Subterranean to release signed limiteds of Game and Clash!

["Blackfyre"]

I can appreciate and understand SotM and Geddon's position. SotM makes great points and brings up valid concerns. A poll would be a good idea. Or maybe an email from Bill to those with the lettered's.

Bill, I'm a big fan of SP - you do great books. But I think this sets an unfortunate precedent. Should you be bound by MM contracts? No, you shouldn't. So restart the series.

But you didn't, you continued from where MM left off. Having done that, I think there's an important understanding there that it's a continuation of the same limited edition run.

This sums it all up.

As a side note, I would like to take this time to say that I am in the market to purchase an unbroken lettered set and that if anyone decides they would like to sell the ones they have please let me know.

[pickle_supreme]

While fully aware that this view won't win me many friends on this board, I must say that I am rather looking forward to the new editions of AGoT and ACoK. And of course I would, since I don't own the Meisha Merlin editions, and my interest in books ultimately boils down to having an object of beauty to read and enjoy. The market value of these books, while certainly not irrelevant, is secondary to their main purpose IMHO. However, a significant number of people here treat them primarily as financial assets, so let's see where that leaves Subterranean Press's recent actions.

SP produces goods that it sells at a certain value. That value sometimes appraises with time, and sometimes drops, so it is up to the investors to make an educated guess, and choose to purchase the product or not. If SP does something that reduces the value of a product that they sold to someone previously, their reputation will go down, and fewer people will trust them to buy their products in the future. But, it is their risk to take - the market will decide the outcome.

The situation with MM is different though. Why would SP prop up the value of someone else's product? There is a market for these books, they are not hurting the value of SP's own brand and it is thus a clear gain. One can argue that it was up to GRRM to stop it, but why would he not want to have a consistent set of limited editions from one publisher? To protect the investments of people who bought MM editions? Even with interventionist monetary policy becoming the norm recently, MM and SP are publishers, not banks, and GRRM is a writer, not a government.

My point is that books are not financial instruments. If buyers choose to treat them as such, they also accept with it a hefty dose of risk - publishers failing, value dropping, new and better editions coming out... However, there is also a potential for making significant returns far in excess of, say, government bonds. So, best of luck to anyone who is looking to make a killing on GRRM's oeuvre, but don't go and make it your pension plan.

PS And don't attack SP for, ultimately, doing their job.

[evogeler]

I'll also echo Blackfyre-- if anyone out there with an unbroken lettered set is now looking to unload it, I'd be happy to chat with them...

[Geddon]

Maybe, but as a case study of ethical dilemmas goes, 'I spent $500 on a book in the expectation that it would appreciate to $1000 and now it's only worth $750 because of this decision*' is not really calculated to tug at the heartstrings.

Fuck you. I spent over £2500 building my lettered set, much of which went on getting the two MM books. GRRMs decision just halved the value at least. If you had just made a loss of that magnitude on an asset because some asshole had decided to go back on everything he had led you to believe about said asset you'd be pissed off too.

Now imagine that an addendum to that fantastic peice of news was that, in order to have a chance at maintaining the remaining value of the asset, you now had the opportunity of paying an extra £450 over what you had expected to pay. That's kicking somebody in the balls and then stamping them on the head when they fall over.

Now add in my losses on the numbered set, plus an extra £350 to spend if I wanted to buy the Sub Press copies of books 1 and 2 to maintain whatever value remains in that set. Multiply that by the number of MM owners. Maybe now you're starting to understand the true consequences of GRRMs decision.

The contracts (yes, plural) I signed to take over the series did obligate me in certain ways, financially and otherwise, but did not specify that I was responsible for promises or claims made by Meisha Merlin. Are you saying I'm obligated by previous contracts to which I was not a party?

No. Once Meisha Merlin folded the responsibilities and obligations for the limited series reverted to GRRM. He could have proceded in a number of ways at that point. The one he chose was to license another company to continue the series. The contracts should have specified that you were to continue the series beginning at book 3 and that all books should match as closely as possible the style and features of the previous editions.

He got the first part right, at least until he changed the contract a short time ago. Changing it amounts to a heinous betrayal of those people who bought copies of the first two books on the understanding that the first contract would remain in effect. He is the one who reneged on the deal, in this case the fault lies almost entirely with GRRM.

I'm also curious -- and not intending this to be provocative -- but where does everyone see the other limited editions of A Feast for Crows as fitting into this? They certainly preceded our edition, by a good bit.

They, like most modern UK hardbacks, were made with the poorest materials possible using the cheapest manufacturing methods possible; they barely count as books let alone collectibles. Those two sad volumes are nowhere near being in the same vicinity of the same league as the Meisha Merlin or Sub Press editions, so nobody considers them to be part of the series of limiteds or thinks to include them in these discussions.

[Geddon]

While fully aware that this view won't win me many friends on this board, I must say that I am rather looking forward to the new editions of AGoT and ACoK. And of course I would, since I don't own the Meisha Merlin editions, and my interest in books ultimately boils down to having an object of beauty to read and enjoy. The market value of these books, while certainly not irrelevant, is secondary to their main purpose IMHO. However, a significant number of people here treat them primarily as financial assets, so let's see where that leaves Subterranean Press's recent actions.

SP produces goods that it sells at a certain value. That value sometimes appraises with time, and sometimes drops, so it is up to the investors to make an educated guess, and choose to purchase the product or not. If SP does something that reduces the value of a product that they sold to someone previously, their reputation will go down, and fewer people will trust them to buy their products in the future. But, it is their risk to take - the market will decide the outcome.

The situation with MM is different though. Why would SP prop up the value of someone else's product? There is a market for these books, they are not hurting the value of SP's own brand and it is thus a clear gain. One can argue that it was up to GRRM to stop it, but why would he not want to have a consistent set of limited editions from one publisher? To protect the investments of people who bought MM editions? Even with interventionist monetary policy becoming the norm recently, MM and SP are publishers, not banks, and GRRM is a writer, not a government.

My point is that books are not financial instruments. If buyers choose to treat them as such, they also accept with it a hefty dose of risk - publishers failing, value dropping, new and better editions coming out... However, there is also a potential for making significant returns far in excess of, say, government bonds. So, best of luck to anyone who is looking to make a killing on GRRM's oeuvre, but don't go and make it your pension plan.

PS And don't attack SP for, ultimately, doing their job.

That's excellent. Lets consider an example with another asset in place of books, you've got a house right? So if somebody decides to build a prison next to your house and it knocks 50% off the value that'd be okay too, yeah? No need to get pissed off just because something somebody else did has a massive effect on your asset, correct?

How about if the person who sold you the house had expressly told you that no prison would be built anywhere near it. Let's say he's the town planner so you believe him implicitly. Now, when the prison goes up, are you allowed to get angry then?

How about if it turns out the guy who sold you the house, the guy who led you to believe that you had no reason to worry about a prison, not only lied but stands to benefit personally from building the prison. Now, finally, do you get the right to be pissed off?

As somebody without any MM editions and who isn't facing significant losses why don't you shove your opinion up your arse.

[mormont]

How about people who spent $1500* on a book they had no indication would ever be rereleased in a different format, making their purchases worth.....what exactly? I'm not sure reducing this to a criticism of profit margins on speculative purchases is exactly helpful.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that there's more to the issues involved, on both sides, than the profit margin. On the one hand, there's the feeling that faith has not been kept: and on the other, I'm assuming that at least some of the motivation (probably a big part for GRRM, for whom the money can hardly be much of an issue) is to allow people to complete sets for that non-monetary value that pickle talks about. As a non-collector, I'd tend to sympathise with that more than the cash value argument. I'd love to own a set of these books. It would be nice if they appreciated in value. But I'd also see it as very much the secondary thing.

Also, to be clear, there's nothing wrong with investing and hoping to make a profit (large or small) on collectible books. I'm not criticising that.

All I'm saying is that, while it may be a shame that such profit is smaller than it would otherwise have been as a result of this decision, it should be kept in proportion and dealt with maturely. (Something I think you have done, by the way.)

It would be one thing if SP had decided to restart the series as soon as they took over the license, but since they didn't do that the understanding was this was a continuation of the MM editions, with all the responsibilities that that entails. To backtrack on that is, IMO, a breach of trust - and I'm saying this as someone who'll buy the new editions anyway.

This seems fair, and indeed gets to the core of the issue. Whenever I hear the words 'implicit contract', as I did earlier in this thread, my alarms go off. Because frequently, people's idea of an 'implicit contract' is, 'I expected you to do X, therefore for you not to do X is wrong': with little regard to whether that expectation was actually reasonable.

So the question would appear to be whether SP or GRRM 'backtracked': whether they did or said anything that would reasonably be interpreted as if they'd no intention of doing a SP AGOT/ACOK. That, SP at least can argue for themselves. (And I see they are.)

I spent over £2500 building my lettered set, much of which went on getting the two MM books. GRRMs decision just halved the value at least. If you had just made a loss of that magnitude on an asset because some asshole had decided to go back on everything he had led you to believe about said asset you'd be pissed off too.

Now I'm confused. Have you made a loss on the amount you spent on the books? That's not how I read your earlier post.

If your complaint is that you've made a loss, that's one thing. If your complaint is that you haven't made enough profit, that's another.

(Either way, I think you should keep your temper.)

[Geddon]

If your complaint is that you've made a loss, that's one thing. If your complaint is that you haven't made enough profit, that's another.

I believe I have made a significant loss. Many of the people who own MM editions did not buy them at retail price from the publisher, the majority of those people are looking at big losses on the price they paid.

(Either way, I think you should keep your temper.)

Indeed. Perhaps the best course of action would be for you to avoid making flippant remarks in a thread where temperatures are already running high due to financial losses suffered by some of the participants. If you start throwing oil on a fire don't be surprised if it burns hotter as a result.

[Bronn Stone]

I believe I have made a significant loss. Many of the people who own MM editions did not buy them at retail price from the publisher, the majority of those people are looking at big losses on the price they paid.

Maybe. Maybe not. There is clearly an interest in an unbroken lettered set. Maybe even in a numbered one. Offer yours at pre-announcement full price if you are convinced it has lost its value.

For collectibles with such limited distribution, there is no way to gauge the market save actually testing it. I'm not reading anything here that suggests a flood of MM AGOT's is currently hitting the secondary market at reduced prices. Without a test or news of a flood, the rest is just squawking in the dark about so-far imaginary "financial losses suffered by some of the participants."

[Geddon]

So the question would appear to be... whether they did or said anything that would reasonably be interpreted as if they'd no intention of doing a SP AGOT/ACOK.

I'd honestly love to see someone argue against that interpretation.

Maybe. Maybe not. There is clearly an interest in an unbroken lettered set. Maybe even in a numbered one. Offer yours at pre-announcement full price if you are convinced it has lost its value.

An excellent idea. I bought my lettered's some time ago; there is no recent, pre-announcement sale of a similar set against which we could gauge any change in value.

However I do also own a numbered copy of A Game of Thrones, the last copy to sell went on ebay for US $1500 a couple of weeks before the Sub Press editions of AGoT and ACoK were announced. The seller sold six copies in very short order so apparently there was still significant demand for the numbered edition at that point.

Let's test whether the announcement has reduced interest in buying the MM editions, or affected the resale value of them. I'll sell my numbered copy (which is in immaculate collectible condition) here for that price, shipping at cost. Any takers?

[pickle_supreme]

How about if the person who sold you the house had expressly told you that no prison would be built anywhere near it. Let's say he's the town planner so you believe him implicitly. Now, when the prison goes up, are you allowed to get angry then?

That is a very good example actually. When you purchase a house, you typically check the planning permissions in the neighbourhood. Even better, you get a solicitor to do it for you. And here's the rub - you don't implicitly believe anything that is not written down and verifiable.

If you are looking for an investment vehicle, you need to approach the whole process in a far more serious manner. Someone on this board made a killing with 50 copies of AGoT. That is an exception rather than a rule.

As somebody without any MM editions and who isn't facing significant losses why don't you shove your opinion up your arse.

So as to stop fans from getting into this whole collecting malarkey thinking they are making a savvy financial decision. They are not, unless they get lucky AND know what they are doing. Which is not to say they shouldn't buy gorgeous books if they can afford them. A nice library beats wallpaper any day. :-)

[Sword of the Morning]

I had written a LONG (and for those of you who know my history here, you know what that mean) post going into greater detail about why I think this is a horrid mistake but learning from previous misadventures, I decided to delete it, cool off, and think it over.

I think Geddon makes some very good points and won't belabor them. His view on this is dead on and many of the people who disagree are obviously not collectors and do not understand the greater issues at stake here.

By the way this type of things is not new in the collector's market. Let me give you another quick example:

Sideshow Collectible 1/4 scale Dr. Doom Statue on Throne. Gorgeous and VERY limited. 300 only produced. MSRP of 300 dollars. Sold out almost within a few days when it debuted at the San Diego Comic Con. Sideshow decided to up it to 500 because they wanted to be fair to people who could not make it to San Diego Comic Con. That unleashed a WAVE of backlash. As a collectibles company, Sideshow knew the inevitable backlash but stood by their decision because they felt that adding an extra 200 would give a chance to those who would unfairly miss out. The decision was made literally days after the reveal.

Today? Say hello to a 2000 dollar collectible because that's how much an Exclusive Doom is worth. 2000. That almos SEVEN TIMES the MSRP price.

Over and over and over again, as Sideshow's market value has skyrocketed and their reach lengthened, people who got in the game late begged and begged. Make some more! Reissue it! It's going for SEVEN TIMES the going rate, Sideshow isn't making a penny on those Ebay transactions. Why not make another 1000 to sell? There's more than enough demand.

Well, the reason for not doing that is simple. Think about all the people who TRUSTED in Sideshow's reputation as a producer of LIMTIED COLLECTIBLES. That's the definition of the word LIMITED. Many of these people spent thousands purchasing collectibles on the seondary market. Not necessary as an investment but because they loved the statue and the character and this was the ONLY way to get it. They knew that no more would ever be made. How would these people feel if Sideshow simply reneged on their word and decided to pump out another few hundred for 300 dollars a pop?

Using the needs of the many outweighing the few, Sideshow should definitely make more because there is DEFINITELY more people who want this statue now than there was 8 years ago.

But NO, Sideshow did not do this and they never will. They want to protect the value of their products on the secondary market and they realize that sometimes morally and ethically it ISN'T always about the needs of the many outweighting the needs of the few. You have to be fair to all involved.

Getting back to this issue with the new books, it SIGNIFICANTLY hurts people who invested heavily in the Meisha Merlin editions when there was an UNDERSTANDING that there would be no other options.

People who just say things like "oh I don't care, I just enjoy the books for what they are" are being a tad self-involved in my opinion. YES, these books are wonderful and are works of art and all that but when you bought them for 1500 dollars and then found out they are now only worth a fraction of their original price, that is going to affect your enjoyment of those books unless you are a saint or a millionaire. And what happens when something happens and you lose a job or a loved one gets sick and you are forced to liquidate and sell for emergency money?

These are all issues that should be considered.

People who aren't collectors or who haven't spent literally thousands on these books really don't have much to say because they can't possibly understand how this make us feel. Geddon's example of the prison next to your house is spot-on.

[Sword of the Morning]

That is a very good example actually. When you purchase a house, you typically check the planning permissions in the neighbourhood. Even better, you get a solicitor to do it for you. And here's the rub - you don't implicitly believe anything that is not written down and verifiable.

If you are looking for an investment vehicle, you need to approach the whole process in a far more serious manner. Someone on this board made a killing with 50 copies of AGoT. That is an exception rather than a rule.

So as to stop fans from getting into this whole collecting malarkey thinking they are making a savvy financial decision. They are not, unless they get lucky AND know what they are doing. Which is not to say they shouldn't buy gorgeous books if they can afford them. A nice library beats wallpaper any day. :-)

pickle_supreme, you don't really get it.

Number one, you are very very wrong if you think that the majority of people who buy these books do it as an investment. That is an idiotic a MORONIC thing to do. Geddon and I don't buy books because we think we're going to get rich selling them off. We OBVIOUSLY buy them because we love the books and the authors who write them. HAVING SAID THAT, we also wind up spending a significant amount of money buying them because we TRUST the fact that these books are limited editions. If we knew for instance that these books would be later reprinted or have another special edition sanctioned by Martin, we would be fucking idiots for spending 1000 dollars or 1500 dollars on this. So the people who are angry are not angry that their INVESTMENT didn't pan out, it was never about that. It was simply about a breach of trust perpetrated by an author who showed no integrity in making this decision.

Do you understand now?

Also, if you think a solicitor is enough to protect you from being ripped off when you buy a house then you are sadly mistaken and I hope you never find this out in the future for your sake. And yes, the operative word is RIPPED OFF. You use your example of a solicitor to protect you FROM BEING RIPPED OFF and you are thus implying that if Martin is RIPPING US OFF and to prevent that we the buyer of his limited collectibles should have done more research or maybe hired a SOLICITOR to prevent him from ripping us off.

What would you have us do, sue George for being an asshole?

[mormont]

I believe I have made a significant loss. Many of the people who own MM editions did not buy them at retail price from the publisher, the majority of those people are looking at big losses on the price they paid.

Hmm. Well, on the other hand if you paid over retail price, you were engaged in speculation, surely? With all that entails.

So while I sympathise to some degree, that's a bit different than if you had lost money on the retail price. The key issue, though, is still whether you were led to believe this release would never be permitted, or (to put it another way) whether you could reasonably have foreseen that it might happen.

Indeed. Perhaps the best course of action would be for you to avoid making flippant remarks in a thread where temperatures are already running high due to financial losses suffered by some of the participants. If you start throwing oil on a fire don't be surprised if it burns hotter as a result.

Sorry, no dice. 'You made me lose my temper, it's not my fault' cuts exactly no ice on this board. Normally, your previous post would have been deleted. I'm already being tolerant: don't push it.

Sword, I don't think you need to be a book collector to understand the issues here. I understand them just fine. Declaring that people who don't agree with you just don't understand the issues is a long-established tactic but not a very valid one. Nor is the ad hominem on a man you don't know nearly well enough to ground those sorts of opinions. You do know that GRRM frequently donates collectible items to charitable auctions, by the way?

[pickle_supreme]

Getting back to this issue with the new books, it SIGNIFICANTLY hurts people who invested heavily in the Meisha Merlin editions when there was an UNDERSTANDING that there would be no other options.

Number one, you are very very wrong if you think that the majority of people who buy these books do it as an investment. That is an idiotic a MORONIC thing to do. Geddon and I don't buy books because we think we're going to get rich selling them off.

I do not think that it is a majority, quite the opposite, and you are contradicting both yourself and Geddon's previous posts where he is complaining of his profit margin. But this is getting silly.

Once the amounts paid for these books start getting into thousands, these are investments we are talking about, unless you have money to burn. And investments into a highly volatile, unregulated market, at that. Over the course of these past few posts, you have very clearly demonstrated why that is a bad idea.

It may come as some surprise to you that I do not advocate suing either George R.R. Martin or Subterranean Press for anyone's perceived losses (you only materialise a loss when you actually sell at a lower price*). It is not their job to guarantee you a profit, nor have they reneged on any promise. Asking SP to sit on their rights to the first two books out of courtesy to MM buyers' portfolios is nonsensical. GRRM is a writer, who is spending a significant chunk of his time on this planet creating works for others to enjoy. And that damn well gives him the right to have a matching SP set on his shelf if he so pleases.

Finally, this is a matter of principle for me, as you probably gathered. I am sorry if anyone financially suffers because of these two books being reissued. But it is profoundly unfair to blame either GRRM or SP for it.

* Also, I am not convinced that this will hurt MM's value in the long term - new illustrators, new design, etc. etc. - but that is beside the point.

[SubPress]

No. Once Meisha Merlin folded the responsibilities and obligations for the limited series reverted to GRRM. He could have proceded in a number of ways at that point. The one he chose was to license another company to continue the series. The contracts should have specified that you were to continue the series beginning at book 3 and that all books should match as closely as possible the style and features of the previous editions.

He got the first part right, at least until he changed the contract a short time ago. Changing it amounts to a heinous betrayal of those people who bought copies of the first two books on the understanding that the first contract would remain in effect. He is the one who reneged on the deal, in this case the fault lies almost entirely with GRRM.

Geddon,

I won't engage with you on most points, as that discussion, with the current tenor, will get us nowhere. I will, however, point out that 1) GRRM does not own the rights to produce limited editions of the books, though they proceed with his blessing; 2) At no point since we signed the series of contracts back in '05, if I remember the date, have those contracts changed. In fact, GRRM was not a signatory, then or now.

All best otherwise,

Bill

SubPRess

[Sword of the Morning]

Geddon,

I won't engage with you on most points, as that discussion, with the current tenor, will get us nowhere. I will, however, point out that 1) GRRM does not own the rights to produce limited editions of the books, though they proceed with his blessing; 2) At no point since we signed the series of contracts back in '05, if I remember the date, have those contracts changed. In fact, GRRM was not a signatory, then or now.

All best otherwise,

Bill

SubPRess

Hi Bill,

I'm a bit confused then. Are you saying that limited editions of the books could be produced WITHOUT his approval? If GRRM doesn't own the rights to produce limited editions of the books, then who does? His publisher then?

If the details of the contract has not changed, then are you implying that the right to produce new limited edition volumes of A Game of Thrones and Clash of Kings was always part of that original contract?

If so, that would have been nice to let us know as it might have prevented many fans from being scalped on Ebay and on here to the tune of over a thousand dollars per book.

Thanks for any clarification. I'm not sure what the point of George calling Stego or anyone to ask them their thoughts would have been if a deal to do this would have proceeded regardless of his opinions.

Thanks

Dennis

[Sword of the Morning]

I do not think that it is a majority, quite the opposite, and you are contradicting both yourself and Geddon's previous posts where he is complaining of his profit margin. But this is getting silly.

Once the amounts paid for these books start getting into thousands, these are investments we are talking about, unless you have money to burn. And investments into a highly volatile, unregulated market, at that. Over the course of these past few posts, you have very clearly demonstrated why that is a bad idea.

It may come as some surprise to you that I do not advocate suing either George R.R. Martin or Subterranean Press for anyone's perceived losses (you only materialise a loss when you actually sell at a lower price*). It is not their job to guarantee you a profit, nor have they reneged on any promise. Asking SP to sit on their rights to the first two books out of courtesy to MM buyers' portfolios is nonsensical. GRRM is a writer, who is spending a significant chunk of his time on this planet creating works for others to enjoy. And that damn well gives him the right to have a matching SP set on his shelf if he so pleases.

Finally, this is a matter of principle for me, as you probably gathered. I am sorry if anyone financially suffers because of these two books being reissued. But it is profoundly unfair to blame either GRRM or SP for it.

* Also, I am not convinced that this will hurt MM's value in the long term - new illustrators, new design, etc. etc. - but that is beside the point.

Well now hold on a minute. Are you saying that Subterranean Press ALWAYS had the rights to produce Game of Thrones or Clash of Kings? Because I can tell you that almost all of us who bought these from Bill was under another impression entirely. We were under the impression that the rights to the first two books were NOT part of the deal and that SP would merely to CONTINUING the series.

Were you around when the limited edition of A Storm of Swords was published by SP a few years ago? Part of the outcry was the fact that the volume DIFFERED so much from the first two books. Two volumes instead of one. A slipcase that was NOTHING like the Merlin versions. No engraving on the slipcase, no gold gilt edge, different sizes, etc, etc, etc.

If we thought there was a chance, ANY CHANCE that SP would be redoing A Game of Thrones or A Clash of Kings there would not NEARLY be this level of unhappiness.

In point of fact, I strongly believe the possibility was raised that perhaps SP would revisit the first 2 books and that notion was basically dismissed by Bill himself at the time.

If I misunderstood you, I apologize and would like a clarification of what you meant about SP "sitting" on their rights.

My understanding was that they did not own such rights but that they had recently negotiated and acquired the rights to redo the first two books. Hence the current controversy over whether that should have been done or not.

I still think we are communicating at cross purposes. It was not my intention that SP or George Martin "guarantee" us a profit in the collector's edition books we buy. That point is obvious. Equally obvious is the entire concept of a "limited" edition. Do you know, per chance why Subterranean Press even has numbers or letters? Why not just sell these books to as many people want them as possible and do away with the numbers? Or just make it open-ended? What's even the point of letters? Do you still think people would be paying 250 or 350 dollars per book if that were the case and they were just "really nice books with good paper, nice art, and good leather binding?"

Ummm. No. They are numbered and lettered FOR A REASON. Reason: they are LIMITED. That's part of what makes them COLLECTIBLE. And so contrary to Mormont's position which I will address in another separate post, unless you happen to be a COLLECTOR who COLLECTS things like books, stamps, statues, art, etc you could not possibly understand the issues at stake here or the visceral emotional reaction that this particular decision has elicited in many people.

At the end of the day, it is about TRUST which means that in the hopes of putting together a complete set of LIMITED edition books that we so love, we were operating under a set of assumptions ENCOURAGED implicitly by publisher AND author that there is NO OTHER way of getting that completed set other than by acquiring them on the secondary market. Hence, many people paid exorbitant prices for the Meisha version of the A Game of Thrones. Over a thousand in fact. Kishkeking made a tidy sum VERY fast by liquidating 6 books in less than a month for over a thousand each. People who bought these books didn't buy them as an investment but did so because they BELIEVED that this would be the ONLY way to get a complete set in the forseeable future. Similarly when George Martin sold his stash of Meisha Game of Thrones for over a thousand a copy, there was the SIMILAR understanding that there would be NO OTHER WAY to get a complete set.

What aspect of this involves "investment" in any way. I'm talking about the passion of the collectors out there to spend this type of money to get the collectibles they want. So when you turn around and decide to re-issue the first two books thus making the Meisha versions orphans . . . you are essentially not treating the people who went to the effort of acquiring these books fairly. These people are being treated UNFAIRLY and SHABBILY.

If you ask ANY collectible company who puts out ANY collectible product, they can explain this simple concept. You MUST respect the LIMITED nature of any collectible or very rapidly you will lose ANY credibility as a collectible company. You may win on one or two products but ultimately your company will fail because NO ONE will buy your stuff when they know you will go back on your word and make the "limited" part of your product a joke.

Bill from SP will be MORE THAN HAPPY to explain this concept to you since he would not survive as a producer of rare books for long if he continuously and haphazardly decided to just "reprint" limited books that sell out fast!

Geddon was trying to make an example using real estate to illustrate to you how he felt and your response was to flippantly reply that you should "hire a solicitor and be more careful making an investment" if the stakes are that high? Huh? Do you really think it's that hard to rip you off if someone really wanted to do so and targeted you? Or that a solicitor would protect you? You can have your solicitor read the contract all you want but if your local government decides to put a prison next to your neighborhood, guess what good that's going to do? Not to mention, why should we have to do something like this to buy a limited edition book?

Exactly what research would you have us do before buying a Meisha Game of Thrones from George RR Martin himself? Huhh??? Are you kidding me? What? Did you want us to draw up a fucking contract making him promise that they wouldn't reissue the first 2 books again before paying out 1500 for the Meisha versions? I'm just unclear why you seem to think that the people who paid exorbitant amounts of money to scalpers are somehow to blame for what has since happened.

Are you similarly critical of the people that Bernie Madoff stole billions from because "they weren't careful enough." Well, Hell's bells, why the fuck is he in jail and why the hell did his son kill himself? It's not his fault. If the mark isn't careful enough to protect his money then he DESERVES to be ripped off.

And make no mistake, to a LARGE degree that is what is being done here. Maybe it's not as egregious as "rip-off" or "con" but the bottom line is that there has been a breach of trust to a lesser or greater extent depending on your viewpoint and the people left with complete numbered or lettered sets definitely feel that their trust in George Martin, Subterranean Press, and whoever hold the rights to these limited editions have been breached.

It's self evident that almost without exception, EVERY person who owns a complete unbroken lettered or numbered set of these books have NOT liked what SP has done. Many of them like dajamieson are very well respected collectors of Martin signed memorabilia.

So again, I think we are arguing about apples and oranges. You seem to suggest that we have no right to be angry or should "just get over it" because that's the way the cookie crumbles and our stance is "no, that's not the way the cookie should crumble and Bill should have KNOWN better because he actually runs a business based on limited and collectible products." At the end of the day if there was any CHANCE of this happening, this fact should have been well-publicized and placed in a sticky at the top of the forum to protect people from being scalped!

In any case, I will continue to buy A Song of Ice and Fire limited editions from Subterranean Press because at this point of the game, I have no choice if I don't want to give up matching sets that I've dedicated years and thousands of dollars to building but you can bet I'm not buying any more new limited books from SP and you can double that bet that I won't be investing in ANY type of George RR Martin approved "licenses" in the near future either.

Dennis

P.S.: I'm completely at a loss why Bill doesn't just redo A Storm of Swords and Feast for Crows with a new artist to help out all the people who missed out and are just getting to know GRRM. As far as I can tell, the principle would be similar.

[Justinian]

<i>So the question would appear to be whether SP or GRRM 'backtracked': whether they did or said anything that would reasonably be interpreted as if they'd no intention of doing a SP AGOT/ACOK. That, SP at least can argue for themselves. (And I see they are.) </i>

I'm definitely trying to dig up the original announcements and correspondence about SP taking over the series. My strong impression at the time was that SP could not and would not be republishing the first two books in the series. They certainly stressed that they were "taking over" the limited editions from MM. To claim later that they are two different beasts entirely is disingenuous at best and I hope even the people who disagree about these new books would agree with that. It was always very clear that the MM books were the first part of a single run of limited editions which SP would continue after MM folded.

Does anyone disagree with that? Has anyone saved the original announcements? I know I have the MM ones, but I'm not sure about Storm of Swords.

[Justinian]

It's self evident that almost without exception, EVERY person who owns a complete unbroken lettered or numbered set of these books have NOT liked what SP has done. Many of them like dajamieson are very well respected collectors of Martin signed memorabilia. [...] In any case, I will continue to buy A Song of Ice and Fire limited editions from Subterranean Press because at this point of the game, I have no choice if I don't want to give up matching sets that I've dedicated years and thousands of dollars to building

Dennis about sums up what I'm seeing, if a little more vitriolically than I would say it since I think we're likely to be tuned out otherwise. I'd love to know which unbroken lettered sets were owned by people who were consulted about this. If the answer is "none" I'd wonder about how it can in good conscience be said to be after consultation with the appropriate people.

But, yeah, the big problem is that we're stuck shelling out $700 or whatever for books which we've already purchased, with no choice in the matter if we don't want to accept a precipitous drop in the value of the books we've already bought. It's a bit extortionate, frankly.

"No, you don't have to buy these two books. Of course if you don't the ones you've already bought will be worth a fraction as much as your set will now be broken. But it's your choice!"

[Justinian]

Sorry to post in a row, but I found some of the info I was looking for. Here is some of what was stated in 2005:

Collectors take note. Subterranean Press will be publishing the deluxe illustrated version of A STORM OF SWORDS, having just purchased the rights to continue the series of limited editions from Meisha Merlin and Bantam Books.

From 2006:

Subterranean's STORM OF SWORDS is the third in the series of limited editions originally begun by Meisha Merlin. Each of the books is lavishly illustrated, slipcased, and signed. The art for the Meisha Merlin editions of A GAME OF THRONES and A CLASH OF KINGS was done by Jeff Jones and John Howe, respectively. The spectacular artwork for A STORM OF SWORDS is by Charles Vess.

I don't think it could be stated any clearer than that. "Subterranean's STORM OF SWORDS is the third in the series of limited editions originally begun by Meisha Merlin." End of line.