brilliant cover inks and white, fresh, supple pages that place them far above other books that might receive the same technical grade. Books from these pedigree collections actually transcend their technical grade."

 

"They are the most sought after and generally the most well-documented, making it easier to ascertain identity or provenance. Books from these collections all exhibit the extra qualities mentioned above."

 

"This striking difference becomes apparent when comparing two comic books of the same grade, one pedigree and one generic. In most cases, the pedigree book will far outshine the generic one. This is the reason why copies from the Mile High, San Francisco and Gaines File collections bring multiples of Guide. Many also agree that a book from one of these collections could very well be one of, if not the, best surviving copies." [2]

 

To many a hobby expert, dealer and individualist collector the absolute number one criteria in designating a collection as a pedigree is the discernable fact of a compilation of books in distinct, high-grade, and well preserved condition. Would anyone argue the contrary?

 

The Overstreet definition coupled with the added Gemstone clarity disqualifies Stan's books from receiving the status of pedigree. It is a matter of public record that an overwhelming majority of those in question were not consistent with being "high grade". In fact, a summative assessment of SLFC Silver Age books reveals the collection to be anything BUT high grade, as the median grade was found to be Fine (6.0) condition, with the highpoint being one book in 9.2 condition (Fantastic Four #68) and the low point being two books in 1.5 condition (Fantastic Four #48, Strange Tales #101) [3].

 

Further exploring, and in an effort to understand just how CGC might apply the definition during the certification phase, a closer look at their criteria used in pedigree designation may prove helpful:

 

"CGC designates as a Pedigree collection any comic book collection that can be authenticated as having had a single owner prior to coming onto the back issue market." [1]

 

The independent, third-party experts have refined the definition with the enhancement of additional criteria. That being, the "original owner" checkpoint. In my view, however, this criteria is concentric to an earlier argument for which doubt concerning SLFC could be raised. Just how is this checkpoint validated beyond a reasonable doubt?

 

In referencing Stan's personal comments regarding his books [4], the Rolling Stone article which paints an altogether different picture concerning the disposition of any personal collection which may have contained early Silver Age books, and his admittedly and well documented bad memory [5] should, in and of themselves, raise sufficient uncertainty and prove problematic when using this measure during validation. Although the weaker of the two arguments being raised, the question cannot be ignored.

 

Maybe SLFC was not really designated as a pedigree, as some suggest, but rather just a File Copy (FC) collection. Before arguing weather Stan's book are, or are not, a properly designated FC, it may prove advantageous to look at two well-known FC compilations:

 

1. Gaines File Copy. An extremely high grade collection of EC comic books personally set aside and stored in the personal files of EC publisher William Gaines. Designated as a File Copy Pedigree [6], these copies are some of the best, if not the best, surviving high-grade specimens in existence [7].

 

2. Dave Sim File Copy. "By the time I started Cerebus, the story of Bill Gaines putting away twelve copies of each EC comic, fresh from the printer was pretty widespread in the collectibles market". "I had no idea if it was an urban legend or not. I had heard that he put twenty of each away, so that’s what I did." [1]

 

Wondering if those two FC examples exhibit certain characteristic ingredients that are consistent with any recognized industry evaluation instrument, I consulted The Official Overstreet Comic Book Grading Guide (2nd Edition) for assistance:

 

"FILE COPY – A high grade comic originating from the publisher's file; contrary to what some might believe, not all copies are in Gem Mint condition. An arrival date on the cover of a comic does not indicate that it is a file copy, though a copyright date may."

 

Indeed! Both FC examples register an exactness to the standardized definition. It is undeniable, they fit the bill precisely. Given the composition ingredients of "high-grade condition" and that both collections belonged to publishers, being from their "file", one can quickly ascertain certain indelible characteristics prior to assigning FC designation. It is that straightforward.

 

There is, however, another visible characteristic which is recognizable to the common eye once graded FC books have finished encapsulation. That being, the location of the FC designation in the upper right-hand quadrant of the CGC label. As mentioned earlier, this location is consistence with that of the pedigree location. So it would seem that FC collections are dually recognized as designated pedigrees, and if truth be told, they most certainty are [1,2,6].

 

In examining the Lee collection, it makes absolutely no sense in rearguing the high-grade evaluation criteria required for FC designation. I firmly believe the summative assessment referred to earlier has unequivocally made the case, the collection does not warrant the designation based on the high-grade condition requirement.

 

There is, however, an additional minor argument I would like to propose. One that may be splitting hairs and a little anal retentive for some. However that may be, I will leave it to the board members to discuss the merit thereof, that being: Stan Lee was not the publisher of Marvel Comic's during the Silver Age portion of the SLFC collection – Martin Goodman was [8] .

 

Finally, I sincerely hope that corners were not cut and the certification process haphazardly handled while playing fast-and-loose with recognized industry definitions and evaluation criteria prior to the designation of SLFC. Furthermore, I would like to believe in nothing more than an integral certification process when determining label designation, a study which must be firmly rooted in good order and discipline and resilient to compromise while ensuring commitment toward protecting the lofty and coveted status of pedigree/file copy. However that may be, I have my reasonable doubts.

 

Epilogue

 

Heritage Comics Auctions brought the Stan Lee File Copy collection to market in July of 2002, on the heels and exactly two months after the much anticipated premier of Spider-Man the Movie which to this day maintains the highest opening week-end gross [9]. The auction, which included comics and original art, was a record-breaking success with sales in excess of five-million dollars, and an 83% sell-through. The Lee books brought anywhere from 2 to 25 times pre-auction estimates [10].

 

Hungry for public recognition and consumer acceptance and with a wonton desire to gain traction in a burgeoning marketplace, the two fledgling companies involved in certifying, grading, encapsulating, and bringing the SLFC collection to auction were, collectively, just three-years old.

 

 

**********************

 

[1] CGC Article 177

[2] Gemstone Publishing Web Page - Grading

[3] heritageauctions.com/common/auction/pricesrealized search input = stan lee file copy silver age: superhero

[4] Heritage Auctions Press Release 212

[5] Stan Lee and Roy Thomas Interview

[6] CGC Article 44

[7] Heritage Auctions Press Release 152

[8] Martin Goodman bio

[9] All Time Weekend Gross

[10] Scoop Article

[Aman619]

I think its safe to say that in time, the Stan Lee File Copies will be files away as a marketing phenomenon of some success, but little more.

[OldGuy]

That was one of the best posts I've read on these boards in the four years I've been here. Thanks for taking the time to write it.

 

Having said that, don't hold you breath for a reply from Heritage. They tend to only post in a "drive by" fashion and only when it suites/self serves them.

 

I think the short response to your post is:

 

The Lee books were treated like they were for one reason and one reason only.

 

$

[sckao]

Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide (Thirty-Fifth Edition):

 

"PEDIGREE – A book from a famous and usually high grade collection - e.g. Allentown, Lamont Larson, Edgar Church/Mile High, Denver, San Francisco, Cosmic Aeroplane, etc. Beware of non-pedigree collections being promoted as pedigree books; only outstanding high grade collections similar to those qualify."

 

The Overstreet definition coupled with the added Gemstone clarity disqualifies Stan's books from receiving the status of pedigree. It is a matter of public record that an overwhelming majority of those in question were not consistent with being "high grade". In fact, a summative assessment of SLFC Silver Age books reveals the collection to be anything BUT high grade, as the median grade was found to be Fine (6.0) condition, with the highpoint being one book in 9.2 condition (Fantastic Four #68) and the low point being two books in 1.5 condition (Fantastic Four #48, Strange Tales #101) [3].

 

In examining the Lee collection, it makes absolutely no sense in rearguing the high-grade evaluation criteria required for FC designation. I firmly believe the summative assessment referred to earlier has unequivocally made the case, the collection does not warrant the designation based on the high-grade condition requirement.

 

 

Hi,

 

You make some nice points. However, I think that your overall case is marred by your own evidence.

 

You quote Overstreet's definition: "PEDIGREE – A book from a famous and usually high grade collection" and yet neglect to address the first part of that definition.

 

FAMOUS

 

Stan Lee is a singular figure in comic book history. There is no one else with the same reputation, body of work, industry placement, and creative history as Stan Lee. He is simply iconic. I would postulate that his fame is the primary reason his comics received Pedigree Status NOT the condition of his collection.

 

Many Marvel comics most of us read over the decades started with Stan Lee Presents. He answered the Letters Pages from a first person viewpoint. He wrote his Soapbox as if he were talking directly to the fans. And he happened to create or co-create some of the most famous characters in comic history. The name/persona fashioned by Stanley Martin Lieber is itself one of the great character creations of the 20th Century.

 

That's why his comics deserve a special notation.

[MasterChief]

OG, appreciate the feedback!

 

Sckao:

 

Actually, I didn't overlook the angle of famous collection. Thinking the post was extremely too long winded, I chopped the draft augment from the final version.

 

In a nutshell, you are right! Stan Lee is, and will always be, regarded as the single most influential individual associated with the American Comic book. His collection should receive notation. Special notation like that of Pedigree or File Copy? Well, I think you know my answer to that.

 

If anything must be afforded, I submit it is what it is – a Collection. A collection like that of Nicholas Cage, Don and Maggie Thompson, Dallas Stephens ...

 

And the designation should have been placed in the center of the CGC label. Exactly were all the other collections have been placed.

 

Regards!

 

Edited May 19, 2006 by MasterChief

[bluechip]

Stan Lee worked for Marvel between the time he was hired in December of 1940 and the 1970s, when he scaled back his writing and editing chores to be the publisher and focus on other media.  In that time, he wrote and/or edited literally thousands of comicbooks.  But, when Heritage acquired Stan Lee’s “file copies” for auctions in 2002 and 2003, he had only a few hundred books for them. 

Stan said at the time the books were the only copies he’d kept “all these years.”  Stan has said in other interviews that he “never really collected” the comics he made, and wished he’d had the foresight to collect copies for later resale, because they increased so much in value.

According to a friend of Lee’s, who was quoted in a Rolling Stone article in 1971. Stan had initially kept a copy of “every book he’d worked on” -- but they were all destroyed years earlier, by a leak in the wall.   It makes sense to think that as a young man he might have routinely saved each book (or that his wife did).   And it makes sense that the destruction of all those books might have caused Lee (or his wife) to give up on saving a copy of every book.   It makes even more sense when you consider that during the 1950s Lee became disillusioned with his work in comics, and had almost quit prior to creating the Fantastic Four in 1961, which led to much unexpected, and unprecedented, success. 

While all that makes sense, some old school collectors have seized on Lee’s comments that he “didn’t collect” comics (and/or the Rolling Stone report that Lee’s collection was destroyed) to assert that Stan Lee must not have had any copies to give to Heritage in 2002.   And that, therefore, Lee must have “faked” a collection in order to “cash in”.

Coincidentally, the people who make that assertion also happen to be the same people who’ve made it clear they don’t like the notion that creator-owned copies should have any added value.   But let’s consider their assertions, anyway.

The person quoted in the Rolling Stone in 1971 said the destruction of Lee’s collection took place “in the house he used to have...” (emphasis added).  That would explain why Lee had no books from the “golden age,” which would have been worth a fortune, even in 1971 – a time when you could still find Amazing Fantasy 15 for a few dollars (or even a few cents, if you found the right store).  It gives no credence at all, however, to the notion that Lee – who still had an office at Marvel in 2002 -- couldn’t possibly have had any books on hand from the 1960s and 70s, for reference or for any other reason.

That doesn’t stop the detractors, who say that Stan Lee must have faked a collection to cash in.  But the facts just don’t support the notion of a “money grab.”  This was before the MCU movies, and Stan Lee was not yet a household name.  The standards of the old school comics collecting market in 2002 meant that Stan’s copy of Amazing Fantasy 15 sold for only one-fifth of what a higher-graded copy had sold for.   And Stan’s share of that after commissions was approximately what Stan made under his Marvel contract in a single day.  Yet the conspiracy theorist collectors insist that others believe Stan must have been willing to risk ruining his reputation and even committing fraud, for that money.  They further insist you must also believe that Lee was willing to do so in just about the stupidest and riskiest and least rewarding manner.

The books that Stan had to offer were not what a “collector” would accumulate if he or she were saving them for eventual resale.   They were, instead, copies like what a professional might have that were kept around for reference or just because they accumulated in the natural course of the business of making and publishing comics. 

Nearly all the books were in lower grades, and the only titles he had in complete sets were the short run series “The Silver Surfer”, “Not Brand Ecch” and “Bible Tales for Young Folk”.  (The handful of “Bible Tales” books were the only ones Stan had which were dated prior to 1960).  

There were only two early Avengers books, one X-Men book and about 25 Spider-man books.  By contrast there were a little over 50 copies each of “Millie the Model” and “Sgt. Fury and his Howling Commandos.”

Some books were not just low grade but even incomplete and had very distinctive defects and markings, or even panels cut out of the cover.   Why would anyone buy second hand books like that to sell as his own, when it would be easy, less risky, and far more rewarding financially, to accumulate nice, complete sets of all the key titles in about very fine condition.  Silver age Marvels in that condition are numerous and look, essentially, the same.  Unlike low grade books with defects that are unique and highly identifiable, and would carry a much higher risk of being "outed" by a prior owner.  (chances are very slight that anyone would spot a “fine” copy of a book as one they used to own. But they would instantly recognize a low grade “Strange Tales” with a panel they had personally cut from the cover).  

Finding really nice copies of all Marvel silver age books is not, and never was, difficult to do.  In fact, Silver Age marvel keys in nice condition are still so easy for any good dealer to uncover that "fake finding" such a collection could be achieved on a daily basis. 

So, It makes no sense at all that Lee would seek out low grade copies.  Just as it makes no sense that Lee would neglect to buy easily obtainable copies of highly collected titles like Spider-man, and instead put more attention and money into buying and faking ownership of nicer copies of “Millie the Model”, “Not Brand Ecch” and even more obscure titles like “Our Love” and “My Love” (He gave Heritage about twice as many copies of “My Love” as he did copies of Avengers, X-Men, Hulk and Daredevil, combined) 

So why do some collectors leap into any online discussion of Lee’s file copies to denigrate them or accuse them of being “fake”?   Well, as pointed out, some collectors simply don't like the idea of creator-owned books having any value beyond their condition.  While we should assume most collectors come by their opinions honestly and rationally, some may be seen as veering into the irrational, or even the downright silly. Some collectors believe the only true “stars” in their hobby can be collectors such as themselves and that “pedigrees”, therefore, can only be books from the collection of a true collector.  Others are, simply, offended by the use of the term “file copy” which they believe should be reserved for unread copies, kept on file, by the publisher.  Some old school collectors traditionally valued condition above all else and believed that anything not in high grade copy was for “readers” only, not for “collecting,” and, above all, not for “investment.” 

Most of those old school collectors will be honest about Lee’s books and say they believe the books were genuinely Stan’s, but they just don’t want them.   Only a very few take it to the absurd extreme, but they are very vocal and very insistent.  Any mention of the “Stan Lee file copies” will bring them out to insist the books have little or no added value.  Depending on how people do or not respond, they will veer between insisting the books aren’t “real” and insisting that even if the books are real they still don’t have added value.   Which argument you get depends on how much you believe they are real.  They will insist that Lee never saved any books, and if you don’t believe that they will pivot to saying Lee did save books but they were all destroyed.   If you point out that it would seem only his golden age books were destroyed, they’ll go back to saying he never collected anything.   Basically, they don’t mind embracing contradictions and don’t care which argument you believe, so long as you believe any one of them and – most importantly – you agree the books have no added value.

Saving books for reference or just having them accumulate in the office or on shelves after publication is not the same as "collecting" books and saving them with the idea they will be worth a lot of money some day.  It's always been clear that when fans ask Stan about "collecting" books, that is what they mean, and it’s clear that Stan understands what they are saying, and responds accordingly. 

William Gaines is the only comic related person I know of who did both those things -- kept copies for reference and/or files while at the same time carefully wrapping and preserving pristine copies.   Bill Gaines did, therefore, "collect" comic books while Stan Lee (and apparently every other creator until recently), did not.  

If, in the future, some collectibles dealer who had sidled up to Stan in his later years somehow “discovers” that Stan had, in fact, complete sets of all the Marvel books with multiple copies of the keys in high grade condition, then any sensible person should be inclined to think some chicanery may be involved.  But the idea that in 2002 Stan risked his reputation, and even, theoretically, his freedom, to buy and resell a few hundred low grade books as his own, and somehow couldn’t do that with any degree of intelligence or planning?   It just doesn’t wash. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by bluechip

[mattn792]

5 hours ago, bluechip said:

 If, in the future, some collectibles dealer who had sidled up to Stan in his later years somehow “discovers” that Stan had, in fact, complete sets of all the Marvel books with multiple copies of the keys in high grade condition, then any sensible person should be inclined to think some chicanery may be involved.  

Paging Keya Morgan...