General Category > Comic Related Discussion
Holyoke is a Myth...
JVJ (RIP):
Yes, Michael,
we understand this general overview. You've made it clear. What we're asking for are the DETAILS. If you've talked to all of these guys "extensive conversations" - so can you give us some of the dirt instead of kicking up the same dust over and over again?
We'd all be grateful.
(|:{>
JVJ (RIP):
--- Quote from: mmiichael on April 17, 2010, 12:21:09 PM ---
--- Quote from: Bob Hughes on April 17, 2010, 06:27:46 AM ---There's a lot of stuff on the internet that attempts to link Carnahan via Barreaux to Trojan. It's even in Jerry's Who's Who. I don't find any evidence to support that. Do you?
--- End quote ---
Bob,
I think I supplied Jerry with the info on Carnahan. Worth Carnahan was employed by the soft porn arm of what evolved to DC, c1927-39, initially as a staff artist eventually becoming inhouse art director and an editor.
He interfaced with Barreaux who was a feature packager and editor from the late 20s right into the early 50s when he reprinted his own comic features done for the SPICY/SPEED line for Trojan Comics.
These were carried by new distributor, Leader News, a Sampliner alternative company set up in 1939 to carry to more contentious stuff that they didn’t want connected to the burgeoning comics lines. Frank Armer was CEO. It was a consolation prize for him as he was taken out of the comics money loop.
The picture gets complicated because there were increasing mob interests in periodical distribution throughout the 40s that came to a head in 1947. Bowles pulled out and the fringe comic publishing end served a different purpose. A means of leverage with wholesalers.
--- End quote ---
yeah, stuff like this.
Do you have actual dates for these events? I.E. did Bowles pull out in 1947? If so how did Sparkling Stars last until 1948? Did he divest himself of Holyoke? See, all of these stories you relate have some manifestation in the real world of comics and we're trying to establish that relationship.
(|:{>
JVJ (RIP):
--- Quote from: mmiichael on April 17, 2010, 11:46:55 AM ---Guys,
The point I try to emphasize is that the indicia and other publisher supplied information cannot always be used as Gospel. My information sources are broader and deeper and I think I have a clearer picture of the scenarios.
I've had extensive conversations with real old-timers like Jack Adams who was IND's general manager, the hands on guy, 1939-53. Other stories even first hand accounts of Bowles with people who he backed.
--- End quote ---
And those people are? And they said what? I get the sense that perhaps you don't want to be explicit. What's the problem?
--- Quote ---Comics were a good investment by 1940, with the success rate being 60-70%. Various deals were cut with distributors, printers, paper suppliers and outside dabblers, often lawyers. Layers of obfuscation were created to obscure the money sources.
People like Leo Greewald and Temerson where hired gun nominal publishers given the task of making sure product came down the pike in time and on budget. They were the ones who put their name on the periodicals, for legal and postal requirements, but at best were front men with minority participation.
--- End quote ---
makes sense, but "front men" for WHOM? Every thing you say seems valid but also seems deliberately vague. You keep telling us we don't the whole story and appear to only want to share the "chapter titles" of the real story. WUWT?
--- Quote ---A problem is these mags changed hands and ownership positions all the time, often issue to issue.
--- End quote ---
again, give us a couple of real world examples if this was so prevalent.
--- Quote --- PDC typically would front the credit line for paper and printing (80% of the costs) and take a 25% position in a start-up company. When sales were below expectations and bills were unpaid, they increased their shareholding to the point they were in control. Then a decision was made whether to keep the original crew and publisher or tune the operation over to a new 'packager.'
There was a crisis on the newsstand s in mid-1940 when Britain was fighting for its existence and everyone was glued to their radio sets. Too many new comics on the stand, many with unappealing contents, and there was something of an implosion.
--- End quote ---
Which "new comics" imploded? All of these statements you make are tantalizing and they have to have manifestations in the published world. Can YOU make the connections for us?
--- Quote ---Publishers and distributors, often the same people, huddled and decided they had to get more reliable professional content management...
Ex-porn guys like Greenwald and Carnahan were out and a new crop of comics professionals were sought. Greenwald initially oversaw an operation from which content for both Centaur and Ace were generated. He was moved elsewhere if I recall, maybe to girly mags.
More to it than that, of course. There was a war on with the independents against the America News Company stranglehold on distribution, and comics lead the way in breaking their monopoly in many regions.
More comics meant less space for other products, and printing prices came down as new arrangements were made for dedicated 4-color presses and redistribution channels.
Maybe more later.
Mike
--- End quote ---
Lots of questions????
(|:{>
mmiichael:
Jim,
Trying to address your concerns. I do not take comic book sourced information seriously when it comes from marginal publishers. You people do, and it leads you down endless rabbit holes. Many of these publishing entities you are concerned about were simple bookkeeping fabrications designed to avoid tax implications, supply distributors with fodder, or move quantities of cheap paper.
The money sources were intentionally concealed. You will never know who put up what and for how long. The IRS had trouble penetrating these mazes even back then. Jack Adams once told me how a mysterious company, what was it? – Lafayette? – came to be. He was one of the investors. Donenfeld, Gaines, Liebowitz, and a couple regional wholesalers put up some money for a news-educational title idea floating around. I think there was a GUMPS newspaper strip title as well.
In the flood of new product 1946-7, the titles failed. A failed venture. Nothing in the printed material indicates the real back story.
SPARKLING STARS from what I recall was someone in publishing who decided to take a flyer on a comic title or two. They likely cut a deal with Bowles on a line of credit. Who knows who the guarantors were or if they assumed control at some point.
The position of distributor, paper supplier, printer, content provider we will never know on these small scale projects. And I don't see how it matters all that much. This obsession with separating companies and their product works with majors like DC, Fawcett, Dell, etc. But breaks down as you approach the fringes. A group of investors, which could be a couple lawyers, guys at the racetrack trying to launder profits, a hungry paper broker. They might put some money in and pull out when they lost.
For Post Office regulations and the IRS publisher information had to be supplied. But it didn’t necessarily reflect the true nature of the virtual operation. Many companies were just a packager delivering material to a printer and the distributor handling the profit dispersement.
My best guess is that in many cases a comic book started out with a distributor providing initial paper-printing credit, a group of wholesalers sharing the risk and the nominal publisher having a small stake which could grow if the thing flew.
It is 2010. Most of the long-term company histories have been tracked in laborious detail. Some titles will remain a mystery with only tantalizing published info as leads. That is were the trail will end in most cases.
More intriguing would be investigation of the distribution and wholesaler network, a sorely neglected area of research. In the 1940-54 period, Irwin Molasky, a large wholesaler in St Louis, who helped put DC on the map, occasionally bankrolled a title or two as a side venture. He made sure his name never appeared in a publication, except maybe as a DC silent partner on a couple occasions. He was behind many of these loosey goosey operations you guys seem fixated on. But I never see him mentioned anywhere.
I’m sorry if I sound supercilious but I’ve done a lot of primary research in to comics and ephemeral American publishing. I provided a lot of inside dope when I participated in GCD boards. Most of it ignored it seems.
I see the same comics researchers running around on the same loop they were 20 years ago without much kn owledge of the bigger picture. Expand your horizons and move beyond those indicias if you want deeper answers.
Mike
Zog:
mmiichael
I'm not entirely sure of what you are aiming for here, with your comments.
Do you want this thread to be stopped, because they are all wrong in the desire to hunt down obscure publishers (which seems to be the main point I draw from your comments)
Are you saying it's pointless and a waste of time, if so, they are enjoying themselves...it's their time to waste, and are harming no one.
You keep throwing up vague references without any solidity, you MUST know this is going to drive them insane, if you've read the whole thread.
The reason I posted this, is not to pick on you, but to try to prevent this descending into nastiness.
If you have some input, please put in a form that is more ...friendly to the aims of this thread.
If you have another form of attack, to track down publishers/owners/backers as you mentioned, start another thread, I am 100% certain that'll be better than seemingly, to me at least, in derailing this one.
:)
Zog
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version