Trusted
14,606
edits
The Two Doctors (novelisation): Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m
→Writing and publishing notes
Borisashton (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
== Writing and publishing notes == | == Writing and publishing notes == | ||
* The publishing issue regarding making payment for using the likeness of actors in the covers of the novelisation was very much a complicated (and costly) issue at the time. It was an issue that meant this cover did not feature | * The publishing issue regarding making payment for using the likeness of actors in the covers of the novelisation was very much a complicated (and costly) issue at the time. It was an issue that meant this cover did not feature either of the Doctors' faces. | ||
* The cover price for this special (collectible) novelisation (with gold foil logo), rose from £1.50 to £1.75, before dropping down to the increased price of £1.60). | * The cover price for this special (collectible) novelisation (with gold foil logo), rose from £1.50 to £1.75, before dropping down to the increased price of £1.60). | ||
* There is a suggestion that this title had a first print run of 100,000 copies (beating the previous high of 65,000 copies of ''[[The Myth Makers (novelisation)|The Myth Makers]]'' and ''[[Marco Polo (novelisation)|Marco Polo]]''), but the recorded figures show a first print run of only 60,000). The fact that most of these copies were sent to the USA meant that a rapid reprint was needed. The combination of the two first very-close print runs may explain the discrepancy. | * There is a suggestion that this title had a first print run of 100,000 copies (beating the previous high of 65,000 copies of ''[[The Myth Makers (novelisation)|The Myth Makers]]'' and ''[[Marco Polo (novelisation)|Marco Polo]]''), but the recorded figures show a first print run of only 60,000). The fact that most of these copies were sent to the USA meant that a rapid reprint was needed. The combination of the two first very-close print runs may explain the discrepancy. | ||
