AGGIEZ

Pretty sure Dave took every opportunity that he had to use live models...smart man

And someone just him the BIN on my ASM#194. Time to dust off my ASM#265's and throw those out to the lions this weekend.

My two favorites... Dave Stevens - The Rocketeer Mark Schultz - Xenozoic Tales

I'd submit them as fast as you can and sell them before CGC corrects the label noting #8 as her real first appearance.

Annnnnnnnnndddddd....it isn't.

I don't think the news has hit. Once it does, the ASM#265s will fly off the shelves and somebody will hit the BIN on my ASM#194 http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/spider-man-spinoff-thor-writer-tackling-silver-sable-black-cat-movie-988065

He hasn't done nearly enough work, but Mark Schultz is my modern master...even with the small sample size. I hope he gets freed up to continue the Xenozoic Tales line...

I believe all Henry Pym does in TTA #27 is pour the shrinking sermum on his arm, shrink down to the size of an ant, explore, then it wears off and he grows back to normal size. It's TTA #35 where he really becomes the superhero, with his new cybernetic helmet, speaking to and controlling ants, strong as a man but made like an ant, etc. If the splash page didn't say "Return" of the Ant-Man in #35, I don't think there would be much argument here. Proponents of #27 argue that how could Ant-Man "Return" in #35 if he hadn't already appeared in #27. I get the scarcity angle on the price, but #27 is generally accepted (and labeled as such) as the 1st appearance of Ant-Man...and I don't think that's correct. http://berkeleyplaceblog.com/2017/01/13/tales-astonish-35-1962-first-appearance-ant-man/ TTA #27

TTA #27 label states "1st appearance of the Ant-Man, (Henry Pym, not in costume)." TTA #35 label states "Origin and 2nd appearance of Ant-Man., 1st appearance of Ant-Man in costume." Marvel Super-Heroes #13 label states "1st appearance of Carol Danvers, 2nd appearance of Captain Marvel." Ms. Marvel #1 label states "1st Carol Danvers as Ms. Marvel" No consistency between the labels on these two books. If they were consistent, then TTA #27 would be labeled "1st appearance of Henry Pym" and TTA #35 would be labeled "1st Henry Pym as Ant-Man"...OR the MSH#13 would be labeled as the "1st appearance of Ms. Marvel (Carol Danvers)"...which I don't think it the correct distinction. I think the way they have the Danvers/Ms. Marvel labels is as accurate as you're going to get. To tie this back to the HIM/Warlock discussion, the label for the MP#1 is more consistent in thought with the Danvers/Ms. Marvel labels: Fantastic Four #67 = "Origin and 1st appearance of Him, (Warlock) in cameo" Thor #165 = "1st full appearance of Him (Warlock)" Marvel Premiere #1 = if they were really consistent, then it should say"1st HIM as Warlock"....the current label states "1st appearance of Him as Adam Warlock"...which is close enough in my book. I think the HIM/Warlock books are appropriately labeled...I just prefer first FULL appearances, particularly those with the character on the cover...which is Thor #165 in this case. .

I tend to agree. I like MP #1 as the first appearance of the Adam Warlock that we all know from the various Infinity series...not the golden underoos HIM. My supporting argument is TTA #27 vs. #35 as the true 1st appearance of Ant-Man. TTA #27 is the first appearance of Hank Pym, the scientist in street clothes that tests out the serum that makes him shrink to the size of an ant...TTA #35 is the first appearance of our Ant-Man, the costumed superhero that went on to join the Avengers. I think the same logic applies to Adam Warlock.

I would join those up in a heartbeat. Very cool pieces!

Now that's just silly.

HA! There you have it...he mustn't know because he didn't write it...

Just more proof as to why I feel like Leifeld is an id'jit...

"RISE FROM YOUR GRAVE!" bumping this up because Domino was just cast in Deadpool 2 and CGC still has the label wrong... http://marvel.com/universe/Domino_(Neena_Thurman)

hope you don't mind...I borrowed your indicia pic. There are a few that have asked about it already. I don't think there is much knowledge on that out there.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/-/232272345718?

Really? I don't remember that book jumping from $0.50 to $11.00. Guess I should pay more attention.

Are these collected in a TPB? Anyone know?

Exactly...

What run are you talking about? I've never read any of the CM books.

WOW... http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-MUTANTS-100-1ST-APP-X-FORCE-1ST-PRINTS-LOTS-OF-3-MARVEL-COMICS-VF-NM-/192113100278?hash=item2cbad545f6:g:YpsAAOSwWxNYsIwY

Agree... FF#67 = first FULL appearance of the Cocoon, HIM cameo (check) THOR#165 = first FULL appearance of HIM (check) Some people just don't get that the publishing time between issues is irrelevant...

Wrong... Which is the key...ASM #299 or #300? First FULL appearance is what matters to first appearance collectors...not some 2-panel cameo, regardless of the timing. And the story in 165 certainly did contribute to the characters deveopment. Have you read it? It tells you why he was created and what he did to his creators...thats part of his origin. In a vacuum, if this book were published 2 months after FF#67 you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. It's obviously his first full appearance but the fact that it came out 24 months after his cameo makes you discount the fact that this is his first full appearance...so time is your only argument. Weak and irrelevant...but agree to disagree. You collect all the ASM 299s, Man of Steel 17s, Hulk 180s and Jimmy Olsen 134s you want. I'll stick to the more relevant first full appearance books. Point made (check).