Remco Mini Monster Dracula cloth cape variant? Is it possible?

[bigdicebuddha]

I bought this item off Ebay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/221439416461?_trksid=p2060778.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

It had been sitting there for awhile and I made the seller an offer and they accepted. The seller isn't exactly sure what they have, and their opinion was that even though it appeared to be factory sealed, they thought that it was a reseal. They thought the reason for the yellowing of the bubble must be the glue. However, in closely looking at the pictures, I can see the waffling from the heat press. I'll have to get it into my hands to know for sure, but it it's hard to find evidence of a reseal from looking at the pics. There appears to be a slight bit of paint loss on the fingers of Dracula's right hand, and a little paint loss on his medallion, but this is not uncommon for a sealed item, when the figures rub up against the bubble.



Then, I found this thread from 2007 on the Rebel Scum forums:

wondering if anyone can answer this

this past weekend i saw 2 MOC remco mini monster draculas. they had 2 different capes. one had the commonly seen black cape with red inside. the other one had a black cloth cape with cut bottom like batman's. it looked like the neck area on this cape hooked around draculas neck like super power's capes.

does anyone know of this variant??? the card was completly sealed.

http://forum.rebelscum.com/t974667/

Nobody had an answer.

So I guess I'm asking, what's more likely? That I've found the figure that this poster was talking about from nearly 8 years ago? Or that there was a small run of variants with a cloth cape?

If it ends up being a reseal, it's okay, I can live with the price I paid, I just want to properly identify it. Can anybody help?

[LordMudd]

The problem as I see it is that Remco does not have the following that Star Wars or GIJoe has, making the identification of variants much more difficult. I have seen very few blisters on Remco figures yellowed like that, which is usually caused by exposure to sunlight over time. Problem is the figure would be faded too. There are also scammers that have got real good at resealing blisters, not suggesting your seller is a scammer, especially if it is the same figure from 7 years ago. He probably got burned by the scammer and just wants to recoup some of his loss.

CCC.

[bigdicebuddha]

Thanks for the response, I had the same thoughts, but a quick search and comparison on Ebay showed similar MOC's with the same/similar yellowing, and not a faded fig:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/REMCO-Dracula-Figure-GREAT-CONDITION-FREE-SHIPPING-RARE-/201225014581?pt=Classic_Toys_US&hash=item2ed9f20d35

http://www.ebay.com/itm/vintage-Remco-Universal-City-Studios-Monsters-DRACULA-MOC-/191376889466?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c8ef3967a

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-1980-Remco-Universal-Monsters-Dracula-Figure-3-3-4-Glow-in-the-Dark-/121489856523?pt=US_Action_Figures&hash=item1c495c180b

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-1980-Remco-Universal-Monsters-Dracula-Figure-3-3-4-Non-Glow-/121489861560?pt=US_Action_Figures&hash=item1c495c2bb8

I also checked my MOC set of Mini Monsters, and they share the waffling from the heat press. Also, it is an oddly shaped bubble. So essentially, the only way that I could see it being a re-seal would be if the scammer had the original card AND original bubble. But then how would the create the heat press waffling? It seems like a lot of trouble to go to for a not very valuable figure.

[palitoy]

Yeah the bubble's yellowing isn't interlocutory with the figure fading at all. I personally think it's a reseal, I can't be certain without it being in hand but I think I see some stress there, could be wrong.

Maybe the vinyl cape bugged a collector, so they swapped it out for a more appropriate one. Who knows? It's a great conversation piece and as long as you didn't pay a premium, it's a nice addition.

Also, as a diehard collector of these, I wish there was another variant to pursue, I really do....

[bigdicebuddha]

Thanks for the response, palitoy. I will update when I get it in my hand, and take more detailed pics if applicable.

Any thoughts about a near identical example being described back in 2007 on the other forum? I'm actually waiting approval for an account over at Rebel Scum to post on that thread.

[palitoy]

Thanks for the response, palitoy. I will update when I get it in my hand, and take more detailed pics if applicable.

Any thoughts about a near identical example being described back in 2007 on the other forum? I'm actually waiting approval for an account over at Rebel Scum to post on that thread.

Not much other than it's a small world. I used to have this great denim carded Superman that looked like he was waving (a reseal), I've watched it move around the interwebs from collector to collector almost like it's checking in.

[bigdicebuddha]

Ha, I saw that recently! I thought, did all of them have their arm raised like that from the factory?

[enyawd72]

I've collected Remco toys for years...owned every version of every monster at one point from minis to 9 inch to Monsters-at Home, all their Energized Superheroes, etc. and I can guarantee you with absolute certainty that is not a legitimate variant. Remco never used cloth capes on any of their mini- monster figures.

[bigdicebuddha]

I've collected Remco toys for years...owned every version of every monster at one point from minis to 9 inch to Monsters-at Home, all their Energized Superheroes, etc. and I can guarantee you with absolute certainty that is not a legitimate variant. Remco never used cloth capes on any of their mini- monster figures.

Thanks for the response. Odds are that you are right. But after doing a lot of research, I've noticed that there are a lot of variations among Remco toys without rhyme or reason, specifically the AWA Matt Mania Wrestling figure series.

I suppose my thinking was that perhaps there could be a prototype, error variant, etc... out there, because like another poster said, there just isn't a big following for these toys, therefor not a lot of information. I'm looking forward to following up that post on Rebel Scum to see what the person, that saw it all those years ago, says.

Like I said, when I found that post from 2007, it piqued my interest. I knew the risk when I bought it, and paid a price I can live with to hold it in my hands and find out.

[palitoy]

A prototype wouldn't be on a second run glow card, just sayin'....

[bigdicebuddha]

A prototype wouldn't be on a second run glow card, just sayin'....

Salesman sample, perhaps? I know, wishful thinking. I just find it to be unusual, and I'm looking forward to checking out the seal myself when it gets here. Any tips on identifying a re-seal that may be helpful, beyond the waffling and any apparent stress?

[bigdicebuddha]

At least one person at Rebel Scum has claimed that they remember this variation from a liquidation at K-Mart or Toys R Us back in 81/82. He stated that he has found simliar slight variations through the years in Remco's Lost World of the Warlord through the years. He stated that Remco often did things like this without reason because they were not as polished of a production as Kenner or Mattel.

Now I'm even more confused.

[darkmonkeygod]

It looks like a reseal of a used figure to me, and Paul, Larry, and the gang at Amok Time tend to know their stuff. I've been collecting those since they hit the racks in the Summer of 1981 and, short of some errors (Dracula on a Creature card comes to mind) and the confusion of the first version (I think) of the glow figures all having the same Frankenstein proof of purchase on the back, there's nothing notable variation wise of which I'm aware besides their being four versions of each figure including card variations, and I've been actively seeking them in hope of discovering one. The one you present would be very odd, as Remco didn't have any other lines with that style accessory. The figure is more worn in odd spots than inner bubble wear can account for, to me. Very curious to know what you see when you get it. They are such fun figures.

[enyawd72]

Another dead giveaway that it's a recard is the fact that the paint that's rubbed off on the figure isn't on the inside of the bubble. There should at least be a very noticeable yellow mark from his medallion on the inside of the bubble.

[bigdicebuddha]

It looks like a reseal of a used figure to me, and Paul, Larry, and the gang at Amok Time tend to know their stuff. I've been collecting those since they hit the racks in the Summer of 1981 and, short of some errors (Dracula on a Creature card comes to mind) and the confusion of the first version (I think) of the glow figures all having the same Frankenstein proof of purchase on the back, there's nothing notable variation wise of which I'm aware besides their being four versions of each figure including card variations, and I've been actively seeking them in hope of discovering one. The one you present would be very odd, as Remco didn't have any other lines with that style accessory. The figure is more worn in odd spots than inner bubble wear can account for, to me. Very curious to know what you see when you get it. They are such fun figures.

Thanks for the response. I'm looking forward to getting it in my hands myself. That's interesting about the Frankenstein POP on the first run glow cards. Was that an error that was fixed or did it just cover that whole wave of first version Glow in the Dark figures? I see this particular one has the Frankenstein POP, as well. I've only collected the glowburst cards, so I don't have anything to compare to.

I agree with everybody here that the odds are against this being a legit variant. I'm as skeptical as a collector as most of you. There are just a few things that made me take the chance on in it. Notably that at least one other person has seen one (or this one), and that it has the waffling of the original glue. When it gets here, I'll inspect it and take more detail pictures.

Wouldn't it be cool, though, if it was the real deal, and if there were more of them out there?