Search:

Good idea. Also, print runs on the proofs are often unreliable.

John

I would not trust the info on the sticker on the proof. The info on them is often unreliable.

John

Just a reminder that just because Amazon has a date doesn't mean that it will be accurate.

John

Thanks for putting that together, RF!

John

The dates on some of the proofs (when they have them) are also unreliable. Still, that's all we have so far.

John

I want to emphasize that these dates are those mentioned in promotional letters from the publishers. I've found that they are often incorrect (as are first edition printing numbers, etc.)

John

Email with two parts sent.

John

I have an original copy of the letter (undated) from Doubleday that's promoting The Uncut Stand. This letter lists the publication date as May 18, 1990. The letter is too big to fit my scanner,...

I've found that the publisher's proposed release dates are often incorrect. I wouldn't worry too much about this letter.

John

I have a feeling that there may be legal differences between the publication date and the for sale date. I don't know why this would be, though, unless it's for some arcane publishing thing.

John

It was widely mentioned in the media. Everyone "expected" the books to reach the saturation point, but most hit the bestseller lists with good sales. I don't remember details, but I remember that...

Thanks! I'll pass that on to Justin.

John

I've been working with Justin Brooks (Primary Bibliography of SK) and he's asked be for help on the following dates for Dolores Claiborne:



He's interested mainly in the actual month, day and...

Geoff, very often the release dates listed on the proofs and the associated letters are incorrect. I would not rely on those.

John

That one I believe!

John

The proofs cannot always be reliable. I've noticed a number of them have the wrong date, wrong price, etc. A good current example were the two "Manuscript Proofs" of Blaze. One had the price as...