# Are model kits still advertised in Comic books?



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

I just had a thought the other day....

I remeber back in the 1980's (And the eariler comics) that Revell use to post full page ads about their model kits.

Do they still do that in the comics these days?


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

I'll bet some comics would still be good places to advertise figure kits. I wonder, do you buy ads in specific comics or do you have to buy multiple titles?


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

You know, I was thinking that it might be an interesting idea to see if I could get Monster Hobbies advertised in one, but I wonder what the cost would be, considering that they print comics in the multi-billions.

I wonder who you contact for that?


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Nope. At least not in the Marvel titles I buy.


----------



## Kit (Jul 9, 2009)

Two things that are of more interest to adults than kids today: Model kits, and Marvel comics.


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

So, when I was buying Aurora monster kits for 98 cents each, my favorite comic books cost 12 cents an issue. We all know how much model kits have increased in price - how much does a comic book cost these days?


----------



## Matthew Green (Nov 12, 2000)

I have written several emails to Dennis at Scary Monsters to get published there but he never responds. I tell him I want to take out an ad and he never responds. It´s not a comic book but a monster magazine. I THOUGHT that a ¨Monster¨magazine would want a monster cafe paying ad in it but I suppose not.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

Zorro said:


> So, when I was buying Aurora monster kits for 98 cents each, my favorite comic books cost 12 cents an issue. We all know how much model kits have increased in price - how much does a comic book cost these days?


I just did a Google images search for "Amazing Spider-Man" and looked close at what I think was a couple of recent issues. The price on both: *$3.99!* Holy guacamole! Even if I were interested in collecting them again, the price would keep me away.

Maybe others cost less, but my tipping point would be $2.50 on anything that wasn't extraordinary. I think modern comics are printed on better paper, but I'd rather have newsprint at half the price.


----------



## Chinxy (May 23, 2003)

I buy the Warlord and it's at $3.99!!!!!:freak: I started buying the Warlord for .25c back in 1976 and have every issue. :thumbsup: Plus I sculpted the Warlord and Queen. Too bad I sold all of the kits but still have the first one. :tongue:

Chinxy!:dude:


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

I liked the old multi ads that had the photo-reduced pictures in them. that's the ad where you could buy the 6 foot inflatable frankenstein, the X-Ray glasses, the squirting fountian pen, etc. I'd look at that thing for hours and hours. I wonder if that company is still around?


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

Those X-Ray glasses ... man, I stared and stared at that ad. Quite possibly the most blatant case of false advertising I've ever seen. It pretty much flat-out told horny boys they could see through women's clothes if they bought them.

My dad was the one who figured out the "remote control" for a ghost in one of those ads was a long piece of string.


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

Todd P. said:


> Those X-Ray glasses ... man, I stared and stared at that ad. Quite possibly the most blatant case of false advertising I've ever seen. It pretty much flat-out told horny boys they could see through women's clothes if they bought them.












I wonder how many kids got their money back?

I remember ordering one of these and being a bit disappointed that the battleships were the exact same size as the soldiers and that they were all flat as a pancake.


----------



## DocJam00 (May 18, 2010)

Actually, if you read the X-Ray ad carefully, you will notice the language brilliantly AVOIDS saying they actually work. Look at your hand. "Seem" is a word choice that lawyers must have drooled over in the next phrase. And then there's a question -- "Is that really..."

This guy's English teacher must have taught him well....

Doc


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

I think the key word in the ad is "Imagine"...because beyond this word, it's all imagination from there!


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

Todd P. said:


> Those X-Ray glasses ... man, I stared and stared at that ad. Quite possibly the most blatant case of false advertising I've ever seen. It pretty much flat-out told horny boys they could see through women's clothes if they bought them.
> 
> My dad was the one who figured out the "remote control" for a ghost in one of those ads was a long piece of string.


*"x ray specs" were invented by Harold Von Braunhut, also the inventer of a little phenomenon called "sea monkeys", which is still a pretty big product to this day.. he died in 2004.the specks had chicken feathers in those peepholes of the specs that bended the spectrum so it "looked" like one was seeing through hands, clothes , etc..I wish I had invented em...He told me in 1981 that they were very successful..and yes, it does say "optical illusion"...

Z
*


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

Yeah, and all those 12-year-olds knew what that meant, and that the illustration showing the guy looking through a woman's dress wasn't what they'd really get for their buck.

I have fond memories of them too, folks, but I recognize their goal was to trick kids. Lots of innocent brine shrimp died too at the hands of kids who had no clue how to take care of "Sea Monkeys". I don't know how those have escaped the wrath of the animal-rights people for so many years.


----------



## Moebius (Mar 15, 2007)

Comic advertising is expensive beyond belief!


----------



## Cro-Magnon Man (Jun 11, 2001)

Todd P. said:


> Lots of innocent brine shrimp died too at the hands of kids who had no clue how to take care of "Sea Monkeys". I don't know how those have escaped the wrath of the animal-rights people for so many years.


I saw my first Sea Monkeys advert in 1975, so I've been waiting 35 years to find out what they really were. I always guessed the picture of a happy smiling family of Dad, Mum and 'children' sea monkeys, all standing together, was false.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Current issue of Spider-Man - #634. 
Retail $3.99

Advertisements within:


Rand International (inflatables, pools, backyard fun!)
Spidey sports toys for kids (football, fishing pole, baseball bat...)
Marvel freeze pops
UFC action figures
Marvel superhero popsicles
Mad Engine brand Collectible T-Shirts
Marvel Kids' apparel
Universal Orlando Resort
Iron Man 2 video game
And various full-page promos for other Marvel comics.
That be it!


----------



## Cro-Magnon Man (Jun 11, 2001)

I expect comics would still take model kit ads - the reason for the lack of them is possibly that model kit manufacturers aren't sure it's worth putting ads in comics any more.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

I still have most of my comics from the 1940s through the early 1980s. I must say that the best ads were definitely from the '60s and '70s. Most of these are science fiction and horror themed comics, with a few superheroes in the mix.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

G.I. Joe ads were great. And the Hostess spots with the Joker trying to steal all the Twinkies in Gotham — timeless.

Given Frank's perspective on the very high price of modern comics advertising, coupled with the nature of the ads that now fill each issue, perhaps they wouldn't be that good a place for model companies after all.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

> the Hostess spots


I loved those too! (I don't remember the Batman one though)

I wish I could find some of those Hostess pies these days. Our local 7-11 stopped bringing them in about a year or more ago and I can't seem to find them anywhere anymore.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

The best comic ads were the cool war game figure sets hawked by "Helen of Toy"... They had a Roman set, War of Independence Set, Civil War set, several World War II sets like "Woods Edge", "Tank Trap" and "Task Force".


----------



## ChrisW (Jan 1, 1970)

You know, I still think I got my money's worth out of the "X-Ray Specs" that I bought at the corner novelty shop (remember those?). I took them to (parochial Catholic) school, and we'd put them on and ogle the girls, making comments. They screamed, we laughed...yep, money well spent!


----------



## Cro-Magnon Man (Jun 11, 2001)

But what could you actually see with them, Chris? Serious minds, curious for over 30 years, need to know!


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

I think Chris is saying that they didn't work, but he freaked out the girls by pretending that they did.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Plus those glasses hid the black eye he got from said girls...

Oh and there was the giant cardboard submarine you could get... fired torpedos, had a periscope, etc.

And those seed and greeting card ads. If you sold 47,000 packages of beet seeds you could win a Cox control line airplane, 10 speed bike, or a baseball glove, etc.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

Who else was tempted to try to sell subscriptions to Grit?


----------



## northjason (May 10, 2003)

MadCap Romanian said:


> I loved those too! (I don't remember the Batman one though)
> 
> I wish I could find some of those Hostess pies these days. Our local 7-11 stopped bringing them in about a year or more ago and I can't seem to find them anywhere anymore.


I've got a Hostess factory outlet store about four miles from my house, and let me tell you, you're better off not having access to these things. 28 grams of fat. 28. It's golden, delicious death.

I still read comics, but they're not made for kids anymore. The wordcount/panels per page has been reduced so much that they take about 5-8 minutes to read. I thought about getting my young nephew interested, but at $4, with so little value offered, I think he's better off without them. Which is sad, because I adored them growing up.

He will, however, be getting a few model kits when he gets old enough.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Hopefully he gets them from Monster Hobbies!


----------



## Duff Miver (Dec 18, 2007)

I have every issue of Richie Rich but nobody knows ...You guys can keep a secret , right ?


----------



## deadmanincfan (Mar 11, 2008)

Todd P. said:


> Who else was tempted to try to sell subscriptions to Grit?


I actually sold Grit in my hometown when I was in 6th and 7th grade.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

I should clarify that I think the ADS were tricky, not necessarily the X-ray glasses themselves. If you find a pair in a store, you have an opportunity to pick them up and examine them before you put down your money. In the comics, though, all we had to go by was that tiny illustrated ad, which may have been technically truthful but kids were often likely not to get it.

At least, I didn't get it when I first saw it. Maybe the rest of you were smarter.


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

Todd P. said:


> I should clarify that I think the ADS were tricky, not necessarily the X-ray glasses themselves. If you find a pair in a store, you have an opportunity to pick them up and examine them before you put down your money. In the comics, though, all we had to go by was that tiny illustrated ad, which may have been technically truthful but kids were often likely not to get it.
> 
> At least, I didn't get it when I first saw it. Maybe the rest of you were smarter.


 
Of course not. Which is why they sold ten cajillion of them.


I bet they sold ten cajillion Nuclear Subs too!


----------



## Kitzillastein58 (Jan 27, 2009)

Zorro said:


> Of course not. Which is why they sold ten cajillion of them.
> 
> 
> I bet they sold ten cajillion Nuclear Subs too!


Man, I really wanted one of those Nuclear Subs, thats why I wanted to sell Grit.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

Did anyone here ever get one of those?


----------



## otto (Jan 1, 1970)

I remember Grit, my folks read it all the time. Pretty interesting articles, kind of a mild version of the National Enquirer. Mad Cap, I ordered the sub and NEVER recieved it. Or if I did, my dad may have sent it back after realinzing what a gyp it was without telling me. I have a sneeky feeling it was just a fold out cardboard box with a dart gun and a cheap plastic periscope.


----------



## Todd P. (Apr 12, 2007)

Just found this photo that says it's the real deal:










Not what the photo in the ad shows, but still kind of neat.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

I ordered the sub but they sent the cardboard tank instead. 
It was pretty chintzy - a fold-up, slightly tank-shaped cardboard box. But waddaya want for $6.98?


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

John P said:


> I ordered the sub but they sent the cardboard tank instead.
> It was pretty chintzy - a fold-up, slightly tank-shaped cardboard box. But waddaya want for $6.98?


Betcha' could have taken it out with this $1.98 Machine Gun!


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

Todd P. said:


>


_*"Rusted trash barrel 30 degrees off port bow. Load torpedo tubes and prepare to dive - if I can just scrunch down enough to close this conning tower!"*_


----------



## otto (Jan 1, 1970)

Wow, Thanks Todd! The Sub is much better than I expected! On the other hand, I can tell its a thin cardboard "punch out, crease at the dotted lines, and connect the tabs" sort of thing. Still pretty cool. I have a feeling by the time a kid climbed in and out a few times, it would be pretty crunched up.


----------



## Moebius (Mar 15, 2007)

I had one. Took forever to get the $6.98 together. Very disappointed when I got it, but I'd like to have it back! I think I bought a jet engine at the same time, and that ended up in a pile of things I couldn't figure out what to do with. If I remember correct, I got it from Johnson-Smith. Wonder if kids today still comb through those catalogs or if they look at crap like this online...


----------



## rkoenn (Dec 18, 2007)

Nowadays kids are wrapped up in computer games and simply socializing on the net. It is likely that starts at a very early age. We were raised in simpler times when we read comic books, built plastic models, played sand lot football and baseball, and spent loads of time outdoors. My two sons didn't do too much of that when they were growing up and I felt sorry for them because of they didn't. It didn't take much to make us happy and we were very active. But I think parents, and partly justifiably so, today are very protective of their kids so they keep the kids under a watchful eye and also feel guilty that the mothers work and therefor take them to outside activities within in very regimented schedules. Our days were very unplanned and carefree and I grew up enjoying my childhood.


----------



## bucwheat (Mar 9, 2010)

Zorro said:


> I wonder how many kids got their money back?
> 
> I remember ordering one of these and being a bit disappointed that the battleships were the exact same size as the soldiers and that they were all flat as a pancake.


Boy that brings back memories


----------



## rkoenn (Dec 18, 2007)

I had army men but never had the fancy sets. I was the oldest of four children and my dad was a teacher. We lived quite comfortably but toys were a bit limited. My best friend was the last of four boys and his brothers were gone so he had a step up in toys. I remember really liking his Fort Apache cowboy and Indian set. The fort itself was fairly large. He was also the first one to get a mini-bike back about 1968 or so. We did get lucky and me and my slightly younger brother did get mini-bikes and they were a blast. Great to reminisce about the good times back then.


----------



## Mitchellmania (Feb 14, 2002)

I had Sea Monkeys last for quite a wile, but they got spilled. They look like little shrimp.


----------



## clark_savage (Jan 24, 2003)

Cro-Magnon Man said:


> But what could you actually see with them, Chris? Serious minds, curious for over 30 years, need to know!


Noticed no one answered that query. I believe it was an optical trick done with two layers of red-tinted plastic sheet - one was just a plain sheet, the other one was a magnifier. So whatever you look at would seem to have something of a shell around it. So it probably won't take a genius to figure out that if you were to look at a person through the specs, you would not see their underwear, but you would see an image of the person surrounded by a slightly blurry, slightly larger image of the same person.

Hope that explains it a bit.

What I am curious to know is, did anyone actually manage to breed a successful colony of sea monkeys and how long it lasted?


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Mitchellmania said:


> I had Sea Monkeys last for quite a wile, but they got spilled. They look like little shrimp.


what a coincidence... they ARE little shrimp!


----------



## Cro-Magnon Man (Jun 11, 2001)

clark_savage said:


> Noticed no one answered that query. I believe it was an optical trick done with two layers of red-tinted plastic sheet - one was just a plain sheet, the other one was a magnifier. So whatever you look at would seem to have something of a shell around it. So it probably won't take a genius to figure out that if you were to look at a person through the specs, you would not see their underwear, but you would see an image of the person surrounded by a slightly blurry, slightly larger image of the same person.
> 
> Hope that explains it a bit.


 
Thanks so much, Clark - I can rest easy now, now that I know what the Sea Monkeys really were, and how the X-Ray Specs 'worked'!


----------



## Spockr (Sep 14, 2009)

*X-Ray Specs minor correction*



Cro-Magnon Man said:


> Thanks so much, Clark - I can rest easy now, now that I know what the Sea Monkeys really were, and how the X-Ray Specs 'worked'!


The basic description Clark provided is pretty correct but instead of red lenses the thing that creates the optical illusion is BELIEVE IT OR NOT _bird feathers_

I pulled mine apart all those many years ago and thats what I found. Here is a more detailed description of how these suckers work:

_The lenses consist of two layers of cardboard with a small hole about 6 mm (.25 inch) in diameter punched through both layers. The user views objects through the holes. A feather is embedded between the layers of each lens. The vanes of the feathers are so close together that light is diffracted, causing the user to receive two slightly offset images. For instance, if viewing a pencil, one would see two offset images of the pencil. Where the images overlap, a darker image is obtained, supposedly giving the illusion that one is seeing the graphite embedded within the body of the pencil. As may be imagined, the illusion is not particularly sustainable._

I had Sea Monkeys too and yep they are shrimp or more accurately brine shrimp (with crowns and all)

Regards,
Matt


----------



## northjason (May 10, 2003)

Spockr said:


> I had Sea Monkeys too and yep they are shrimp or more accurately brine shrimp (with crowns and all)


Awesome pets, AND they make your instant ramen even more delicious. :thumbsup:


----------



## deadmanincfan (Mar 11, 2008)

northjason said:


> Awesome pets, AND they make your instant ramen even more delicious. :thumbsup:


...we REALLY need to have a "tossin' your cookies" smilie here... :drunk:


----------



## Cro-Magnon Man (Jun 11, 2001)

Spockr said:


> Here is a more detailed description of how these suckers work:
> 
> _The lenses consist of two layers of cardboard with a small hole about 6 mm (.25 inch) in diameter punched through both layers. The user views objects through the holes. A feather is embedded between the layers of each lens. The vanes of the feathers are so close together that light is diffracted, causing the user to receive two slightly offset images. For instance, if viewing a pencil, one would see two offset images of the pencil. Where the images overlap, a darker image is obtained, supposedly giving the illusion that one is seeing the graphite embedded within the body of the pencil. As may be imagined, the illusion is not particularly sustainable._
> 
> ...


 
Thanks, Matt; those X-Ray specs have turned out to be very interesting, quite a deception and breach of trading standards, which they got away with!


----------

