tb's Mickey Mouse Magazines
3 3

82 posts in this topic

That certainly makes sense-- I would love to buy your correspondent a cup of coffee and hear the many stories that he could tell about Western.

 

I wonder why my Racine file copy from April, 1938 has the Mickey logo but the file copy from January, 1940 does not. I was curious enough to look thru my own copies and also did a quick review of the images on the Heritage website. The earliest Mickey logo I could find was V.I #12 Sept 1936, and the latest was V.3 #12 Sept 1938. While my review is admittedly unscientific, I wonder if the logo was added for a specific time and then discontinued. Also, whether it's possible the logo was added to the Racine copies instead of the Poughkeepsies. This might explain why the earlier file copy has it and the later one does not.

 

pooroldman,

 

I have forwarded your message....unfortunately, he/she did not give me their name and they were speaking from memory from over 40 years ago. It appears he/she may not have been a Western employee for long before being bought by Mattel but was responsible to review current and past contracts for compliance.

 

Looking at the timeline for Western's expansion, the Poughkeepsie facility was established in 1934. The deal to establish K.K. Publishing was in 1933 for the Disney related material. My theory is initial demand for MMM could be handled at a single facility. When demand increased, the other facility was necessary to meet production. The reporting requirements to ABC may have created the need to report circulation numbers, in aggregate, but the contract may have required the logo to be added to differentiate facilities.

 

I would bet file copies would be sent from each facility to a central location, some with the logo, and some without.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That certainly makes sense-- I would love to buy your correspondent a cup of coffee and hear the many stories that he could tell about Western.

 

I wonder why my Racine file copy from April, 1938 has the Mickey logo but the file copy from January, 1940 does not. I was curious enough to look thru my own copies and also did a quick review of the images on the Heritage website. The earliest Mickey logo I could find was V.I #12 Sept 1936, and the latest was V.3 #12 Sept 1938. While my review is admittedly unscientific, I wonder if the logo was added for a specific time and then discontinued. Also, whether it's possible the logo was added to the Racine copies instead of the Poughkeepsies. This might explain why the earlier file copy has it and the later one does not.

 

pooroldman,

 

I have forwarded your message....unfortunately, he/she did not give me their name and they were speaking from memory from over 40 years ago. It appears he/she may not have been a Western employee for long before being bought by Mattel but was responsible to review current and past contracts for compliance.

 

Looking at the timeline for Western's expansion, the Poughkeepsie facility was established in 1934. The deal to establish K.K. Publishing was in 1933 for the Disney related material. My theory is initial demand for MMM could be handled at a single facility. When demand increased, the other facility was necessary to meet production. The reporting requirements to ABC may have created the need to report circulation numbers, in aggregate, but the contract may have required the logo to be added to differentiate facilities.

 

I would bet file copies would be sent from each facility to a central location, some with the logo, and some without.

 

Thanks a lot for the information, rookster, this is news to me. To support pooroldman's observation, the earliest variant issue, I have seen, is also from late V1. What is known from reliable sources is that Hal Horne left after V1#5 despite Kay Kamen and Walt and Roy Disney trying hard to keep him. Further, Horne suffered heavy losses from his involvement in the magazine ($50,000 if I remember correctly?).

 

From my own observations, the paper quality of the next few issues is dramatically lower, making these the most difficult of the entire run to find in collectible condition. What I have been guessing so far is that those issues reflect a period of flux as Kay Kamen may have been trying to salvage the title, eventually leading to some kind of change that resulted in 1. the variant edition and 2. significantly better production quality, from around V1#12. The input from your source would actually fit very nicely with that theory.

 

To me, the most burning question is why Kamen (or perhaps even the Disneys?) chose to continue, and seemingly even invest(?), in a title that seemed doomed for failure with the resignation of Horne. V2 was an explosion of bold initiatives: first (and only) 100 page issue, first color Sunday reprints, several cover layout changes, first covers promoting/leveraging Silly Symphony characters, and so on. I wish more was known about who (Kamen and/or Disney?) and why all this effort was put into a failing magazine at a time when Kamen must have been overloaded and some Disney childrens' books already had reached circulations of several million copies. Clearly, these decisions turned out to be extremely smart and profitable, but they can't have been easy back in those critical months of the summer of 1936. Someone at Disney must have had the foresight to understand the potential of the comic book format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for the information, rookster, this is news to me. To support pooroldman's observation, the earliest variant issue, I have seen, is also from late V1. What is known from reliable sources is that Hal Horne left after V1#5 despite Kay Kamen and Walt and Roy Disney trying hard to keep him. Further, Horne suffered heavy losses from his involvement in the magazine ($50,000 if I remember correctly?).

 

From my own observations, the paper quality of the next few issues is dramatically lower, making these the most difficult of the entire run to find in collectible condition. What I have been guessing so far is that those issues reflect a period of flux as Kay Kamen may have been trying to salvage the title, eventually leading to some kind of change that resulted in 1. the variant edition and 2. significantly better production quality, from around V1#12. The input from your source would actually fit very nicely with that theory.

 

To me, the most burning question is why Kamen (or perhaps even the Disneys?) chose to continue, and seemingly even invest(?), in a title that seemed doomed for failure with the resignation of Horne. V2 was an explosion of bold initiatives: first (and only) 100 page issue, first color Sunday reprints, several cover layout changes, first covers promoting/leveraging Silly Symphony characters, and so on. I wish more was known about who (Kamen and/or Disney?) and why all this effort was put into a failing magazine at a time when Kamen must have been overloaded and some Disney childrens' books already had reached circulations of several million copies. Clearly, these decisions turned out to be extremely smart and profitable, but they can't have been easy back in those critical months of the summer of 1936. Someone at Disney must have had the foresight to understand the potential of the comic book format.

 

tb,

 

Let me first express my thanks to you for starting this thread. I know I have gone askew with it somewhat. I do hope my questions about the 12-card set and the variant covers has been appreciated by everyone.

 

I agree with your assessment of Disney's forsight about the comic book format. I think pooroldman had the right idea about the relentlessness of MMM for pushing Disney products. They advertised everything.....toothpaste, typewriters, desks, sweatshirts, etc, etc. I suppose the magazine could have been a loss-leader by itself, for a short time, but I imagine its ability to sell related material was enormous. If the children's books were already being sold in the millions, those children's books wouldn't have the best format to sell extra material compared to a large-sized magazine with snazzy covers and slick paper packed with ads with everyone's favorite characters in them. Disney and his team were obviously talented about entertainment.....but I think ol' Walt was obviously talented at making money, too.

 

tb...I do still look forward to seeing more images of your MMM's. Thanks for sharing some already :) . Truly remarkable!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose the notion of having the variant editions to complete the MMM run could cause the obsessive collector to reassess what an entire run of MMM's really is now. Let the search begin???

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking around, seems like a fair number of the "Mickey logo" versions are out there. Hard to say that they are any scarcer than the "non-Mickey logo" versions. Anyone compared the indicias?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am now more convinced the "Little Mickey" logo had high significance when originally printed.  

I have seen a copy of the 100-page issue Volume 2 Number 3,  with the "Little Mickey" located near the "E" in "Mouse" in the title instead of near the "M" in "Mickey".  The cover layout had to be rearranged since the normal location of the "Little Mickey" was printed with a black background on this issue, which would have obviously obscured the "Little Mickey" printed in black like the previous issues.  If this logo had little importance, it would have been omitted or the color changed to something other than black and kept in the same spot as the previous and subsequent issues.  However, the "Little Mickey" logo was kept in black ink but moved to another spot on this issue.  

In other words, this demonstrates the "Little Mickey" logo was likely required to be printed on some issues with black ink........sounds like a legal/contract item.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just picked up a Mickey Mouse Magazine Vol 3 No 3. Sadly it was missing a few pages most importantly the Snow White centerfold. Still you have to love this cover. Probably my favorite in the volumes. I worked out a deal (refund) with the person I bought it from after I found out about the missing pages. Anyone have an opinion about the value with the missing pages? How rare are these to come by? 

 

Lots of covers to love in the volumes. I couldn’t find a tread on these magazines but what’s everyone favorites and I’d love to see people books if you have em. 

 

 

2DDC5997-5CF9-4D4D-A739-F544D7844897.jpeg

DFE2F5B6-2663-4F85-9902-B3327558340D.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>>to hoffitmus prime "Sadly it was missing a few pages most importantly the Snow White centerfold."

If you were to submit this to CGC, it would possibly come back as "I" for incomplete and "0.5" for Poor in blue label.  It would also have the possibility of coming back as green label "Q" for qualified.  The qualified values for comics are VERY subjective.  A qualified grade can be for the cover loose at one staple.  In your case, several missing pages, it would certainly be much less desireable and less valuable as a result.  The qualified grade would be for the books current condition if the defect was otherwise not there.  Another MMM vol 1 number 5 is listed on ebay with missing pages.  Its apparent condition would likely grade at 6.0-7.0 (Overstreet PG for a 6.0 is $477, which is ridiculously low) and has only 1 bid for the opening price of $75 and was listed 3 days ago, 3 days left to bid.  This is the closest example I can find which fits your situation.  It is assured if the listing on ebay was for a complete copy, the price would be in the hundreds by now and likely soar during the final seconds of bidding.  There are other examples of qualified graded MMM's which have languished for weeks with defects such as loose covers or holes punched and the buy-it-now prices are between 10-20% of the non-qualified prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2019 at 10:32 AM, hoffitmus prime said:

I just picked up a Mickey Mouse Magazine Vol 3 No 3. Sadly it was missing a few pages most importantly the Snow White centerfold. Still you have to love this cover. Probably my favorite in the volumes. I worked out a deal (refund) with the person I bought it from after I found out about the missing pages. Anyone have an opinion about the value with the missing pages? How rare are these to come by? 

 

Lots of covers to love in the volumes. I couldn’t find a tread on these magazines but what’s everyone favorites and I’d love to see people books if you have em. 

 

 

2DDC5997-5CF9-4D4D-A739-F544D7844897.jpeg

DFE2F5B6-2663-4F85-9902-B3327558340D.jpeg

I own one also . Great cover! Mine is also missing the centerfold. :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just started to collect a few numbers of this wonderful "magazine". Covers are great, content varies a lot between beginning and end. What is, in your opinion, the best cover and the best one in terms of content?

 

For me the VOL1 n.8 is the nicest cover, where DD shows all his strenght! See my copy below:

IMG_20200716_075532.jpg

IMG_20200716_075351.jpg

Edited by DavideD
added media
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
3 3