developed-responsibility
- +

Author Topic: Pictures of old Comic stands  (Read 21872 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Yoc

  • S T A F F
  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15338
  • Karma: 61
  • 15 Years Strong!
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #15 on: July 18, 2010, 03:31:55 PM »
Depending on the date of those EC letters, another likely explanation was EC was public enemy #1 to distributors and retailers by the end.  Many bundles were never sent out or were returned unopened.  Gaines' testimony financially shot himself in the foot.  It was extremely lucky that he was convinced to turn Mad into a magazine thus avoiding the comics code entirely while remaining a successful publisher.

Digital Comic Museum

Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #15 on: July 18, 2010, 03:31:55 PM »

Drusilla lives!

  • Guest
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #16 on: July 18, 2010, 04:54:33 PM »
Sorry to disagree with you here Yoc, but I think this was a problem for EC way before Wertham started targeting them.  In fact, just recently... about two months ago... I started reading through the entire HofF run, and this stuff starts to pop up in the letters page as early as the 7th issue (the May-June 1951 issue).  I suspect it had nothing really to do with news dealers or Wertham at this time... just the squeeze of a huge number of imitators flooding the market with similarly named titles.  It's this last interesting tidbit that brings me back to the significance of those "alpha" racks.

As far as being public enemy #1... look at those pictures, particularly of the one with the child in front of those racks... keep in mind that there were over 200 titles being published EACH month.  Now consider EC, they had perhaps ten titles, which were published bimonthly... that is, in any given month there were only five EC comics on the rack among 195 others... and yes, they were successful titles, but they weren't high profile ones like Superman or Batman.  It truly astonishes me that they were considered such a threat to the public, when you probably couldn't even FIND them in all that mess.  :)

Remember, the newsstand dealers were complaining about comics in general... and in particular, the number of comics they felt they HAD to handle or else... that was the whole "tie-in" issue that lengthened the 54 hearings.  It's my opinion that what these news dealers and distributers disliked was having to handle 200+ titles a month... and looking at those photos could you blame them?   They were angry, and they conflated the issue for there own reasons IMO... and yes, there were too many horror titles, but to them (IMO) there were too many titles period, regardless of genre or publisher.  And from the hearing transcripts, I don't recall anyone asking them which publisher was the most troublesome... it was the industry as a whole that they (the news dealers) had a problem with.  
« Last Edit: July 18, 2010, 05:10:22 PM by Drusilla lives! »

Offline darkmark (RIP)

  • VIP
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1331
  • Karma: 60
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #17 on: July 18, 2010, 06:12:01 PM »
Does anybody have dreams related to old comics stores?  Sometimes I dream of a second-hand place in my old hometown that sold comics for a nickel.  Other times, I dream of finding great comics stores in Dallas with old friends, and upon waking, I'm left wondering if those places existed or not.

Drusilla lives!

  • Guest
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #18 on: July 18, 2010, 07:33:24 PM »
Yeah, now that I think about it... yes.  

As a kid I use to have a fear of being accused of loitering around the comic racks simply to ogle the adult mags... I should add that in several candy/smoke shops they were usually placed in the racks, or facing upward on a bottom shelf just under the racks, near the comics.  The ones in the racks would be separated from the comic books by a "buffer zone" of magazines like National Lampoon, Heavy Metal and of course, the Warren mags.  But they were always (uncomfortably) close IMO and I was always aware and wary of them, the adults that came by to look at them, and of how long I spent looking for a particular book... comic book, that is.  

I think as a result of these early experiences, for awhile (in my teens) I think I recall having a recurring dream of being tossed out of a candy store in front of everybody (strangers) for looking at the adult magazines while all I really was looking for was a comic book.

Btw, this never really happened in real life.  

And now that I think about it, it's also why I never bought a Vampirella either.  :P


Drusilla lives!

  • Guest
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #19 on: July 18, 2010, 07:42:23 PM »
Btw, I just came across this interesting site on POP, SOTI and lots more!

LostSOTI.org

Offline Yoc

  • S T A F F
  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15338
  • Karma: 61
  • 15 Years Strong!
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #20 on: July 18, 2010, 10:29:04 PM »
You make some good points there DL.
And thanks for the fun SOTI link!   :D

You might also add that not all distributors were equally good at their jobs.  And I'm sure some places in the US must have gotten better service than others.
I hear Atlas/Marvel were common in one area, none in another.  And Charlton would be everywhere in some... etc etc.
I've read several fun reminisces from collectors on the Timely-Atlas Yahoo group of having to bicycle around town hitting different stores trying to find certain titles.  Or having to travel to a different state to find a certain publisher while visiting grandma.

I believe the poor profit margin on a 10cent comic was the biggest reason newstands didn't like comics.  They made a lot more cash on magazines and pocket books than they ever did on a comic.
'Follow the money' will often show you the main reasons for business decisions of all eras.

-Yoc

Drusilla lives!

  • Guest
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #21 on: July 19, 2010, 10:04:24 AM »
.. You might also add that not all distributors were equally good at their jobs.  And I'm sure some places in the US must have gotten better service than others.
I hear Atlas/Marvel were common in one area, none in another.  And Charlton would be everywhere in some... etc etc.
...
I believe the poor profit margin on a 10cent comic was the biggest reason newstands didn't like comics.  They made a lot more cash on magazines and pocket books than they ever did on a comic.
'Follow the money' will often show you the main reasons for business decisions of all eras.

-Yoc

Yes, I agree.  And your point on "following the money" supports my feeling that the news dealers didn't want to deal with comic books... especially in the big cities where distribution was probably good and they had 200+ comics to contend with.  

This oddly enough reflects back on my own childhood experience of fearing being accused of loitering around to peek at the adult mags... every newsstand/candy store that I've ever went into back then wanted a quick sale... they didn't want people (and particularly children) standing around (obviously, to prevent theft and other mischief).  They wanted you "in and out" as quickly as possible... and I doubt it was much different back in the 40s and 50s.  I can't see how racks and racks of comics, and lots of kids asking "where is the latest issue of Tales From the Crypt... I don't see it out here" as formulating a particularly endearing association in their minds eye.  

Perhaps that's one reason why dedicated comic shops (and the direct market) arose in the late 70s, early 80s.  I know, at least by my own experience, that I was already going to a newly opened comic shop a few blocks from my home by 78... and I was glad to... by then the newsstands were flooded with adult mags (the situation much like that of pulps and comics repeating itself), many candy stores were closing up shop in NY due to economic reasons (and perhaps consolidation), and besides, the comic shop had back issues and everything else comic related.  Although I should add that the selection of new comics (and back issues) was somewhat limited to Marvel.  I guess now that I think about it, this was a reflection of the owners own personal preference, although at the time I never noticed, since I was mostly interested in Marvel and Marvel back issues anyway.
  
« Last Edit: July 19, 2010, 10:25:23 AM by Drusilla lives! »

Offline Geo (RIP)

  • Global Moderator
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3513
  • Karma: 40
  • Moderator
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #22 on: July 19, 2010, 06:43:17 PM »
I remember having to go to different places/stores to find a particular book more then once during the mid to late '50's and mid '60's. Sometimes not even finding it then, after doing that. And we are talking about any of the major players books at the time, (DC, Atlas, Timely, (now Marvel), Charlton books). You could find an issue you were looking for one month and then the next not at all. Distribution wasn't the best it seems, spotty at best, it seems during that time. At least it was that way in the area I was raised in.

Geo
Filling holes, by ONE book at a time

Offline JVJ (RIP)

  • VIP Uploaders
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Karma: 58
  • paix
    • ImageS Magazine
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #23 on: July 19, 2010, 07:38:22 PM »
The other thing you have to realize, guys, is that by 1955, a dime was worth about a nickel in 1935 money, so the profits from carrying comic books had effectively been halved (both at the distributor AND newsstand levels), while they continued to take up more and more space. Perhaps the post-code "implosion" is what saved comics after all. The distributors and newsstands certainly would have reacted poorly had they continued their unchecked expansion.

FWIW.

Peace, Jim (|:{>
Peace, Jim (|:{>

JVJ Publishing and VW inc.

Drusilla lives!

  • Guest
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #24 on: July 20, 2010, 12:34:09 PM »
Jim, you wouldn't know off-hand how many titles were being published at the height of the 1950-1955 (pre-implosion) period?  I keep thinking it was around 200+ but I don't recall where I heard that... and in fact, I think it might be a rather conservative estimate... even when discounting titles that lasted only two or three issues.  

Unfortunately it's almost useless trying to use the GCD for a quick search and compilation of such info, even with their recent improvements.   :(

Again, from this photo...

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/7500/1948comicracklr8.jpg
... it looks like at least 160 titles (but this was in 1948).
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 12:45:35 PM by Drusilla lives! »

Offline John C

  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
  • Karma: 3
    • John's Blog
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #25 on: July 20, 2010, 04:46:09 PM »
Distribution wasn't the best it seems, spotty at best, it seems during that time. At least it was that way in the area I was raised in.

It occasionally seems to have taken nosedives, too.  I can remember books--even semi-major titles, like Green Lantern and the like--failing to make it to the shelves as late as the mid-80s.

I also had a peculiar run-in with clerks, by the way.  In my case, a magazine shop that was selling used comics, over the course of a month, somehow metamorphosized into an adult bookshop.  In itself, that might have been mildly awkward, but they hadn't changed the signs, so I wandered the store for a good ten minutes (I couldn't have been more than fifteen at the time) before asking for help and getting panicked shouting answers from clerks who apparently didn't notice me walk in.  They also denied having ever sold comics...

Interestingly, that shop is still open (and selling adult videos) after...hmm...more years than I care to think about.  No, I don't shop there.  I pass it daily on my commute.

Oh, right.  Counting titles.  If it seems like I'm teaching a lecture, it's not condescension, but rather me not ever wanting to do this again...

You'll need a few ingredients.  The GCD is a big one.  You'll also need Firefox with the Table2Clipboard add-on (a favorite toy of mine).  Lastly, Microsoft Excel will be very, very handy.  (Or, if you're just happy with a single number of titles printed in 1952, jump to the end and save yourself some fairly dry reading.)

I hit the GCD's advanced search, and asked for Issues (rather than Stories, the default), Starting with 1/1/1952 and Ending 12/31/1952, published in the United States and in English.

If anybody with influence over the searching mechanism happens to be reading, I'd really prefer the issues to be the default, a more obvious way to use the date (even a single example to show that "1952" only turns up a dozen or so books), and maybe a checkmark to say, "yes, I want everything at once instead of chopping into result pages."  But those are minor nitpicks in the grand scheme.

Anyway, click "Search" and start harvesting.  On each page, right-click the table.  If you installed Table2Clipboard, you'll see it in the context menu that pops up, and from there, you can "Copy Whole Table."  Do so, then paste it into Excel, then (with Ctrl-End and some minor arrowing) get ready for the next page.  Lather, rinse, repeat.

Now I have an awkward spreadsheet with every book published in 1952 in Excel.  First thing, select all the data (Ctrl-A) and if you're an old fogey like me that still uses menus (i.e., I can't help you if you're using Office 2007 or something, with the "ribbon" up top), Edit, Clear, Formats, gets you something more readable.

Then for some minor magic tricks.  Thankfully, I don't care about the Date column, because it's about to get trashed.  Select the Issue column (C in mine), and click Tools, Text to Columns.  Delimited text, split on "Other," an open parenthesis.  Since the GCD names the books as "Title (year series) #nn," this gives us a clean series title.  Try to ignore the little flags on the left.  I have no idea how to select them en masse to delete them, but they're harmless...

Now, sort (Data, Sort) on the column that has the titles.  And then run down the list and delete all those headers you copied in--they'll sort together, to make it easy to nuke the rows at once.

We're almost there, I promise, and here's the neat part.  Select your data again, plus one more column to the right.  Now hit the menus for Data, Subtotals, which I want to know why nobody told me about it!  At each change in your (sorted) title name column, tell it to Count (not that it really makes a difference) and put the subtotal into (at least) the empty column.  Excel will then busily insert bolded rows with your title and...well, the number of things in the empty column for that title, so zero.

But that's OK, because we don't care how many issues of Frogman Comics we have for the year (if you did, put the subtotal in an otherwise-used column), but rather how many titles.  Which means we need to count those zeroes.  So...go down to the lower-right of your data (Ctrl-End), and type something LIKE the following:

=COUNT(F2:F2153)

(The equals sign tells Excel to get to work.  Count is self-explanatory.  F is the column where I put the subtotals.  I start at row #2, because the headers are in the first row, and end at row #2153, because that's the row where the final subtotal (for Young Romance) is sitting.

If all went well, it should only take a few minutes (it took me more time to explain this than do it), and you'll get an answer.

For 1952, I got a fairly large-sounding 418 titles.  On the other hand, I know that, today, companies track the top-300 in sales, so that means the market must be far more crowded.

(Trickier would be to have the spreadsheet screen out books that only got an issue or two out, but I'm waaay too lazy to deal with that.  One approach would be to take a recent GCD dump, load it into a database system, and write some SQL, which would get that answer in one step.  But I also realize that's not exactly appealing to the average home user.)

Drusilla lives!

  • Guest
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #26 on: July 20, 2010, 05:07:29 PM »

I also had a peculiar run-in with clerks, by the way.  In my case, a magazine shop that was selling used comics, over the course of a month, somehow metamorphosized into an adult bookshop.  In itself, that might have been mildly awkward, but they hadn't changed the signs, so I wandered the store for a good ten minutes (I couldn't have been more than fifteen at the time) before asking for help and getting panicked shouting answers from clerks who apparently didn't notice me walk in.  They also denied having ever sold comics...


The horror, the HORROR!  :)

... If all went well, it should only take a few minutes (it took me more time to explain this than do it), and you'll get an answer.

For 1952, I got a fairly large-sounding 418 titles.  On the other hand, I know that, today, companies track the top-300 in sales, so that means the market must be far more crowded. ...


Or I could have just read that New Yorker piece recommended by Yoc (which I just got around to doing)...

Quote
...more than twenty publishers were putting out close to six hundred and fifty titles a month. Eighty to a hundred million comic books were sold every week; according to contemporary reports, the average issue was passed along to six or more readers. ...

... but seriously, I know how difficult it is working with that GCD search and you did a great job of it, thanks John. :)

Btw, that quoted 650 number is reported in David Hajdu's "The Ten-Cent Plague."
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 05:15:41 PM by Drusilla lives! »

Drusilla lives!

  • Guest
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #27 on: July 20, 2010, 07:00:12 PM »
Quote
...more than twenty publishers were putting out close to six hundred and fifty titles a month. Eighty to a hundred million comic books were sold every week; according to contemporary reports, the average issue was passed along to six or more readers. ...

Wait a second... that's 80 to 100 MILLION comics sold each WEEK?!?  That's 320 to 400 MILLION comics sold a MONTH!

But according to the census records for 1950, the population of the United States was approximately 151 million?  Either that's a lot of comics going over to Europe or that number is rather funky IMO... and what's with the "the average issue was passed along to six or more readers" stuff, I know that was the spiel you would find on the cover to Crime Does Not Pay, but I thought that was discounted long ago by comic scholars as a sales gimmick on Gleason's part.

EDIT: Dug out my old copy of Nicky Wright's "The Classic Era of American Comics" and according to him Gleason's CDNP, BOY and Daredevil had combined sales of almost a million copies in 1943, with CDNP accounting for the biggest percentage of that... by 1947 he states that circulation of Gleason's titles had topped two million copies a month, again with CDNP (by then one of the best selling titles of the era) accounting for a large portion of that total.  I recall him mentioning similar numbers somewhere in that book for Superman in the early-to-mid 40s... that is, a little over a million copies sold each month being typical for Superman (at the height of his popularity).

Just for the record... he also states that by 1940 there were 168 various comic book titles (from 24 publishers) with combined monthly sales between 12 and 15 million copies.

So it appears that for a comic to be considered "a huge success" back then it would have to break at least a million copies a month (or per issue), on a consistent basis.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2010, 06:08:31 AM by Drusilla lives! »

Offline paw broon

  • VIP
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 307
  • Karma: 9
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #28 on: July 21, 2010, 10:33:02 AM »
My experiences were obviously not in N. America but in Scotland, a country of only 5 million people.  And from distribution of American comics starting in 1959, there seemed to be comics everywhere. Any wee corner shop and newsagent had bundles on the counter and later spinners appeared. (There were  also bundles of Australian comics, which also came in as ballast) Many newsagents also sold American mens mags (Blue Book? etc.) on the same spinners and it was very embarrasing going in with your mother and/or sister for a comic and having that other stuff adjacent.  In the cities (in my experience, Glasgow and Edinburgh) there were a number of 2nd hand bookshops which sold comics and adult mags and books and some of those shops were quite seedy - but cheap.  As to readership, when I worked on newspapers, the readership to sales ratio was considered to be about 3 or 4 to 1.
Love these pics of newsstands and wish I could contribute some local ones but I can find nothing.  I'll kep looking.
Stephen Montgomery

Offline John C

  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
  • Karma: 3
    • John's Blog
Re: Pictures of old Comic stands
« Reply #29 on: July 21, 2010, 04:23:14 PM »
what's with the "the average issue was passed along to six or more readers" stuff, I know that was the spiel you would find on the cover to Crime Does Not Pay, but I thought that was discounted long ago by comic scholars as a sales gimmick on Gleason's part.

It had better be.  If it's not, then...well, four million books per month, read by "an average" of six people sharing, means that, globally, nearly two and a half billion comics were read during each month.  By pure coincidence (I hope...), that happens to also be the global population (estimated) in 1950 to a fairly good tolerance.

If we assume that each reader read every title, just to drive the numbers down, that means that one in every six hundred humans would have read comics.  And somehow, I don't think we can assume that's the case.  More likely, we're talking about typical consumers reading only a dozen or so books, meaning that one in every ten to twenty people would have to read.

That's globally, mind you.  If we further assume that the Iron Curtain didn't have strong sales in Commie-bashing heroes and mutilation of half-naked women, the rest of us would have needed to pick up the slack.  Oh, right.  And the unindustrialized and less literate parts of the world at the time, like the majority of the South Pacific, Africa, and South America.  They probably didn't read many comics, either.

So there's still something seriously off with the numbers.  Let's face it, if there were half a billion sales per month (rounding up the hundred million per week), that's HUGE business and a lot of infrastructure for a penny or two revenue (not profit) per sale.  I feel that, if that were the case, the Victor Foxes would have tried to add value and raise prices to get a bigger piece of the few millions of dollars per month we're talking about.

It almost calls the author's other numbers into question, seeing as how his title count is half bigger than my count from the GCD.  I realize the GCD isn't authoritative, but for them to be missing a third of the books published during a year seems improbable.