Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!decvax!decwrl!burrows@ts1.DEC
From: burrows@ts1.DEC (Jim Burrows)
Newsgroups: net.comics
Subject: Baxter books
Message-ID: <7651@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-May-84 21:40:09 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.7651
Posted: Thu May  3 21:40:09 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 4-May-84 06:52:50 EDT
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 22


     I find I'm a little confused by the Baxter-paper phenomenon. You see, for
my money, the colors on Baxter paper look garish, and less attractive than
either old-fashioned pulp or the Mando high-quality pulp. I realize it's more
expensive and heavier, but given the choice of two comics at the same price,
one on Mando and one on Baxter, I'd take the Mando every time. 

     Now, given that they charge MORE for what I find less pleasing, I find
that I pass by books that I would have bought if only they were on lower grade
paper. Specifically, I gave Omega Men and Ronin a pass because of it. I did
get Camelot 3000, but I'm an incurable Arthurophile.

     More recently, I decided that since the Baxter Teen Titans book will be
reprinted in the Mando book, I'll wait the year despite the fact that the
Titans are among my top four favorite books. Strangely enough when I mentioned
this to a friend, he said he was doing the same thing, and for the same
reason. I had originally assumed that everyone else prefered the Baxter, and
that I'm just weird. Now, I'm beginning to wonder. I mean I know I'm odd, but
how many of you dislike the look of Baxter paper?

JimB	-- Easynet:	Kryptn::TS1::Burrows
	-- usenet:	decwrl!rhea!kryptn!ts1!burrows
	-- ARPA:	burrows%ts1.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA