Misery from Suntup editions:

[Martin]

I think it's interesting that collectors even look at this sort of thing. From my perspective the color of the pen isn't even something that would cross my mind when numbering a book.

This came up because the limitation page states the first 185 are numbered in blue ink and the last 15 are numbered in red ink. The red indicate they were never offered for sale. Someone noticed their copy was numbered in blue ink. I actually checked mine to see what color it was numbered.

[Dan Hocker]

This came up because the limitation page states the first 185 are numbered in blue ink and the last 15 are numbered in red ink. The red indicate they were never offered for sale. Someone noticed their copy was numbered in blue ink. I actually checked mine to see what color it was numbered.

Interesting. That seems like a very odd thing to do.

[jeffingoff]

Interesting. That seems like a very odd thing to do.

I think the ink used in identifying the limitation number/letter was also done with Centipede's Salem's Lot.

[Dan Hocker]

I think the ink used in identifying the limitation number/letter was also done with Centipede's Salem's Lot.

I guess I just don't understand the purpose behind it. Like why would you even have copies that weren't offered for sale?

[jeffingoff]

I guess I just don't understand the purpose behind it. Like why would you even have copies that weren't offered for sale?

Oh, I see. In Suntup's case, the red numbered edition go to the subscribers, I believe. So those numbers are lifetime numbers and they are never open to sales. I think that's what it means.

[Martin]

I guess I just don't understand the purpose behind it. Like why would you even have copies that weren't offered for sale?

I can't say for sure but I believe they were what we normally think of as Publisher/Contributor copies. I say that because Jason Sechrest has a red ink copy. I assume it was given to him for providing web content promoting the book prior to its release.

[Brian861]

I TOLD you we'd get in trouble making that waiting list in the other forum!

And I'm probably really going to be in trouble now with my reply.

[Martin]

Since the page sequence issue has been a topic of discussion I thought I would post the note received from Suntup Editions today regarding the issue:

Dear Friends,

It was recently brought to my attention that four pages in the Numbered edition of Misery appear out of sequence. This occurs between page 226 and 227. This is a binding error caused by the binder responsible for folding and gathering the book blocks. To be specific, half of one of the signature sections were folded backwards, resulting in those pages being out of order. There are no missing or damaged pages; it is only these few pages that appear out of sequence.

Our binder has taken full responsibility for this, which occurs only in the Numbered edition. It does not affect the Lettered or the Artist Gift edition.

As you probably know, I strive for perfection when it comes to each release from Suntup Editions. I was of course upset when I heard about this, but at the same time, I realize that some things are outside of our control, and when a hiccup happens such as this, you learn from it, and do everything you can to make it right.

I have seriously considered the options, one of which would be to allow anyone who is not happy with the out-of-sequence pages, to send the book back for repair at no cost. If there were only one or two copies with the error, it would make sense to do this, but it appears that the full run of the Numbered edition was impacted.

As a result, if I were to make this offer, it would create a "second state" of this edition, which would impact the integrity of the edition. Further, if the value of the book is important to you, that would also be impacted.

The state in which you have the book currently, is how it has been issued by the publisher, without any modifications. It is not a structural issue, or a printing issue, there is no physical damage, and the error is uniform across all copies.

If one were to do a 'return and repair' on the book, it would have to be done on 100% of the copies, and the likelihood of everyone sending their book back is minimal. The vast majority of owners who have voiced their opinion feel the same way; that they have no problem with it. Aside from that, there is always the risk of damage and/or loss to the books as they are being handled and shipped back and forth.

Having said that, I have decided that the only way to make this right and to retain the "first state" integrity and value of each person's edition, is to offer anyone who wishes to return their book, a full refund of the price paid. If you wish to take me up on that, simply reply to this email.

Everyone is different when it comes to book collecting. For some, this kind of mishap is insignificant. For others, perhaps it is more than that. But either way, my heart is with you; the fan, the collector, the Stephen King Constant Reader. It is with people who love books, who love beautifully made books, and my mission is to continue to make some of the finest editions out there for your enjoyment. And when mishaps occur, all I can do is make it right in the best possible way.

My sincerest apologies for this error, and I hope this does not impact your love or reverence for the book.

Yours truly,
Paul Suntup

P.S. An errata sheet can be downloaded here

[RonClinton]

As things turned out, I’m now happy to be a Gift Edition owner with a book that is 100% correct. I get that things happen and I respect and admire the way Paul has taken ownership of the issue and offered a solution. But a book priced at the level of the Artist’s Edition needs to be flawless, and neither alternative would’ve been for me an pleasing option, neither keeping a flawed limited nor sending it back for a refund and thus owning no copy at all. The folks at TDT.org are in my estimation too quick to dismiss it as an innocuous issue...if I were an owner of an Artist’s Edition, I’d be awfully disappointed. Looks like being a cheap bastard finally worked to my advantage!

[mhatchett]

I feel very sane and lucky LOL!!!

[jeffingoff]

And I'm probably really going to be in trouble now with my reply.

He referred you to some bylaws. I think that counts as getting off with a warning. I'm too fragile for that forum.

[Brian861]

He referred you to some bylaws. I think that counts as getting off with a warning. I'm too fragile for that forum.

Apparently, others are as well.

[Brian861]

Thanks for sharing the email, Martin. I was curious as to what Paul had to say.

[jeffingoff]

Thanks for sharing the email, Martin. I was curious as to what Paul had to say.

yes, thank you, Martin. As someone who didn't get a numbered edition (because you beat my brains out and used a more compatible browser), I also didn't get the email and I had no right to ask for it since it is technically none of my business. But I appreciate knowing how the story was going to play out. I thought it was interesting that Paul's response hewed so closely to Simon's post (I believe it was Simon's post . . .). I agree with the decision, but not so much the rationale. If Paul opened it up to all owners who wanted a "fix" and all owners opted in, it would be a nightmare. So offering a refund instead of a "repair" is the best solution. One crazy idea I had that wasn't surfaced anywhere was allowing customers to deal directly with the printer/binder and then all risk is transferred to the owners and the binder. But that's also crazy.

I'll just be over here sipping my tea and waiting for that artist edition.

[Martin]

Happy to share the letter from Suntup. Figured since we had discussed it as a group and not all received it I should post it.

Also, as an owner of this edition I can say I am totally comfortable with how Suntup Editions has handled this. Every owner has to determine what this means to them but for me, I have a beautiful book on my shelf that I love. Yes, four pages are out of sequence but I am fine with that.