tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295869345625274211.post6297922472021967037..comments2023-12-18T10:15:52.664-06:00Comments on Gillette-Torvik Blog: A pointless boycott?Bart Torvikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13661031240106200076noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295869345625274211.post-81417441896425339322012-02-07T14:31:36.199-06:002012-02-07T14:31:36.199-06:00A little bit of research would really help here. ...A little bit of research would really help here. Stan Lee does not, and did not, ever own Marvel Comics and has had very little to do, if anything, with the business negotiations with Jack Kirby. Stan Lee was briefly the president of Marvel, but when Kirby was working he was merely an editor, he had little to nothing to do with the business side of comics. Additionally Stan didn't sell Marvel to Disney, Marvel is/was a publicly traded company, so its shareholders, and now Disney and its shareholders own Marvel. I agree with your general premise that a boycott is ineffective and realize none of your errors affect that premise, but it really detracts from the piece as a whole when so many basic facts are misstated.Dannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295869345625274211.post-56957797047696808382012-02-07T10:53:29.276-06:002012-02-07T10:53:29.276-06:00According to my dyslexia its Strumm. Nevertheless...According to my dyslexia its Strumm. Nevertheless, I will make the change. Thanks Anon.Adam Gillettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14498496568932193475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295869345625274211.post-75779653631342950202012-02-07T10:48:25.070-06:002012-02-07T10:48:25.070-06:00According to the byline, it's Sturm, not Strum...According to the byline, it's Sturm, not Strumm.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com