Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Unpublished issues of Whoopee 
Author Message

Joined: 03 Mar 2006, 15:50
Posts: 1637
Reply with quote
geoff42 wrote:
I believe the only true victim of general strikes was Scream in the eighties... a shame.

I always thought Scream ended due to complaints from parents,so if that was the case imagine what the PC brigade of today would have done :lol:


16 Dec 2015, 20:09
Profile

Joined: 18 Apr 2014, 00:48
Posts: 657
Reply with quote
Nay, Bri, Fleetway only considered pulling a title when the House of Commons brought it up for debate; when it was slammed in the nation's best-selling newspaper; and when Menzies and W H Smiths threatened to pull the plug on all Fleetway's titles - ACTION! Scream never reached those heights of notoriety.


17 Dec 2015, 02:06
Profile

Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 01:31
Posts: 19
Reply with quote
I have the issue from 17th December 1983 being the 500th issue of 567, ending on 30th March 1985. The following week, Whoopee was squeezed into Whizzer & Chips.

Of course, i may be wrong, but i'm 99% sure it's accurate.


06 Jan 2016, 02:37
Profile
User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 20:26
Posts: 356
Reply with quote
hankshanklin wrote:
I have the issue from 17th December 1983 being the 500th issue of 567, ending on 30th March 1985


You are 100 per cent right on both numbers :)

_________________
Check out my blog about comics from other peoples' childhood: http://kazoop.blogspot.com


06 Jan 2016, 08:47
Profile

Joined: 03 Mar 2006, 15:50
Posts: 1637
Reply with quote
i had whoopee down as 573 issues in one note book and 567 in another so im gonna have to update all my note books :lol: is the official figures for roy of the rovers 851 and whizzer and chips 1087.


06 Jan 2016, 14:05
Profile

Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 01:31
Posts: 19
Reply with quote
I have the same for W&C, but can't say for ROTR, as i was never interested in football or war based comics, only the humour comics.


06 Jan 2016, 15:35
Profile

Joined: 03 Mar 2006, 15:50
Posts: 1637
Reply with quote
klakadak-ploobadoof wrote:
hankshanklin wrote:
I have the issue from 17th December 1983 being the 500th issue of 567, ending on 30th March 1985


You are 100 per cent right on both numbers :)

I'm sure i read somewhere issue 500 was numbered incorrectly and it actually wasnt the 500th but fleetway messed up and didn't take strikes etc into consideration but i may have dreamt that :lol:


06 Jan 2016, 17:05
Profile
User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 20:26
Posts: 356
Reply with quote
[/quote] I'm sure i read somewhere issue 500 was numbered incorrectly and it actually wasnt the 500th but fleetway messed up and didn't take strikes etc into consideration but i may have dreamt that :lol:[/quote]

You are quite right. What they advertised as issue 500 was in fact No. 494. Issue 500 came a few weeks later and had the cover-date of Dec 17, 1983.

_________________
Check out my blog about comics from other peoples' childhood: http://kazoop.blogspot.com


06 Jan 2016, 17:58
Profile

Joined: 03 Mar 2006, 15:50
Posts: 1637
Reply with quote
klakadak-ploobadoof wrote:
I'm sure i read somewhere issue 500 was numbered incorrectly and it actually wasnt the 500th but fleetway messed up and didn't take strikes etc into consideration but i may have dreamt that :lol:[/quote]

You are quite right. What they advertised as issue 500 was in fact No. 494. Issue 500 came a few weeks later and had the cover-date of Dec 17, 1983.[/quote]
I thought so as i remember being rather confused a few years ago when writing my list for whoopee! somebody should have being fired for that mistake :lol:


06 Jan 2016, 21:12
Profile

Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 01:31
Posts: 19
Reply with quote
It's an easy mistake to make, & they probably weren't expecting anyone to be scrutinizing it 30 years later. They probably just counted 500 weeks from the first week, & either forgot about the missing weeks, or chose to ignore it.


06 Jan 2016, 23:16
Profile

Joined: 03 Mar 2006, 15:50
Posts: 1637
Reply with quote
if i was one of the higher ups at fleetway i would have been fuming if i discovered that mistake as it is not very professional and does not look good for the company.i wonder if anyone at the time had all 494 issues up to that point and wrote in.


06 Jan 2016, 23:36
Profile

Joined: 13 Jul 2012, 01:31
Posts: 19
Reply with quote
I'm sure someone would have done. OCD still existed back then, just had a different name.


07 Jan 2016, 00:08
Profile

Joined: 01 Mar 2006, 00:59
Posts: 7041
Reply with quote
big bad bri wrote:
if i was one of the higher ups at fleetway i would have been fuming if i discovered that mistake as it is not very professional and does not look good for the company.i wonder if anyone at the time had all 494 issues up to that point and wrote in.


Everyone makes trivial mistakes, like you referring to IPC (as it was in 1983) as Fleetway. :lol:

I'm sure IPC's upper management at the time wouldn't have given a toss about the numbering.

_________________
The blog of British comics: http://lewstringer.blogspot.com
My website: http://www.lewstringer.com
Blog about my own work: http://lewstringercomics.blogspot.com/


07 Jan 2016, 00:27
Profile WWW

Joined: 03 Mar 2006, 15:50
Posts: 1637
Reply with quote
in my mind ipc/fleetway same company it was egmont that ruined comics :lol:


07 Jan 2016, 14:41
Profile

Joined: 29 Sep 2006, 23:33
Posts: 217
Reply with quote
Lew's right - if it increased sales that week then no one was going to be too fussed. It's nice that for an unnumbered comic someone decided to celebrate it. One of the great comics from my childhood.


07 Jan 2016, 18:53
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.