The last 5 numbers of a comic’s UPC are set up to reflect the issue #, the cover (i.e. cover a, b, c, etc) and the printing (i.e. 1st, 2nd, etc.). As a variant collector I’ve noticed that the UPS cover # doesn’t always align with the assignment CLZ assigns (i.e. issue #1 cover 4 is not always equal to #1d). This may be a result of the increasing number of variant covers being produced and only 10 numbers (0-9) being available for the assigned UPC order or just a function of when it is reported to CLZ vs. UPS assignment).
Would it be too difficult of an undertaking to have the UPC assigned number correspond to CLZ’s variant identification letter? And have the repeat cycle from 1=cover a, 2= cover b… 9=i, then doubling the letter (i.e. cover 10 = aa, etc)? The only other suggestion, if this would be implemented, would be to have some format for the original newsstand and direct covers to remain the first two book shown. (Maybe direct cover 1 being the “A” cover and the newsstand cover 1 being “A’ ” or “A1” or vice versa).
I hope this makes sense. This suggestion is not made as a criticism of the current cover nomenclature, but more as means to more “closely” align with the UPC assignment system. Just a thought that’s been in the back of my mind.
Thanks for all the awesomeness that is CLZ!
If this has been previously addressed, my apologies.
Hi, there. Just read trough this, please let me know if I’m missing anything.
”Would it be too difficult of an undertaking to have the UPC assigned number correspond to CLZ’s variant identification letter?”
The way variants are sorted in Core (distributed trough comic shops, excluding exclusives) is using the fourth number on the right. That’s what we have been doing from the start and are still doing. Again, feel free to correct me if I’m not getting this. But what you’re suggesting has been in Core for 25 years 
.
It might be possible that there are some errors with this, we’d be happy to fix them if you do.
Justin,
Maybe I just run into errors since my collection focuses on variants. To give some examples, here are some I see as errors but may or may not be:
All-New Venom #5 - I would think #5“O,” #5“R” & #5“S” should be sequential; either #5“O” - #5”Q” or #5“Q” - #5“S”
Avengers v. 8 #36 & 37 - “B” & “E”; shouldn’t they be sequential? (i.e. - #36”B” & #36”C”, etc.). Also for a different example cf. #42 “B” & “E” (& #43 B & E) and compare with #66”D” & “E”. In terms of sorting, wouldn’t it make sense to be consistent, where possible with like or series variants (i.e. all the Color Timeless Variants would be the same letter designation, if the UPC indicates, and the Sketch Timeless Variants would be the same as well)?
Maybe the UPC codes don’t follow the pattern, I haven’t checked. Or maybe I am just too OCD?
Thanks for responding Justin.
- All-New Venom #5: Looks like B & C were switched, the others were good. Has now been fixed
- Avengers Vol. 8 #36: Looks good to me. So 00111 is A, 00141 is D etc. After that you get the incentives which are numbered: 00116, 00117. In this case the incentive is 03651.
- Avengers Vol. 8 #37: Looks good as is
“all the Color Timeless Variants would be the same letter designation”
If they have the same barcode, then yes. If not, they shouldn’t
I feel like you haven’t updated your database in a while? This sequential nummering with the variant letters is coded in our database. Now, sometimes it happens that the barcode with 00121 doesn’t exist within an issue (this barcode was just skipped by Marvel for some reason), we then have manually change these and move 00131 to B.
No worries at all!
