Log In Forums Help
Comic Collector Live
Home :: CCL Messageboard
Find Comics for Sale
Items For Sale
All Comics For Sale
New Releases
CGC Comics
Bundled Lots
Store Locator
Search Library
Search By Title
Publisher
Story Arc
Character
Credits
Release Date
Change Request Manager
News & Reviews
Reviews
News
Our Products and Services
Get the Software
Buying Comics And Stuff
Selling Your Comics
Opening A Store
Community
Forum
Store Locator
Member Locator
Welcome Guest Active Topics
Zootanapuss Options
Tamwood
Posted: Thursday, September 13, 2012 10:50:02 PM

Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Approver, Member, Subscriber

Joined: 11/13/2009
Posts: 1,627
Points: 148,044
Location: Indiana
I don't know if Zootanapuss has the same inside stories, etc that Glamourpuss has. Personally speaking, I think both books are a waste of paper and ink, but that's just one man's opinion.

Regardless, my shop received a copy of Zootanapuss #5 this week. I went to enter it into the database, and it was rejected because it's evidently a variant of Glamourpuss #26. And, indeed, when I looked it up on Diamond, it SAID that you received 1 Zootanapuss for every 3 Glamourpuss.

But the INDICIA does indeed say Zootanapuss, which is why I had made that CR.

Now, I'm not complaining, just asking for verification (and maybe some reference to back it up) ... IF two books are essentially the same, except for two DIFFERENT Indicia, and two DIFFFERENT titles on the book, do we still list then under one title?

comicscastle
Posted: Thursday, September 13, 2012 11:42:44 PM

Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Approver, Approver Steward, CR-Management, Forum Admin, Grade My Book Host, Guru, History Host, Member, Super Seller, Tool

Shop at My Store

Joined: 1/30/2008
Posts: 14,947
Points: 424,273
Location: New Jersey
My opinion is they should be different books due to the different indicia but they should be linked together with a tag. Of course I've been wrong at least half the time.



The following stores are all stores that I've dealt with or have become friends with through the forums and I highly recommend them all.
Comics Castle-owned & operated by Pat McCauslin
Alpha Comics--ComicVortex--Metropolis Connections 2.0--Comic Cellar


caseysorrow
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 6:49:17 AM

Rank: Watcher
Groups: Approver, Member

Joined: 4/7/2007
Posts: 778
Points: 156,676
Location: Michigan
They are the same interiors, I verified before rejecting the title. Also, they are sold as variants (buy this many copies, get this signed Zootanapuss, etc). One is already listed in the database here.

The Zootanapuss book is labelled once on the interior as Zatanapuss, and on every other page listed as Glamourpuss as seen in the images below:





It is unique in it's presentation, but I don't think this should be listed as it's own title, thus the rejection.

Edit: But hey, I have been known to be wrong too (only in extremely rare instances ). Perhaps some more approvers want to weigh in?

Casey


SwiftMann
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 8:09:53 AM

Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Approver, CCL Feature Crew, CR-Guidelines, Member, Super Seller

Shop at My Store

Joined: 4/19/2007
Posts: 11,239
Points: 1,898,935
Location: PA
caseysorrow wrote:
They are the same interiors, I verified before rejecting the title. Also, they are sold as variants (buy this many copies, get this signed Zootanapuss, etc). One is already listed in the database here.

The Zootanapuss book is labelled once on the interior as Zatanapuss, and on every other page listed as Glamourpuss as seen in the images below:





It is unique in it's presentation, but I don't think this should be listed as it's own title, thus the rejection.

Edit: But hey, I have been known to be wrong too (only in extremely rare instances ). Perhaps some more approvers want to weigh in?


After seeing all this, I've got no problem with the way it's currently listed as a variant.

Has DC Done Something Stupid Today?

"The return of beards and 90's fashion makes hipsters and homeless people impossible to tell apart." - Woody, Quantum & Woody #5
sgriffin
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 8:44:18 AM

Rank: Celestial
Groups: Approver, CCL Feature Crew, CR-Policies, Member, Subscriber

Joined: 4/29/2007
Posts: 2,971
Points: 546,270
Location: North Carolina
So the scan Casey presents shows glamourpuss in the indicia. Tamwood - your issue was different? Right now, based on Casey's scan I'm leaning heavily towards variant.

Megalomaniac Extraordinaire
Tamwood
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 8:50:35 AM

Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Approver, Member, Subscriber

Joined: 11/13/2009
Posts: 1,627
Points: 148,044
Location: Indiana
My understanding, and perhaps this is where I became confused, was that the black vertical strip acted as the Indicia, where it shows Zootanapuss at the top, followed by the issue number and date of publication, and then all the other credits/etc.

I'm happy to add it as a variant to the Glamourpuss issue, if that's the consensous.
scotteaves
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 9:04:01 AM

Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Approver, Approver Moderator, CCL Feature Crew, CR-Guidelines, Guru, Member, Subscriber

Joined: 6/24/2008
Posts: 5,484
Points: 426,348
Location: Hawthorne, NJ
Tamwood wrote:
My understanding, and perhaps this is where I became confused, was that the black vertical strip acted as the Indicia, where it shows Zootanapuss at the top, followed by the issue number and date of publication, and then all the other credits/etc.

I'm happy to add it as a variant to the Glamourpuss issue, if that's the consensous.


What's the block of text at the bottom of the white section? I can't quite make it out in Casey's scans. That looks more like the traditional location for an indicia to me.

This is a pretty dumb way to make a variant if you ask me.

And no matter where it ends up, the Item Bio needs something to explain this stupidity of having a different title on the front and inside cover of the variant.

caseysorrow
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 9:11:23 AM

Rank: Watcher
Groups: Approver, Member

Joined: 4/7/2007
Posts: 778
Points: 156,676
Location: Michigan
What is listed on the bottom inside cover of both copies is the legal disclaimer "Legal Disclaimer: glamourpuss is a publication made up of POP CULTURE PARODY..."

This is an example of an indie publisher playing fast and loose with the indicia. I think Tamwood is correct in that the vertical info in the stripe would normally be considered the indicia. For legal purposes, it is Glamourpuss, but for the publishers (banned)s and giggles it is Zootanapuss (since it is all supposedly satire after all). Still voting for variant.



Casey


scotteaves
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 9:17:16 AM

Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Approver, Approver Moderator, CCL Feature Crew, CR-Guidelines, Guru, Member, Subscriber

Joined: 6/24/2008
Posts: 5,484
Points: 426,348
Location: Hawthorne, NJ
caseysorrow wrote:
What is listed on the bottom inside cover of both copies is the legal disclaimer "Legal Disclaimer: glamourpuss is a publication made up of POP CULTURE PARODY..."

This is an example of an indie publisher playing fast and loose with the indicia. I think Tamwood is correct in that the vertical info in the stripe would normally be considered the indicia. For legal purposes, it is Glamourpuss, but for the publishers (banned)s and giggles it is Zootanapuss (since it is all supposedly satire after all). Still voting for variant.



Thanks Casey. I pulled down the images and tried to zoom in on them but it wasn't quite clear enough to tell. Given that it's not an indicia, yeah that black vertical should be the indicia.

While I completely see why it could be listed as a variant (inside content, everything else is Glamourpuss), because of the indicia I think it should be a separate title.

5 years from now if someone goes to catalogue this, where will they look for it if they have no clue it was released as a variant of Glamourpuss? Title on the cover and in the indicia says Zootanapuss. That's where they'll look, IMO.

padreglcc
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 9:18:36 AM

Rank: Celestial
Groups: Approver, CR-Guidelines, CR-Management, DC Host, Forum Admin, Member, Moderator, New Releases Host, Reviews Host, Subscriber

Joined: 5/6/2007
Posts: 4,202
Points: 439,629
Location: Bangor, Michigan
caseysorrow wrote:
What is listed on the bottom inside cover of both copies is the legal disclaimer "Legal Disclaimer: glamourpuss is a publication made up of POP CULTURE PARODY..."

This is an example of an indie publisher playing fast and loose with the indicia. I think Tamwood is correct in that the vertical info in the stripe would normally be considered the indicia. For legal purposes, it is Glamourpuss, but for the publishers (banned)s and giggles it is Zootanapuss (since it is all supposedly satire after all). Still voting for variant.


+1 on these being variants.

“One of the most sincere forms of respect is actually listening to what another has to say.” ~ Bryant H. McGill

Please make sure you read and understand the Forum Rules here.
LadyJay
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 1:44:46 PM

Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Approver, CR-Policies, Member, Moderator, Super Hero Showdown Host

Joined: 5/13/2007
Posts: 6,726
Points: 112,959
Location: Monrovia, MD
padreglcc wrote:
caseysorrow wrote:
What is listed on the bottom inside cover of both copies is the legal disclaimer "Legal Disclaimer: glamourpuss is a publication made up of POP CULTURE PARODY..."

This is an example of an indie publisher playing fast and loose with the indicia. I think Tamwood is correct in that the vertical info in the stripe would normally be considered the indicia. For legal purposes, it is Glamourpuss, but for the publishers (banned)s and giggles it is Zootanapuss (since it is all supposedly satire after all). Still voting for variant.


+1 on these being variants.


I haven't seen the specific issue being discussed here, but I have seen this one. Given what I recall...

+1 for listing these as variants of Glamourpuss



Tamwood
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2012 8:13:50 PM

Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Approver, Member, Subscriber

Joined: 11/13/2009
Posts: 1,627
Points: 148,044
Location: Indiana
Alright. It looks like the majority of those who have responded are in favor of it being a variant of the Glamourpuss issue, so that's what I'll make the CR as.

Can anybody take a look at my other CR for Shadowman Black? I'd like to get that one added, too, if I can get the title add approved.

http://www.comiccollectorlive.com/LiveData/CoverTitle_New_View.aspx?id=b0dc6ebc-357c-4c13-8504-2c82637db650
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

This page was generated in 0.218 seconds.

ADVERTISEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
All images on comic collector live copyright of their respective publishers. © Copyright 2008, MidTen Media Inc. GOLO231